13 Sept 2017

Marriott TestBED Accelerator for Startups in Middle East and Africa 2017

Application Deadline: 4th October 2017
Eligible Countries: Countries in Middle East and Africa
To Be Taken At (Country): The 8 finalists gather in Dubai, UAE to take part in a series of workshops and pitch their businesses to a panel of judges.
About the Award: TestBED is a 10-week accelerator programme that gives startups an invaluable opportunity to test their products within an operating Marriott Hotel.
Marriott TestBED Middle East & Africa is an accelerator programme powered by Marriott Hotels with the aim to find cutting edge technologies, that can transform hotel guests experience. The programme will work with startups that have developed products and services which can enhance Marriott Hotels guest experience.
Marriott TestBED Middle East & Africa is a 0 cash; 0 equity; 100% opportunity accelerator. TestBED provides startups with an invaluable opportunity to test their products/services for 10 weeks within an operating Marriott Hotel in a major city in the Middle East or Africa. During this period, startups will be able to receive feedback from Marriott guests and associates to help develop their product. It does not offer startups cash, nor does it ask for equity.
Type: Entrepreneurship
Eligibility: Participating startups should fulfill the following conditions:
  • Be a for-profit business
  • Have a product or a service focusing on:
    • Enhancing Marriott Hotels’ in-room experience
    • Transforming the overall guest stay and F&B experience, in and outside the hotels
    • Helping guests discover a ‘headspace’ and achieve a relaxed state of mind during their stay with Marriott Hotels
  • Be ready to pilot within a live hotel environment (fundamentally beyond “idea stage”; seed and early stage startups are welcome to apply)
  • Be based in the Middle East or Africa
  • Be independent entities, meaning that they should not be a subsidiary of an existing corporation or have legal ties to a government body
  • Be represented by team members aged 21 years and older
Selection Criteria: Participating startups will be assessed according to the following criteria:
  • Extent to which the product solves a Marriott-specific business problem
  • Innovative and disruptive technology to transform the guest experience
  • Size of market opportunity and revenue potential
  • A strong market rollout plan
  • Proven traction (e.g. users, customers, revenue)
  • A motivated and skilled team
Number of Awards: 8 startups
Value of Award: Marriott TestBED Middle East & Africa offers the participating startups:
  • The opportunity to test their products/services for 10 weeks within an operating Marriott Hotel in a major city in the Middle East or Africa
  • A marketing training programme, tailored to their needs, provided by industry leaders
  • Mentoring from a range of experts from Marriott Hotels
  • Global exposure through Marriott Hotels’ marketing and media
Duration of Program: 10 weeks
How to Apply: Apply here
Award Providers: Marriott Hotels

University of Nottingham (Malaysia Campus) Developing Solutions Scholarship for Students from Third-World Countries 2018/2019

Application Deadlines: 
  • application for September 2017 intake is open from 15th March 2017 and closed by 28th July 2017. Successful applicants will be notified by 15th August 2017
  • application for December 2017 intake is open from 1st June 2017 and closed by 13th October 2017. Successful applicants will be notified by 31st October 2017
Eligible Countries: Developing and third world countries
To be taken at (country): University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus, Malaysia
Fields of Study: 
  • MSc Chemical Engineering
  • MSc Civil Engineering
  • MSc Mechanical Engineering
  • MSc Electronic Communication & Computer Engineering
  • MSc Crop Biotechnology
  • MA Educational Leadership & Management
  • MA Special Needs
  • MA TESOL
  • MSc International Development Management
About the Award: The Developing Solutions Scholarship Fund will reach out to students who have the potential to make a real difference to the development and prosperity of their home countries.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: In order to apply for one of these scholarships, candidate must;
  • be holding an unconditional offer letter and accepted the offer by paying USD1000 for full time Masters degree programme at The University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus for 2016/17 intakes. Copy of unconditional offer letter and acceptance form must be attached together with the application.
  • be classified as an ‘overseas’ student for fee purposes.
  • have at least 1 full year working experience after completion of undergraduate programme. Fresh graduates will not be considered.
  • must sufficiently enable to support cost of living throughout the duration of studies.
  • complete our scholarship application form online. Please take note only completed form with all supporting documents will be considered.
  • current students and graduates of UNMC will not be considered for this scholarship as to give new students an opportunity.
  • only complete applications and meet the above requirements will be entertained.
Number of Awards: 10
Value of Program: 100% tuition fee waiver
Duration of Program: 1 year
How to Apply: Download the Application Form (pdf)
Once the form has been filled in, please save and attach the form to your email and send it to Developing Solutions Malaysia.
Award Provider: University of Nottingham

RNTC Fully-funded Media & Journalism Scholarships for African & Developing Countries 2018 – Netherlands

Application Deadline: 24th October 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligibility Subject Areas: As of today you can apply with a scholarship for the following courses:
  • Investigative journalism
  • Media campaigns
  • Producing media to counter radicalisation
  • Using media for development
About Scholarship: The RNTC Netherlands training centre provides training for media professionals from all over the world: from journalists and programme-makers to social activists and communications professionals from non-governmental organisations. Whether you are a journalist, a blogger or a media manager, there are courses to fit your needs.
The most commonly used scholarship for RNTC courses are the NFP and MSP (MENA) scholarships. NFP stands for Netherlands Fellowship Programmes (NFP), MSP stands for MENA (Middle East and North Africa) Scholarship Programme
web-rntc-media-training-michiel-bles-19
Offered Since: 2012
Type: Short courses
Selection Criteria: The scholarships will be awarded on academic and professional merit.
Eligibility: RNTC Netherland Fellowships are available for professional journalists, programme-makers, broadcast trainers and managers coming from the countries listed below (a combined NFP list and low-middle-income countries according to the World Bank criteria).
cholarship Benefits: An NFP or MSP scholarship will cover the full cost of your travel and visa (if required), accommodation and meals, insurance, and the course fee. The NFP and the MSP scholarship programmes are funded by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and administered by Nuffic, the Netherlands Organisation for International Cooperation in Higher Education.
Duration: scholarships are available for courses of two weeks or longer.
Eligible African Countries: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Djibouti, DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Mauritania, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, South Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Other Countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Armenia, Autonomous Palestinian Territories, Bangladesh, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Cambodia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eritrea, Fiji, Georgia, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Kiribati, Kosovo, Laos, Macedonia, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Nepal, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, São Tomé and Principe, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Syria, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen
To be taken at (country): The Netherlands
How to Apply: If you want apply for a scholarship to cover the costs of the course, you need to apply to both RNTC (for your course application) and Nuffic (for a fellowship).
There is no preference for where you start, but it’s wise to start with RNTC and to wait to hear whether or not you are eligible. Once you’ve received RNTC’s positive reaction, you can start your application with Nuffic.
It is important to visit the Scholarship Webpage for more information on how to apply.
Sponsors: RNTC Netherlands

Leiden University Mandela Scholarship for South African Students 2018

Application Deadlines: 
  • 1st October 2017 for programs starting in February 2018
  • 1st April 2018 for programs starting in September 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: South Africa
To be taken at (country): Netherlands
Type: Short Courses
Eligibility: Candidates must be:
  • Permanent residents of South Africa;
  • Enrolled in at South African University;
  • Accepted for a semester programme at Leiden University as an Exchange student or Study Abroad student;
  • Motivated to upgrade or extend their knowledge in order to make a contribution towards the development of South Africa;
  • Committed to return to South Africa after their study period at Leiden University.
Number of Awardees: Several
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship amount differs for Exchange students and Study Abroad students:
Exchange students 
  • International travel costs: € 1000
  • Living allowance: € 800 per month (for a maximum of five months)
  • Insurance: will be sponsored by AON Student Insurance and arranged by the Scholarships Department of Leiden University.
Study Abroad Students
  • Tuition fee: the actual fee
  • International travel costs: € 1000
  • Living allowance: € 800 per month (for a maximum of five months)
  • Insurance: will be sponsored by AON Student Insurance and arranged by the Scholarships Department of Leiden University.
Duration of Scholarship: Five months (1 semester)
How to Apply: Visit Scholarship Webpage to apply
Award Provider: Leiden University Fund (LUF), The Netherlands – South Africa Alumni Network (NESANET)

Morocco’s Rebellions

Vijay Prashad

Not far from Rabat’s train station, a small group of protesters hold Moroccan flags and banners as they chant for their lives. They are a family of farmers who have lost their land. These are rebels in the name of the King, to whom they plead for redress. “If only the King knew our situation,” says one of the men. Passers-by skirt the protest. So do the security forces. They are embarrassed. After a few hours, the farmers gather their things. They walk towards the train station. It is over.
The palace of Mohammed VI, the King of Morocco since 1999, is a short walk from the train station. But the King is not home. Nor is he in one of his 12 large palaces in grand cities as Casablanca, Fez or Meknes (the daily upkeep for these palaces is over $1 million). News comes that Mohammed VI is where his passion lies — on a jet ski far from Morocco.
Tourists do not go often to the city of al-Hoceima, which sits between the Mediterranean Sea and the Rif Mountains. This is mainly a fishing town with flashes of old Spanish architecture hidden behind the urgency of modern construction. Last October, the police confiscated some fish from Mouchine Fikri, a 31-year-old fishmonger, and threw it into the garbage. Fikri jumped into the garbage compactor to retrieve his fish. He was killed by the machine. People saw this as another example of hogra — the everyday humiliation of people like themselves by the makhzen (the royal family and its military establishment as well as the landowners and the businessmen). Fiercely rebellious, the Rif exploded.
Heated protests
Regular protests moved from al-Hoceima to cities and towns across Morocco. These are not demonstrations that embarrass the government. They terrify the makhzen. The government oscillated between arrest of the protest leaders and conciliation of their demands. Arrests of the leaders of the al-Hirak al-Sha’abi (Popular Movement) — Nasser Zefzafi, Najib Ahamjik and Silya Ziani — angered, rather than intimidated, the public. Fifty thousand people took to the streets of Rabat on June 11. That was the biggest protest in the city since the February 20 Movement of 2011 (as part of the Arab Spring).
It is difficult not to be in awe of Morocco’s history. Inside the charming maze of the Medina of Fez sits the Al-Karouine University that was founded in 859 AD by Fatima al-Fihri. This daughter of a wealthy merchant put her money into a place of scholarship that taught such luminaries as Ibn Khaldun, Moses Maimonides and Leo Africanus. Ancient manuscripts reside inside the library.
There is solace that the destructive impulse that tore through Mosul, whose great library was ravaged by the IS, will not come to this jewel. Neglect is the criminal. Outside the university runs the Fez River, which has more effluent from the tanneries than fresh water. The architect of the restoration, Aziza Chaouni, calls her city a ‘living city’, not just a city for tourists but also for the million people who live inside it.
Chinese presence
Morocco’s authorities worry that the Hirak protests might dampen tourism — the main foreign exchange earner. The government would like to see 20 million tourists enter the country, double the current figure. Numbers from the West are flat. Chinese tourism has, on the other hand, increased. It is not hard to run into Chinese tourists in the medinas of the old cities and in the hashish region anchored by the blue city of Chefchaouen (70% of the world’s hash comes from Morocco).
Poverty and hogra, as well as state-supported radical clerics, had opened the door for anger to move away from mass protest towards terrorist action.
The IS bomb-maker Najim Laachraoui, who died in the suicide attack in Brussels Airport, is from Ajdir (Morocco), while Paris attackers Salah Abdeslam, Brahim Abdeslam and Abdelhamid Abaaoud were all Moroccan. In June, the Moroccan authorities dismantled an IS cell in the southern coastal town of Essaouira. About 1,500 people have joined groups like the IS.
Hirak put the basic needs of the Moroccans on the table: dignity, healthcare, education and access to water. It is also the antidote to the growth of the IS. Neglect of the people threatens to push them into the arms of toxic radicalism that is typically antithetical to Morocco.
One of Al-Karouine University’s most important graduates was Abd el-Krim, the founder of modern guerrilla warfare.
Krim’s rebellion in the Rif from 1921 to 1926 defeated the much stronger Spanish army. But he was eventually caught and exiled to Egypt. His demands were also elementary: for dignity and for livelihood. These are unredeemed. They are on the table once more.

The Rationality of Kim Jong-un (and His Nukes)

Gary Leupp

Kim Jong-un is not mad. Quite the contrary. He has pulled off a wholly rational feat. By producing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles capable of delivering them to U.S. territory, Pyongyang has obtained near-assurance that the U.S. will not attack it, in (yet another) attempt at regime change.
Wait, you’ll say. He already had that insurance. Every talking head on cable news says a U.S. strike would inevitably mean an attack on Seoul, which would kill tens of thousands immediately. South Koreans would blame the invasion on the U.S. So it’s just not tenable. Even if limited to conventional forces, the threat of invasion already constituted adequate deterrence. There’s no way the U.S. would trigger an attack on a city of 10 million people who are supposed to view the U.S. as their benevolent protector. So the North Koreans didn’t need to upset the world by acquiring nukes.
But think about it from Jong-un’s point of view.
Born in 1984, Jong-un was 7 when the U.S. first bombed Iraq, supposedly to force its troops out of Kuwait (although Saddam Hussein had already agreed to withdraw). Then the U.S. imposed sanctions on the country that killed half a million children.
He was 11 when the U.S. intervened in Yugoslavia, bombing Serbs to create the dysfunctional client state of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
He was 15 (probably in school in Switzerland) when the U.S. bombed Serbia and created the dysfunctional client state of Kosovo.
He was 17 when the U.S. bombed and brought regime change to Afghanistan. Seventeen years later, Afghanistan remains in a state of civil war, still hosting U.S. troops to quell opposition.
He was 19 when the U.S. brought down Saddam and destroyed Iraq, producing all the subsequent misery and chaos.
He was 27 when the U.S. brought down Gaddafi, destroyed Libya, forced the Yemeni president from power causing chaos, and began supporting armed opposition forces in Syria. He was 30 when the U.S. State Department spent $5 billion to topple the Ukrainian government through a violent coup.
He knows his country’s history, and how the U.S. invasion from September 1950 leveled it and killed one-third of its people, while Douglas MacArthur considered using nuclear weapons on the peninsula. He knows how U.S. puppet Synghman Rhee, president of the U.S.-proclaimed “Republic of Korea,” having repeatedly threatened to invade the North, executed 100,000 South Koreans after the outbreak of war on the grounds that they were communist sympathizers who would aid the enemy. He loves Elizabeth Taylor movies but hates U.S. imperialism. There’s nothing crazy about that.
Jong-un was 10 years old when the U.S. and North Korea signed the Agreed Framework, by which Pyongyang agreed to freeze its nuclear power plants, replacing them with (more nuclear proliferation resistant) light water reactors financed by the U.S. and South Korea, and the gradual normalization of U.S.-Pyongyang relations. He was 16 when U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited Pyongyang and met with his father Kim Jong Il. (In that same year, South Korean President Kim Dae-jung met with Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang during the period of “Sunshine Diplomacy” eventually sabotaged by the Bush/Cheney administration.) He was 20 when the agreement broke down (undermined by Dick Cheney and his neocons in 2004).
He was 17 when his older half-brother Jong-nam was busted at Narita Airport, for stupidly trying to enter Japan with his family on forged Dominican passports, to visit Tokyo’s Disneyland. That stunt ruled Jong-nam (murdered as you know in Malaysia in February 2017) out for the succession, whereas the next son, Jong-chul, was deemed “effeminate.” (At a Clapton concert in Singapore in 2006 he was seen with pierced ears.) Jong-un probably didn’t expect to be the next monarch until he was in his mid-20s.
He was 24 when the New York Philharmonic Orchestra visited Pyongyang to a warm welcome. (Washington refused a North Korean offer for a reciprocal visit.) Selected as successor, he became the new absolute leader of North Korea at age 27, a young, vigorous, well-educated man (Physics degree from Kim Il-song University) groomed for the post and with a strong sense of dynastic responsibility. That means returning the DPRK to the relative economic prosperity of the 1970s and 80s, when average per capita energy consumption in the north exceeded that of the south.
Analysts suggest that Kim has made economic development primary, and the long-standing “military first” (Songun) policy is giving way to a policy more empowering civilian Korean Workers Party leaders. The DPRK economy, according to The Economist, “is probably growing at between 1% and 5% a year.” A new class of traders and businessmen (donju) has emerged. The complex social status system (Songbun) that divides society into 51 sub-categories of “loyal,” “wavering,” and “hostile” (and distributing privileges accordingly) has been falling apart with the rise of market forces.
Fourteen months into his tenure, Jong-un invited Dennis Rodman, a member of the U.S. Basketball Hall of Fame, to Pyongyang for the first of what have now been five visits. He is a huge basketball fan, an aficionado of U.S. popular culture, a child of rock ‘n roll. He is also rationally aware of the threat the U.S. poses to his country (among many countries). So his strategy has been to sprint towards nukes while he can. Perhaps he thought that since the Trump administration was (and is) in such disarray, no violent response (such as an attack on the Yongbyon nuclear complex) was likely. But it was risky; the U.S. president is, after all, unstable and ignorant. He has asked his advisors repeatedly, why can’t we use nukes since we have them?
The fact is, Mattis, Tillerson and McMaster have been presented with a nuclear fait accompli to which they must respond, in a period of diminishing U.S. influence and relative economic decline.  They cannot do it by dropping a MOAB bomb (like they did in Afghanistan in April) or a missile strike on a base (like they did in Syria the same month, to display their manhood). Jong-un has insured that.
If Jong-un plays his cards right, he will get international recognition for the DPRK as a nuclear power—the same degree of recognition afforded other non-NPT signatories like India, Pakistan and Israel. The U.S. will have to defer to Chinese and Russian sobriety and abandon hollow threatening rhetoric. It will have to back down, as it did in the Korean War, when it realized it could not conquer the North and reunify Korea on Washington’s terms and had to accept the continued existence of the DPRK.
In return for tension-reducing measures by the U.S. and the South, and the establishment of diplomatic and trade ties, Pyongyang will suspend its nuclear weapons program, content with and proud of what it has accomplished. It is the only way.
The other way is suggested by John McCain, crazy warmonger to the end. The Senate Armed Services chairman told CNN’s “State of the Union” that if the North Korean leader “acts in an aggressive fashion”—whatever that means to McCain who will never realize that his bombing of Vietnam constituted aggression—“the price will be extinction.” Shades of Gen. Curtis LeMay and his casual comments about killing every man, woman and child in Tokyo during the terror bombing of that city in 1945.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, McCain’s good buddy, has said that Trump told him: “If there’s going to be a war to stop [Kim Jong-un], it will be over there. If thousands die, they’re going to die over there. They’re not going to die here… And that may be provocative, but not really. When you’re president of the United States, where does your allegiance lie? To the people of the United States.”
Just knowing that the enemy is capable of contemplating one’s people’s extinction surely motivates some leaders to seek the ultimate weapon. The dear young Marshall pulled it off. He replicated what Mao did in China between 1964 and 1967. He got the bomb, which had been introduced to the world over Hiroshima on August. 6, 1945, and used again three days later over Nagasaki. And never used anywhere since in the years since, in which the U.S. has been joined by the USSR, UK, France, China, Israel, India, and Pakistan as members of the nuclear club. He has no reason to use it, unless the U.S. gives him one.
Negotiations on the basis of mutual respect and historical consciousness are the only solution.

Putin Warns Against Hysteria About DPRK

Manuel E. Yepe

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at the opening of the high–level segment of the Ninth BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) Summit against “military hysteria” around the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea. He said it could lead to a “planetary catastrophe” and called it “useless and ineffective” to impose new sanctions against Pyongyang such as those recently announced by Washington.
Such a position raises the prospect of another dangerous confrontation between Moscow and the United States, whose president called for “the strongest possible sanctions” by the UN as a sign of rejection of North Korea’s sixth nuclear test. It was carried out in early September, according to according to a statement from Radio Havana Cuba quoting as its source the French Press Agency (AFP).
Putin, who participated in the summit recently held at the Xiamen International Convention Center in China, told reporters there that “Russia condemns these exercises in North Korea, but considers that the use of sanctions of any kind in cases like this is always useless and ineffective. ”
“A military hysteria has no meaning … because it can lead to a planetary catastrophe with a high number of victims,” warned the Russian president.
Following Pyongyang’s sixth most powerful nuclear test so far, the United States, its European allies and Japan have announced that they are negotiating new UN sanctions against North Korea.
However, the position of China and Russia –both with veto rights in the Security Council – has not been sufficiently clear.
The North Koreans “will not give up their nuclear program if they do not feel safe. For this reason, we must try to open a dialogue between the parties concerned, “Putin said.
The Russian president believes that “military hysteria does not make sense, because it is a road that leads us to a dead end.” Putin adds to the position of China, which advocates a “peaceful solution” to the North Korean crisis and wants to resume negotiations with the government of Kim Jong–Un.
By contrast, US President Donald Trump, who pledged last month “fire and fury” if Pyongyang continues its threats against Washington, considered last week that, from now on, “any appeasement talk no longer works” with North Korea.
In response to the North Korean nuclear test, South Korea began ground maneuvers with live fire. The South Korean navy had done the same thing a week earlier, hoping to dissuade Pyongyang from any alleged provocation at sea.
US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, announced in New York that a new sanctions package would be presented by Washington –the eighth– will be negotiated in the coming days before being voted on by the Security Council on Nov. 11,.
At the beginning of August, the last resolutions sanctioning Pyongyang –each more severe than the previous one– were unanimously adopted by the 15 members of the Security Council.
According to diplomatic sources, the new measures being negotiated this week could affect oil, tourism, remittances to the country by North Korean workers abroad and other diplomatic decisions.
The hydrogen bomb that Pyongyang announced it had tested on Sunday, had a power of 50 kilotons, five times more than the previous North Korean test and three times more than the US–launched bomb on Hiroshima in 1945, according to South Korean sources.
North Korea is now capable of transporting an atomic bomb in a missile capable of reaching US territory, although, according to Washington, its experts have not confirmed this prediction with absolute certainty.
North Korea has never succumbed to the intimidation of the US and this has generated prestige and admiration for its proven intransigence and resilience in circumstances that have led many other governments of the world to indignant capitulation.
Pyongyang is proud to have survived as an independent nation with a communist orientation in a global context as extremely dangerous as its own. It attributes the success of its national security program –in large measure– to the fact that it includes possession and development of a small nuclear arsenal that serves a deterant. This is because of the possibility that Washington, through its participation in and monopoly of the atomic bomb, could launch another war like the one it carried out on Korean territory, in the 1950s of the last century.

Why Blacks and Hispanics Benefit From Low Unemployment

DANIELLA ZESSOULES & DEAN BAKER

Two years ago, in August of 2015, the national unemployment rate stood at 5.1 percent. This was at or below widely accepted estimates of the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment or NAIRU. This meant that if these estimates were right, the inflation rate would start to increase if the unemployment rate fell further or possibly even if it stayed at its 5.1 percent level.
As it turns out, the unemployment rate has continued to fall and stood at 4.3 percent in August of 2017. Inflation has remained steady or even fallen slightly. By all measures, it is below the 2.0 percent rate targeted by the Federal Reserve Board.
Many economists, including some at the Fed, wanted to raise interest rates enough to prevent any further decline in unemployment out of concerns over inflation. Fortunately, the Fed did not go along with this position.
While the further 0.8 percentage point decline in the unemployment rate itself implies a substantial benefit for millions of workers, it is important to recognize that it is disproportionately the most disadvantaged groups that benefit from lower unemployment.
Figure 1 below shows the increase in employment rates (the percentage of people over age 16 who are employed) for whites, blacks, and Hispanics over the last two years.
While the employment rate for whites increased by 0.5 percentage points over this two year period, it increased by almost 1.4 percentage points for Hispanics and by 1.7 percentage points for blacks. These groups have been disproportionate beneficiaries of the drop in unemployment over this period.
Figure 2 shows the same story from a slightly different perspective. It shows the ratios of the blacks and Hispanic unemployment rates to the white unemployment rate. As can be seen, this ratio moved down over this period from both groups. It started at over 1.5 to 1 for Hispanics, dropping to 1.3 to 1 in the most recent month’s data. For blacks, the decline was 2.1 to 1 to just under 2.0 to 1.
It is important to keep these patterns in mind as the Fed considers its interest rate policy going forward. Further declines in unemployment will disproportionately benefit the most disadvantaged groups in society. This should be a strong argument for the Fed to be very cautious in raising interest rates. While inflation can be a problem, that is not the case now and does not seem likely to be the case in the foreseeable future. In this situation, the Fed should focus on trying to get the unemployment rate as low as possible so that the groups who have thus far been denied the benefits of the recovery will have a chance to get jobs.

Modi Goes to Bollywood

GERRY BROWN

Modi is probably not a fan of Shakespeare plays.  But that doesn’t stop him from taking the Bard’s “The world is a stage” to historic height in politics. The Hindutva leader’s tool of trade is “make believe”.
For decades, Bollywood movies have brought tremendous joy to hundreds of millions of viewers in India. The flicks have also made them forget temporarily daily deprivations such as a life without toilets,  and constant fears of their young daughters and sisters getting  brutally gang-raped.
Instead of actors and actresses, Modi has a jingoistic national press and a cyberarmy dubbed ModiMob to troll the social media. They swarm the Twitter and  Facebook pages of political parties, groups and printed media, local and foreign, critical of Modi’s policies. Their antagonistic and vile remarks routinely set off cyber battles between keyboard warriors.
The jingoistic press in India, more than its counterpart in any other country, is afflicted by collective delusion and hysteria. They are capable of seeing victory in defeat, weaknesses as virtues, black as white. They declared victory upon withdrawal from the border standoff with China, BRICS naming Pakistan terror groups as triumph over both China and Pakistan, the disastrous demonetisation as unmitigated success…
The same make-believe affects the top army commanders. India’s defence chief repeated the army’s readiness to fight wars on two fronts with China and Pakistan, even before the ink is dry on the BRICS Declaration issued days earlier. Fact is the Indian forces would have their nose bloodied fighting just the Chinese army PLA, let alone a two-front war with Pakistan as well.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping, in his meeting with Modi on the sidelines of BRICS Summit last week, saw fit to reiterate the need for peaceful co-existence and non-aggression. Judging by the Indian defence chief’s two-front war rhetoric, Modi seemed not to have taken Xi’s friendly reminder to heart. There’s this uneasy feeling by observers that India is begging for war. That would turn a Trojan horse, as India is widely regarded as one in BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Forum, into cannon fodder on the battlefield as well.
On the international front, his embrace of America sets India up as a proxy in regional conflicts. His counting on the empire and its minions like Japan to come to the aid of New Delhi in hours of need is likely to be a wet dream turned nightmare. That would be all too late for him and India. Like the first Indian premier Jawaharlal Nehru, who died a broken man shortly after India’s ignominious defeat in the  war with China in 1962, Modi would be lucky if he didn’t get lynched by a disappointed and disillusioned ModiMob of his own creation.

The Genocide Of The Rohingya: Big Oil, Failed Democracy And False Prophets

Ramzy Baroud

To a certain extent, Aung San Suu Kyi is a false prophet. Glorified by the west for many years, she was made a ‘democracy icon’ because she opposed the same forces in her country, Burma, at the time that the US-led western coalition isolated Rangoon for its alliance with China.
Aung San Suu Kyi played her role as expected, winning the approval of the Right and the admiration of the Left. And for that, she won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1991; she joined the elevated group of ‘The Elders’ and was promoted by many in the media and various governments as a heroic figure, to be emulated.
Hillary Clinton once described her as “this extraordinary woman.” The ‘Lady’ of Burma’s journey from being a political pariah in her own country, where she was placed under house arrest for 15 years, finally ended in triumph when she became the leader of Burma following a multi-party election in 2015. Since then, she has toured many countries, dined with queens and presidents, given memorable speeches, received awards, while knowingly rebranding the very brutal military that she had opposed throughout the years. (Even today, the Burmese military has a near-veto power over all aspects of government.)
But the great ‘humanitarian’ seems to have run out of integrity as her government, military and police began conducting a widespread ethnic cleansing operation that targeted the ‘most oppressed people on earth’, the Rohingya. These defenseless people have been subjected to a brutal and systematic genocide, conducted through a joint effort by the Burmese military, police and majority Buddhist nationalists.
The so-called “Cleansing Operations” have killed hundreds of Rohingya in recent months, driving over 250,000 crying, frightened and hungry people to escape for their lives in any way possible. Hundreds more have perished at sea, or hunted down and killed in jungles.
Stories of murder and mayhem remind one of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people during the Nakba of 1948. It should come as no surprise that Israel is one of the biggest suppliers of weapons to the Burmese military. Despite an extended arms embargo on Burma by many countries, Israel’s Defense Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, insists that his country has no intentions of halting its weapons shipments to the despicable regime in Rangoon, which is actively using these weapons against its own minorities, not only Muslims in the western Rakhine state but also Christians in the north.
One of the Israeli shipments was announced in August 2016 by the Israeli company TAR Ideal Concepts. The company proudly featured that its Corner Shot rifles are already in ‘operational use’ by the Burmese military.
Israel’s history is rife with examples of backing brutal juntas and authoritarian regimes, but why are those who have positioned themselves as the guardians of democracy still silent about the bloodbath in Burma?
Nearly a quarter of the Rohingya population has already been driven out of their homes since October last year. The rest could follow in the near future, thus making the collective crime almost irreversible.
Aung San Suu Kyi did not even have the moral courage to say a few words of sympathy to the victims. Instead, she could only express an uncommitted statement: “we have to take care of everybody who is in our country”. Meanwhile, her spokesperson and other mouthpieces launched a campaign of vilification against Rohingya, accusing them of burning their own villages, fabricating their own rape stories, while referring to Rohingya who dare to resist as ‘Jihadists‘, hoping to link the ongoing genocide with the western-infested campaign aimed at vilifying Muslims everywhere.
But well-documented reports give us more than a glimpse of the harrowing reality experienced by the Rohingya. A recent UN report details the account of one woman, whose husband had been killed by soldiers in what the UN described as “widespread as well as systematic” attacks that “very likely commission of crimes against humanity.”
“Five of them took off my clothes and raped me,” said the bereaved woman. “My eight-month-old son was crying of hunger when they were in my house because he wanted to breastfeed, so to silence him they killed him with a knife.”
Fleeing refugees that made it to Bangladesh following a nightmarish journey spoke of the murder of children, the rape of women and the burning of villages. Some of these accounts have been verified through satellite images provided by Human Rights Watch, showing wiped out villages throughout the state.
Certainly, the horrible fate of the Rohingya is not entirely new. But what makes it particularity pressing is that the west is now fully on the side of the very government that is carrying out these atrocious acts.
And there is a reason for that: Oil.
Reporting from Ramree Island, Hereward Holland wrote on the ‘hunting for Myanmar’s (Burma) hidden treasure.’
Massive deposits of oil that have remained untapped due to decades of western boycott of the junta government are now available to the highest bidder. It is a big oil bonanza, and all are invited. Shell, ENI, Total, Chevron and many others are investing large sums to exploit the country’s natural resources, while the Chinese – who dominated Burma’s economy for many years – are being slowly pushed out.
Indeed, the rivalry over Burma’s unexploited wealth is at its peak in decades. It is this wealth – and the need to undermine China’s superpower status in Asia – that has brought the west back, installed Aung San Suu Kyi as a leader in a country that has never fundamentally changed, but only rebranded itself to pave the road for the return of ‘Big Oil’.
However, the Rohingya are paying the price.
Do not let Burmese official propaganda mislead you. The Rohingya are not foreigners, intruders or immigrants in Burma.
Their kingdom of Arakan dates back to the 8th Century. In the centuries that followed, the inhabitants of that kingdom learned about Islam from Arab traders and, with time, it became a Muslim-majority region. Arakan is Burma’s modern-day Rakhine state, where most of the country’s estimated 1.2 million Rohingya still live.
The false notion that the Rohingya are outsiders started in 1784 when the Burmese King conquered Arakan and forced hundreds of thousands to flee. Many of those who were forced out of their homes to Bengal, eventually returned.
Attacks on Rohingya, and constant attempts at driving them out of Rakhine, have been renewed over several periods of history, for example: following the Japanese defeat of British forces stationed in Burma in 1942; in 1948; following the takeover of Burma by the Army in 1962; as a result of so-called ‘Operation Dragon King’ in 1977, where the military junta forcefully drove over 200,000 Rohingya out of their homes to Bangladesh, and so on.
In 1982, the military government passed the Citizenship Law that stripped most Rohingya of their citizenship, declaring them illegal in their own country.
The war on the Rohingya began again in 2012. Every single episode, since then, has followed a typical narrative: ‘communal clashes’ between Buddhist nationals and Rohingya, often leading to tens of thousands of the latter group being chased out to the Bay of Bengal, to the jungles and, those who survive, to refugee camps.
Amid international silence, only few respected figures like Pope Francis spoke out in support of the Rohingya in a deeply moving prayer last February.
The Rohingya are ‘good people’, the Pope said. “They are peaceful people, and they are our brothers and sisters.” His call for justice was never heeded.
Arab and Muslim countries remained largely silent, despite public outcry to do something to end the genocide.
Reporting from Sittwe, the capital of Rakhine, veteran British journalist, Peter Oborne, described what he has seen in an article published by the Daily Mail on September 4:
“Just five years ago, an estimated 50,000 of the city’s population of around 180,000 were members of the local Rohingya Muslim ethnic group. Today, there are fewer than 3,000 left. And they are not free to walk the streets. They are crammed into a tiny ghetto surrounded by barbed wire. Armed guards prevent visitors from entering — and will not allow the Rohingya Muslims to leave.”
With access to that reality through their many emissaries on the ground, western government knew too well of the indisputable facts, but ignored them, anyway.
When US, European and Japanese corporations lined up to exploit the treasures of Burma, all they needed was the nod of approval from the US government. The Barack Obama Administration hailed Burma’s ‘opening’ even before the 2015 elections brought Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy to power. After that date, Burma has become another American ‘success story’, oblivious, of course, to the facts that a genocide has been under way in that country for years.
The violence in Burma is likely to escalate and reach other ASEAN countries, simply because the two main ethnic and religious groups in these countries are dominated and almost evenly split between Buddhists and Muslims.
The triumphant return of the US-west to exploit Burma’s wealth and the US-Chinese rivalries is likely to complicate the situation even further, if ASEAN does not end its appalling silence and move with a determined strategy to pressure Burma to end its genocide of the Rohingya.
People around the world must take a stand. Religious communities should speak out. Human rights groups should do more to document the crimes of the Burmese government and hold to account those who supply them with weapons.
Respected South African Bishop Desmond Tutu had strongly admonished Aung San Suu Kyi for turning a blind eye to the ongoing genocide.
It is the least we expect from the man who stood up to Apartheid in his own country, and penned the famous words: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

12 Sept 2017

Destabilizing Egypt; Ethiopia’s Nile River Dam

Thomas C. Mountain

Ethiopia’s new “ Grand Renaissance Dam”, scheduled to be completed next year, will take close to half (40%) of the Nile River’s water every year for the next 5 years as it fills up. How is Egyptian President Al Sisi going to survive for the next 5 years without almost half the Nile’s water when the country is presently suffering serious water and hydroelectric shortages, never mind crippling inflation, growing hunger and a terrorist insurgency?
So far the world thinks that somehow, some way, Egypt, almost 100 million people and growing, already on shaky ground economically, will find a way to survive something that the country has not faced in over two thousand years, almost a half less water from the river Nile for 5 years straight. And what if a drought hits the Ethiopian highlands, the source of the Nile River, with chances are this happening at least once in the next 5 years with the accelerating global warming trend, and Egypt loses over half of its water?
If international opinion turns out to be wrong, and that cutting Egypt’s water by nearly half for 5 years is not survivable, then an enormous explosion is brewing in Egypt, the Arab world’s biggest country, this huge explosion being brought about by the construction of Ethiopia’s massive dam generating 6,000 MW of electricity, something that Ethiopia doesn’t even have the infrastructure to use.
If Ethiopia can’t even distribute this new source of electricity for its people to use due to an almost complete absence of any national power grid, let alone local level infrastructure, than why has the country gone so deeply into debt to build a dam that will do so much damage to its northern neighbor, Egypt?
Those in the know are asking this question, for a potential catastrophe could be in the making in Egypt with a hunger driven popular explosion of rage against the rule of President Al Sisi and fundamentally threaten the Egyptian military’s ability to hold the country together. As in Syria and Iraq, ISIS is sure to take advantage of the resulting chaos to spread its insurgency across the country and all of this could lead to an Egyptian failed state situation.
Such a scenario has directed attention towards the likelihood of the Egyptian military attacking Ethiopia’s new dam if the situation starts to deteriorate domestically. Cutting the Niles water will be a devastating blow to Egypts ability to feed itself and cutting off its ability to produce food for export causing the loss of desperately needed foreign currency.
Will the Egyptian people be able to endure such a dramatic increase in their hunger and hardships for 5 years without an inevitable explosion? Will Al Sisi be able to hold the Egyptian military together and prevent the government from collapsing as a result of such a major water shortage and inevitable mass hunger?
The origins of the very idea of Ethiopia daming the Nile are found at the World Bank, majority owned by the USA. The World Bank, whose policy for many disastrous decades was to push dam construction in some of the most vulnerable areas of the planet was the first to raise the “grand dam” idea, to harness the waters of biblical proportions for a “Greater Ethiopia”.
The problem, again, is that 70% of Ethiopians don’t have access to government electricity, almost 70 million people. The Ethiopian government has gone so deeply into debt building this new 6,000 MW dam there is nothing left over to build the electrical distribution network the country so desperately needs. So all that new electric power will not go towards uplifting the lives of Ethiopians, “for a Greater Ethiopia”, but be sold on the East African market to pay the
onerous debt incurred in building the damn thing.
The needs of Ethiopia for many years in the future could have been met by building a series of smaller, much less expensive dams that would not cause such a drastic interference in the Nile River’s flow.
Yet thanks to the World Banks persistence, Ethiopia went ahead with its “grand dam” and the result could be an explosion of popular anger in Egypt that could threaten much of the worlds economy, being that Egypt controls the Suez Canal, through which the largest trading partners in the world, Asia and Europe, do 90% of their business. It is Egyptian troops, whose salaries are paid for by the USA, that control the Suez Canal and if the Egyptian military loses control of
the country in a popular uprising similar to which brought down Mubarak, than the continued reliability of the army to control the Suez Canal comes into question. Of course, there is always the Israeli Army waiting in the wings, ever ready to step in and occupy the first Great Canal in Suez.
Could it be that having Egypt and Ethiopia, two out of three of Africa’s largest countries, at each others throats is in the national interests of the USA, that wants at all costs to prevent African unity, neither economic or political?
Again we find the USA’s policy of “crisis management” behind the scenes in this brewing conflict, as in create a crisis and then manage it to divide and conquer, the better to loot and plunder African resources with as little resistance as possible.