18 Oct 2017

ZEISS Photography Award 2018

Application Deadline: 6th February, 2018
Eligible Countries: All
To be taken at (country): Any chosen location
About the Award: The World Photography Organisation and ZEISS are pleased to launch the third edition of the ZEISS Photography Award ‘Seeing Beyond’, with the theme “Meaningful places”. The competition was established by ZEISS to challenge photographers worldwide.
Photographers have until February 6, 2018 to submit a series of 5-10 images responding to this year’s brief:
“Seeing Beyond – Untold Stories” requires photographers to present a strong series of 5-10 images that look beyond the ordinary and every day.  “Untold Stories” is intended to be understood in its broadest sense – the work could explore a familiar theme told from a different perspective or it could address an issue that has previously had little attention.  All forms of photography are welcome and judges are specifically looking for series of works that have a strong narrative.  The “Untold Story” that the photographer presents must be visually clear in the submitted images.
Type: Contest
Eligibility: View all eligibility criteria here
Value of Award: The winner and the shortlist with up to ten photographers will be announced on April 3, 2018. The winners will receive attractive prizes, including ZEISS lenses of their choice with a total value of 12,000 euros as well as 3,000 euros to cover travel costs for a photo project. The awards ceremony will be held in London on April 19, 2018, as part of the Sony World Photography Awards.
The winning photos and the selected photos from the shortlist will simultaneously be presented at the Sony World Photography Awards exhibition at the Somerset House in London, with the winner participating in the exhibition opening. In addition, ZEISS will invite the winner to the company’s headquarters in Germany. Here they will gain insight into the world of ZEISS and can familiarize themselves with ZEISS lenses. In addition, they will also have the opportunity to personally work with ZEISS and the World Photography Organisation
How to Apply: Enter Competition
Award Provider: World Photography Awards Limited

HHL Leipzig MBA Scholarships for African Students 2018/2019

Application Deadlines: The scholarship application deadlines correspond to the program application deadlines.
Eligible Countries: African countries
To be taken at (country): Germany
About the Award: With its Africa Scholarship Programme, HHL supports excellent candidates from African countries applying to it’s full-time MBA program. Candidates of all academic and professional backgrounds are welcome to apply. Our ideal applicant will present strong motivation and outstanding professional and academic credentials as well as willingness to become an active member of the HHL community.
Type: Full-time MBA
Eligibility: With its HHL Africa Scholarship Program, HHL offers scholarships to support talented candidates from African countries in order to foster the geographical diversity of the MBA class.
Selection Criteria: Apart from the admission requirements for the full-time MBA program, a combination of excellent academic achievements, work experience and involvement in extracurricular activities will increase the candidate’s chances of receiving a scholarship.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship will provide the successful candidates with a tuition waiver worth up to EUR 14,500.
Duration of Scholarship: Full-time
How to Apply: Please submit your completed full-time MBA application via http://study.hhl.de. Make sure you select which scholarship program you wish to apply for and don’t forget to include the questionnaire below among the uploaded documents. In case of a successful admission to the MBA program, you will be informed about the scholarship decision immediately. Please note that we can not consider your scholarship application without a valid GMAT score.
Award Provider: HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management.
Important Notes: Please bear in mind that your chances to receive financial support increase the earlier you apply.

UCD Michael Smurfit School Masters in Aviation Finance Scholarship 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 30th June 2018.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: All
To be taken at (country): Ireland
Eligible Field of Study: Msc in Aviation Finance
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  1. Scholarship is open to both Irish residents and international applicants except employees of UCD, and their associated affiliated or subsidiary companies, and their immediate families, agents, or anyone connected with this competition.
  2. The scholarship is limited to those who will have submitted a complete application directly to UCD Smurfit School for 2018 entry to the MSc Aviation Finance full-time by 30th June 2018.
  3. The UCD Smurfit MSc Aviation Finance Scholarship will be awarded to the candidate deemed to be of the highest calibre by the UCD Smurfit School judging panel. UCD Smurfit School reserves the right not to award the Scholarship prize if no candidate of the required calibre is identified. The decision is final and correspondence will not be entered into.
  4. An Irish first class honours (Hons 1.1) undergraduate degree result (or equivalent)
  5. A strong curriculum vitae / resume
  6. Excellently written essay question answers in the course application. There are two at 300 words each.
  7. If applicable to you when applying, our minimum English Language Requirement met with an overall IELTS of minimum 7.0, TOEFL 100 / 120 (or equivalent in a test we recognise)
Selection Process:
  • All course applications submitted before the deadline of 31 May 2017 will be considered for this scholarship. Following assessment of the course applications and those with Full, Unconditional Offers, The School will then select a small short list. These candidates will then be interviewed with a view to selecting a winner by mid-June 2017.
  • The continuation of the scholarship funding for semester 2 (2017/2018) is subject to the awardee making satisfactory progress on the programme and passing all exams at the end of semester one.
  • Candidates must be available to commence the MSc Aviation Finance full-time programme in early September 2017.
  • The scholarship is not open to recipients of any other scholarships being awarded by UCD Smurfit School, but is to open to those who have applied for 2017 entry to the programme.
  • Interviews will be scheduled in early July.
  • Winning candidate will be informed in mid-July 2018.
  • Classes commence in early September 2018.
  • No cash alternative.
  • No substitutions allowed.
  • Winner must agree to participate in publicity if applicable.
  • Canvassing will disqualify.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: 100% Tuition Fees
Duration of Scholarship: 1 year
How to Apply: To apply for this scholarship, candidates must submit a course application for the MSc Aviation Finance. The deadline for submitting the complete application to the programme is 5pm on 30th June 2018.  There is no separate applications process for this Scholarship therefore.  It is based on the quality of your actual course application.
To apply to the programme click here
Award Provider: UCD Michael Smurfit Graduate Business School

WWF Russel E. Train Education for Nature (EFN) International Fellowship Competition 2018

Application Deadline: 1st March, 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Anywhere in the world
Type: Master’s, PhD, Fellowship
Eligibility: To be eligible for a Train Fellowship, you must meet the following criteria. Please note that eligibility criteria can vary by competition. Please also refer to specific competition guidelines to ensure you are eligible.
  • You must be a citizen and legal permanent resident of an eligible country.
  • You must have at least two years of conservation-related work or research experience.
  • You must have a demonstrated commitment to working in conservation in an eligible country.
  • Your research or academic program must address one of the focus areas listed in the guidelines.
  • You must be enrolled in, admitted to, or have applied to a master’s or PhD program anywhere in the world.
  • You must plan to begin your studies no later than January 2019.
  • You must commit to working for at least two years in your home country after the completion of your degree.
  • You must not have received a Train Fellowship or Scholarship in the past. Professional Development Grant recipients are eligible to apply.
  • You must notify EFN if you are a WWF employee, consultant, or previous EFN grant recipient.
  • You must submit all required documents by the application deadline (March 1, 2018).
Selection: Train Fellows are selected through a competitive, merit-based process. An independent, interdisciplinary panel of experts is convened in each country to review applications and to identify the top candidates based on the following criteria:
  • Professional qualifications as evidenced by previous and current conservation-related positions, references from colleagues in the field, publications, and other sources
  • Demonstrated leadership through involvement in community and volunteer activities, the workplace, local and national government, and other areas
  • Prior academic achievement as shown by grades, academic awards, and references from professors
  • Motivation and commitment to contribute to conservation in a participating country and to share what is learned with others in their field and in their home communities
  • Potential impact of proposed study/research on conservation efforts in the home country or region
Number of Awardees: Not stated
Value of Fellowship:  up to $30,000 per year
How to Apply: Applicants can access the online application at www.worldwildlife.org/efn.
Award Provider: World WildLife Fund (WWF)

Sciences Po Eiffel Scholarship for International Masters and Undergraduate Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: Submission deadline for a Sciences Po application including the required documentation for the Eiffel Scholarship is 3rd of November 2017 for students already at Sciences Po (including applicants who deferred their arrival or those who received conditional offer last year) and 10th November 2017 for new candidates at Sciences Po.
To Be Taken At (Country): France
About the Award: Sciences Po only presents applications from candidates with profiles that match the priorities of the Eiffel scholarship. If you are offered a place to study at Sciences Po, we will inform you whether your application will be proposed to Campus France (the organisation in charge of this scholarship).
Applications received from students currently studying abroad are prioritised over those from students already living in France.
Students cannot apply directly for the Eiffel Scholarship. Applications must be made through a higher education institution.  If you are studying in two higher education institutions, you can only submit a single application. In order to apply, you must have already been accepted to a program at Sciences Po. For your application to be successful, it is essential that you respect our deadlines.
The Eiffel scholarship program, launched in January 1999 by the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs, is aimed at foreign students whose outstanding ability has been recognised by French institutions of higher education who wish to sponsor these students for the rest of their studies.
The programme is primarily designed to provide an education in France to future decision makers in both the private sector and in the national administrations of emerging countries.
Type: Masters, Undergraduate
Eligibility: Candidates must be under 30 years old.

Sciences Po candidates

  • Applicants for our graduate programmes
  • Applicants for the dual degree in Journalism / Columbia (BAMA) (who are already first year students at Columbia’s university School of Journalism)

Sciences Po students

  • Third year Sciences Po students
  • Second year undergraduate students in one of our partnership programmes at Poitiers campus
  • First year graduate student at Science Po
  • Students admitted last year in their first year as a graduate student who requested a deferral
  • Students admitted last year who have received a conditional offer of admission if they submit an English test before the scholarship application deadline.
  • PhD students who are co-supervised or presenting a joint thesis with a partner university
  • Students admitted to the following dual degree programme (other Sciences Po dual degree programme are not eligible for this scholarship):
    • Journalism Sciences Po/Columbia University (candidates for this programme are eligible)
    • Sciences et Politiques de l’Environnement Sciences Po/Université Pierre et Marie Curie (only first year students are eligible)
    • Quantitative Economics Sciences Po/Panthéon Sorbonne Paris I (only first year students are eligible)
    • The Eiffel laureates who graduated in June 2017and wish to submit an Eiffel application for the PhD.

Not eligible to the Eiffel Scholarship

  • Students who already received a grant or scholarship from the French government
  • Students who have previously applied for an Eiffel scholarship and who have been unsuccessful, even if they change their field of studies.
  • Candidates for the 1year Master’s programmes
  • Candidates for the Joint Master in Journalism and International Affairs (Except candidates in their first year)
  • Students admitted to a Sciences Po dual degree programme (except for the 3 dual degrees mentioned above)
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: Monthly grant. The Eiffel Scholarship does not cover tuition fees.  Students offered a place to study at Sciences Po who receive the scholarship are therefore responsible for paying the annual tuition fees.
How to Apply: 
  • Students cannot apply directly for the Eiffel Scholarship. Applications must be made through a higher education institution.  If you are studying in two higher education institutions, you can only submit a single application.
  • First time applicants who wish to be presented for the Eiffel scholarship by Sciences Po must indicate so in the “Financial Information” section of their Sciences Po application form and must provide the required documents. Please note that your scholarship request will be taken into account only in case of admission.
  • Students already admitted at Sciences Po, students admitted last year who have received a conditional offer of admission or students admitted last year in their first graduate year who requested a deferral have to send their Eiffel Scholarship application by email to the Admissions office by attaching the required documents : Admissions contact form 
  • Sciences Po will select the applications that it wishes to present to Campus France. Please note that applying for the Eiffel grant does not guarantee the presentation of your application to Campus France.
All candidates must attach the following documents to their scholarship application :
  • CV, including information on the applicant’s level (distinction/honours, ranking or position in the promotion, number of students in the promotion, diploma with information on specialisation, date of the diploma, final grades)
  • professional project, one or two pages. The applicant must explain the reasons for studying in France as opposed to their home country, their interest for the selected programme and how this will help them achieve their career goals and objectives.
  • academic transcripts all of the years of higher education (including periods spent abroad on exchange programmes)
  • ID/passport.
  • Language test certificates (french and/or english) if necessary
Award Providers: Eiffel Scholarship, Sciences Po

Open Society Disability Rights Scholarship (LL.M) Program for Africans 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 1st December, 2017
Eligible Countries: China; Ghana, Mozambique, Sudan, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda; MexicoPeru
To be taken at (schools): Participating schools include:
  • School of Law, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
  • Faculty of Law, McGill University, Canada
  • School of Law, University of Leeds, UK
  • College of Law, Syracuse University, USA
  • Washington College of Law, American University, USA
About the Award:  The Open Society Disability Rights Scholarship Program provides awards for master’s degree study to disability rights advocates, lawyers, and educators to develop new legislation, jurisprudence, policy, research, and scholarship to harness the innovations and opportunities offered by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
With the knowledge and networks gained through the program, we expect that fellows will deepen their understanding of international law and education, with a focus on disability rights, and gain the tools necessary to engage in a range of CRPD implementation strategies, such as: challenging rights violations in their home countries by drafting enforceable legislation consistent with the CRPD; utilizing enforcement mechanisms set forth in the convention; taking forward disability rights litigation requesting CRPD-compliant remedies; engaging in disability rights advocacy; and developing law, education, or other academic curricula informed by the CRPD.
Eligible Fields of Study: Bachelor of laws (LLB; in exceptional circumstances, those without a LLB but with substantial relevant experience may be considered); for inclusive education, a degree in teaching, public administration/policy, anthropology, social work, psychology, or related field.
Type: Masters, Fellowship
Eligibility: The Open Society Disability Rights Scholarship is merit based and open to those meeting the following criteria:
  • be a citizen and legal resident of an eligible country: China; Ghana, Malawi, Mozambique, Sudan, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda; Mexico, or Peru at the time of application;
  • have work experience in the legal profession or advocacy focusing on human/disability rights;
  • have an excellent academic record with a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.; in exceptional circumstances, those without a LL.B but with substantial relevant experience may be considered)—degree must be awarded by the application deadline;
  • have demonstrated leadership in the field of disability rights;
  • be proficient in spoken and written English or French and able to meet university-designated minimum scores on standardized language tests;
  • be able to participate in an intensive academic writing program in Summer 2018;
  • be able to begin the graduate program in August or September 2018;
  • be able to receive and maintain visa or study permit required by host country;
  • demonstrate a clear commitment to return to home country to contribute to advancing the inclusion and full participation of persons with disabilities in their communities.
The Open Society Disability Rights Scholarship does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, color, sex, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. Candidates with disabilities are particularly encouraged to apply.
Selection: Competition is merit based, and selection is made on the basis of academic excellence, professional aptitude, leadership potential, and proven commitment to work in the field of disability rights in the home country.
Selection proceeds as follows:
  • Preliminary Selection and Testing
  • Interviews and Final Selection
Value of Scholarship: The fellowship provides:
  • tuition and mandatory university fees;
  • monthly stipend for room, board, and other living expenses;
  • program-related travel;
  • accident and health insurance during the program;
  • funds for educational materials and professional development;
  • all costs associated with pre-academic summer program and annual conference;
  • support for students with disabilities to obtain reasonable accommodations necessary for participating in the program of study.
The fellowship does NOT provide funding for dependent family members.
Duration of Scholarship: 1 year
How to Apply: It is important to see the complete guidelines and submit an application online, or contact the appropriate regional coordinator in the Program Webpage (See Link below)
Award Provider: Open Society Foundation

Funding for War vs. Natural Disasters

Chris Ernesto

I have an aunt who lives in paradise – Paradise, California, that is.  But in 2017 it has been anything but, as the communities surrounding Paradise have been evacuated on two separate occasions due to natural disasters and crumbling infrastructure. In February, torrential downpours caused the Oroville Dam to fail, washing out homes, businesses, memories and lives.  And now they are dealing with devastating wildfires that have killed dozens, displaced thousands, and are being fought by firefighters, some of whom are only making minimum wage and working 70 straight hours.
The fires in California are just the latest natural disaster to inflict suffering on Americans, as the people in Puerto Rico, Florida and Texas can attest, following massive hurricanes over the summer.
Nearly one month after being crushed by Hurricane Maria, 85% of Puerto Ricans still do not have electricity, and 40% do not have running water, and people from the Southwest and the Southeast US continue to struggle with the aftermath of Hurricanes Irma and Harvey.
The destructive California wildfires are predicted to cost the US economy $85 billion.  The costs of recovery post-Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria are estimated to be a minimum of $65 billion$25 billion and $45 billion, respectively.  The combined estimated cost of the recent natural disasters is $220 billion which is just a fraction of the $700 billion the US will spend on the military in 2017.
In fact, Congress appropriates more than 70 times the amount of money for the military as it does for the Federal Emergency Management Administration’s (FEMA) Disaster Relief Fund:
If the US allocated disaster relief funds to its own citizens as religiously as it allocated tax payer dollars to US wars abroad, everyone in affected areas could easily be provided the help they need to get back on their feet.
For example, instead of spending $1.25 trillion dollars to modernize the US nuclear arsenal, and $566 billion to build the Navy a 308-ship fleet, wouldn’t Americans prefer to have that money available to rebuild Southeast Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and California?
Wouldn’t this military allocation be better utilized by modernizing our infrastructure, building more disaster relief centers, and hiring more firefighters and first responders?  Or earmarked to groups like Team Rubicon, a veteran-led organization that trains disaster relief volunteers?
Instead of spending money on war, which leads to destruction, we should spend money in the US to help Americans whose lives are destroyed by natural disasters.
We can’t prevent natural disasters but we as a country can fund the improvement of infrastructure and services so that after a natural disaster hits, the outcome is less devastating to the American people.

Washington, Not China, is the Biggest Threat to American Power

Paul Craig Roberts

Readers at home and around the world want to know what to make of the announcement that China henceforth will conduct oil purchases and sales in gold-backed Chinese currency.
Is this an attack by Russia and China on the US dollar? Will the dollar weaken and collapse from being discarded as the currency in which oil is transacted? These and other questions are on readers’ minds.
Below is my opinion:
The US dollar’s value depends on whether central banks, corporations, and individuals are content to hold their assets or wealth in dollars. If they are, it does not matter what currency is used to transact oil. If they are not, it does not matter if all oil is transacted in dollars. Why?
Because if they don’t want to hold dollars, they will dump the dollars as soon as the transaction is completed and move into other currencies or gold. What China is doing is creating a currency that might be a more attractive currency to hold.
It is possible that the gold-backed Chinese currency is a move against US power, but I see it differently. I see it as a protection against US power. China and Russia are disassociating from the dollar system, because Washington, in its abuse of the world currency role, uses the dollar payments mechanism to impose sanctions on other countries and to threaten them with exclusion from the payments clearing system.
In other words, Washington, instead of operating a fair system, uses its world currency role to dominate other countries. Russia and China are too strong to be dominated, and, thus, are throwing off the dollar system. If other countries follow, the dollar will cease to be an instrument of US control over the rest of the world.
To put it in different words, Bretton Woods gave Washington the responsibility for the world financial system. Washington abused the power entrusted to it by using the dollar system to destabilize other countries, such as Venezuela currently. Washington’s abuse of the world currency role in order to advance American financial and business interests and Washington’s power over the foreign and domestic policies of other countries has set in motion forces that will eliminate the dollar’s role as world reserve currency.
The hubris and arrogance of Washington are destroying American power.

The Real Reason Behind Trump’s Angry Diplomacy in North Korea

Ramzy Baroud

To understand the United States’ stratagem in the Pacific, and against North Korea in particular, one has to understand the fundamental changes that are under way in that region. China’s clout as an Asian superpower and as a global economic powerhouse has been growing at a rapid speed. The US’ belated ‘pivot to Asia’ to counter China’s rise has been, thus far, quite ineffectual.
The angry diplomacy of President Donald Trump is Washington’s way to scare off North Korea’s traditional ally, China, and disrupt what has been, till now, quite a smooth Chinese economic, political and military ascendency in Asia that has pushed against US regional influence, especially in the East and South China Seas.
Despite the fact that China has reevaluated its once strong ties with North Korea, in recent years, it views with great alarm any military build-up by the US and its allies. A stronger US military in that region will be a direct challenge to China’s inevitable trade and political hegemony.
The US understands that its share of the world’s economic pie chart is constantly being reduced, and that China is gaining ground, and fast.
The United States’ economy is the world’s largest, but not for long. Statistics show that China is blazing the trail and will, by 2030 – or even sooner – win the coveted spot. In fact, according to an International Monetary Fund report in 2014, China is already the world’s largest economy when the method of measurement is adjusted by purchasing power.
This is not an anomaly and is not reversible, at least any time soon.
The growth rate of the US economy over the past 30 years has averaged 2.4 percent, while China soared at 9.3 percent.
Citing these numbers, Paul Ormerod, an economist and a visiting professor at University College, London, argued in a recent article that “if we project these rates forward, the Chinese economy will be as big as the American by 2024. By 2037, it will be more than twice the size.”
It is no wonder why Trump obsessively referenced ‘China’ in his many campaigning speeches prior to his election to the White House, and why he continues to blame China for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program to this day.
As a business mogul, Trump understands how real power works, and that his country’s nuclear arsenal, estimated at nearly 7,000 nuclear weapons, is simply not enough to reverse his country’s economic misfortunes.
In fact, China’s nuclear arsenal is quite miniscule compared to the US. Military power alone is not a sufficient measurement of actual power that can be translated into economic stability, sustainable wealth and financial security of a nation.
It is ironic that, while the US threatens to ‘totally destroy North Korea,’ it is the Chinese government that is using sensible language, calling for de-escalation and citing international law. Not only did fortunes change, but roles as well. China, which for many years was depicted as a rogue state, now seems like the cornerstone of stability in Asia.
Prudent US leaders, like former President Jimmy Carter understand well the need to involve China in resolving the US-North Korean standoff.
In an article in the Washington Post, Carter, 93, called for immediate and direct diplomatic engagement with North Korea that involves China as well.
He wrote on October 4, the US should “offer to send a high-level delegation to Pyongyang for peace talks or to support an international conference including North and South Korea, the United States and China, at a mutually acceptable site.”
A few days leader, Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, quoted Carter’s article, and reasserted her country’s position that only a diplomatic solution could bring the crisis to an end.
In a recent tweet, Trump claimed that “Presidents and their administrations have been talking to North Korea for 25 years, agreements made and massive amounts of money paid … hasn’t worked.”
He alleged that North Korea has violated these agreements even “before the ink was dry”, finishing with the ominous warning that “only one thing will work!”, alluding to war.
Trump is a bad student of history. The ‘agreements’ he was referring to is the ‘Agreed Framework’ of 1994, signed between President Bill Clinton and Kim Jong-il – the father of the current leader Kim Jong-un. In fact, the crisis was averted, when Pyongyang respected its side of the agreement. The US, however, reneged, argued Fred Kaplan in ‘Slate’.
“North Korea kept its side of the bargain, the United States did not,” Kaplan wrote. “No light-water reactors were provided. (South Korea and Japan were supposed to pay for the reactors; they didn’t, and the U.S. Congress didn’t step in.) Nor was any progress made on diplomatic recognition.”
It took North Korea years to react to the US and its partners’ violation of the terms of the deal.
In 2001, the US invaded and destroyed Afghanistan. In 2003, it invaded Iraq, and actively began threatening a regime change in Iran. Iraq, Iran and North Korea were already blacklisted as the “axis of evil” in George W. Bush’s infamous speech in 2002.
More military interventions followed, especially as the Middle East fell into unprecedented chaos resulting from the so-called Arab Spring in 2011. Regime change, as became the case in Libya, remained the defining doctrine of US foreign policy.
This is the actual reality that terrifies North Korea. For 15 years they have been waiting for their turn on the US regime change path, and their nuclear weapons program is their only deterring strategy in the face of US military interventions. The more the North Korean leadership felt isolated regionally and internationally, the more determined it became in obtaining nuclear devices.
This is the context that Trump does not want to understand. US mainstream media, which seems to loathe Trump in every way except when he threatens war or defends Israel, is following blindly.
Current news reports of North Korea’s supposed ability to kill “90% of all Americans” within one year is the kind of ignorance and fear-mongering that has dragged the US into multiple wars, costing the economy trillions of dollars, while continuing to make bad situations far worse.
Indeed, a recent Brown University Study showed that, between 2001 and 2016, the cost of wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Pakistan has cost the US $3.6 trillion.
Perhaps, a better way of fending against the rise of China is investing in the US economy instead of wasting money on protracted wars.
But if a Trump war in North Korea takes place, what would it look like?
US Newsweek magazine took on this very disturbing question, only to provide equally worrying answers.
“If combat broke out between the two countries, American commanders in the Pacific would very quickly exhaust their stockpiles of smart bombs and missiles, possibly within a week,” military sources revealed.
It will take a year for the US military to replenish their stockpile, thus leaving them with the option of “dropping crude gravity bombs on their targets, guaranteeing a longer and bloodier conflict for both sides.”
Expectedly, North Korea would strike, at will, all of the US allies in the region, starting with South Korea. Even if the conflict does not escalate to the use of nuclear weapons, the death toll from such a war “could reach 1 million.”
Both Trump and Kim Jong-un are unsavory figures, driven by fragile egos and unsound judgement. Yet, they are both in a position that, if not reigned in soon, could threaten global security and the lives of millions.
Calls for diplomatic solutions made by Carter and China must be heeded, before it is too late.

The Return of One-Man Rule in China?

GERRY BROWN

As the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China ( CPC) draws near, western corporatist media and analysts are out in full force and working overtime to smear and demonize CPC and its top leaders, particularly President Xi Jinping. Their ploy and antics are wearing thin. Increasingly, they don’t even bother to conceal their mendacity and hatred for China and CPC. It’s an unmistakable sign that CPC and its leaders have done good things for China and her people. To paraphrase the Bard, hell knows no fury like an imperialist frustrated.
Their narrative revolves around the sacking (purging according to the presstitutes) of Chongqing party Secretary Sun Zhengcai for corruption, whom they claim was the most worthy successor to Xi after 2022. They said the same thing about Bo Xilai when he was charged and convicted of corruption before Xi became President in 2012.
Fact is there are two other candidates eminently qualified to succeed Xi. One is Hu Chunhua, party Secretary of Guangdong province. The other is Chen Min’er, the new party Secretary of Chongqing who took over from the disgraced Sun. Veteran observers of Chinese politics regard Chen as the more likely successor of the two, given his rapid promotion since 2012.  Xi and the previous President Hu Jintao were promoted quickly before they were elected to the Politburo Standing Committee (PSC) without spending time in the Politburo first.
The presstitutes claim that Xi’s failure to name a successor now (or after the party Congress) reveals his ambition to serve a third term after 2022. They are deliberately obtuse or ignorant of the fact that it’s not for Xi to name a successor. That’s the prerogative of the 200-strong Central Committee in 2022. Any observer worth his salt can make an educated guess as to the likely successor by looking at the new PSC members after the party Congress.
Since 2002, China’s leadership transition has been very much institutionalised. One major feature is collective leadership exercised by PSC, comprising 5 to 9 members. PSC acts like a cabinet in a Westminster parliamentary system. In fact, the composition and working of the PSC are more democratic than the Westminster cabinet. One, unlike the cabinet appointments which are decided by the Prime Minister in a Westminster parliamentary system, members of PSC are elected directly by the 200-strong Central Committee. Two, unlike the Westminster cabinet where the PM is the first among equals, Xi as General Secretary is just like other PSC members. PSC works on a consensual basis, rather than on the basis of majority as in a Westminster cabinet.
Talk that Xi is working to stack the 25-member Politburo (separate from PSC) and 7-member PSC with his own men is plain silly. The Central Committee, comprising 200 odd members, elect members of the Politburo and PSC. The Central Committee members are, in turn, elected by close to 2,300 delegates from the provinces, directly-administered municipalities, armed forces and other government organs. The delegates themselves are elected by tens of millions of CPC members. The provinces and municipalities control more than two thirds of the 2,000 plus delegates. No one could conceivably control the whole election process.
Credit should be given to Xi for grooming Chen, who isn’t a Red “princeling”. Chen rose through the ranks, from local official to provincial head. He was tested at his post as party Secretary of Guizhou province, an economic backwater in south -western China. Within 3 years, he has transformed the province into a centre for Big Data, and lifted many out of poverty.
When the party Congress concludes on October 24, the question as to who will succeed Xi as China’s President and General Secretary in 2022 will be answered. If I may venture my prediction here : Chen will make it to PSC and groomed as a successor to Xi, while Hu Chunhua may get elected to the Politburo or PSC in line to be the next Prime Minister in 2022 to head up the State Council, the executive branch of China’s central government.

Pakistan Faces a Life-Threatening Military Coup

LIAQUAT ALI KHAN

Strong signs are indicating that another military coup in Pakistan is in the making. Pakistan remains a fragile democracy despite several successful general elections in the past seventy years. The military generals, senior bureaucrats, and even high court judges, despite their rhetoric supportive of democracy, do not respect politicians or political parties. It is Pakistan’s tragedy that each unit of the establishment, be it the military, bureaucracy, or judiciary, believes that it alone can safeguard the interests of Pakistan.
Overconfident generals advocate simplistic models of government founded on the notion of law and order and ignore social and ethnic complexities of the people of Pakistan. Corrupt bureaucracy, obsessed with promotions and kickbacks, implements policies without any sense of obligation. Self-righteous judiciary spins out half-digested theories of constitutionalism borrowed from the West, such as Kelsen’s theory of effective government or doctrine of necessity, to endorse military interventions.
Catastrophic Military Governments
In 1962, the military government of General Ayub Khan introduced an ill-advised constitution, purportedly mimicking the U.S. Electoral College, under which 80,000 elected representatives were empowered to choose the President. The system created 80,000 puppets open to manipulation and corruption. The constitution also divided Pakistan into two autonomous units, pitting West Pakistan against East Pakistan, thus sowing the seeds of future secession of Bangladesh from the Western unit.
In 1971, the military government of General Yahya Khan, a gentleman who enjoyed remaining in a state of whiskey-induced intoxication, invaded East Pakistan, ordered the commission of genocide of local population in a tough law and order policy, only to be defeated by India, a geopolitical rival looking for opportunities to dismember Pakistan. Instead of bemoaning losing Bangladesh, the cheerleaders of the military were inviting yet another general to save Pakistan from corrupt politicians.
In 1977, the military government of General Zia-ul Haq, a religious fanatic, introduced harsh punishments, such as public lashings, to turn Pakistan into a spiritual society.  The screams of individuals (whipped in public) amplified through microphones denoted his vision of an Islamic Pakistan. General Zia also introduced blasphemy ordinances opening the way for the persecution of religious minorities, particularly Hindus and Christians, accused of insulting the prophet of Islam. Corroborating with the U.S., Zia also championed the notion of jihad as an Islamic obligation for defeating the enemies (the Soviets) occupying Muslim lands (Afghanistan). This law and order Islamization of Pakistan will sow seeds for the emergence of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
In 1999, the military government of General Pervez Musharraf, a secularist who loved to drink and dance, nudged Pakistan away from Islam. However, the religious forces unleashed by General Zia had solidified to an extent that they were able and willing to take on the armed forces of Pakistan. The 9/11 attacks on the U.S. emboldened the Taliban and al-Qaeda to intensify terrorist attacks in Pakistan. In pursuit of power, General Musharraf turned to criminality, violating laws with audacity and impunity. The massacre of seminarians in Islamabad, the military murder of Akbar Bugti in Balochistan, the cold-blooded assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and the detention of Supreme Court Justices, nothing was prohibited in the maintenance of law and order.
This Coup is Treacherous
A trap has been laid for the dismemberment of Pakistan, like a hidden abyss covered with straws. Already, Pakistan is nearly isolated in the world as its reputation as a terrorist state deepens throughout the world. India and the United States have joined strategic forces to pressure Pakistan to confront domestic religious forces that support the resistance wars in Kashmir and Afghanistan. If the Pakistan military refuses to fight domestic terrorists, while the U.S. bleeds in Afghanistan and India in Kashmir, the charges of state-sponsored terrorism would grow against Pakistan. If the military fights domestic terrorists, a civil war will intensify in all the provinces of Pakistan.
Seeing such an existential threat to the country, the military may overthrow the civilian government. Consequently, like before, political repression will begin and vocal politicians will be arrested, if not exiled. The electronic media will protest but face a choice, either close down the shop or support the military government. Rebel journalists will be detained or they will disappear.
In a political vacuum, the militants fighting for the Islamic state in Pakistan will join hands with the Taliban as the Indian intelligence network covertly enters the battlefield. The civil war will turn bloodier. The movement of independence in Balochistan, supported by some members of U.S. Congress, will gain credibility. India will most probably supply arms, as it already does, to local militants fighting the military. The U.S. might also enter the conflict to dismantle the economic and geostrategic threat posed by the Chinese One Belt One Road initiative, known as CPEC in Pakistan.
The General Whoever leading the new military government in Pakistan will come under tremendous pressure to surrender the nation’s nuclear weapons to prevent a threat to international peace and security. If the General refuses to do so, the international press will demonize the General Whoever following the script that painted Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad as diabolical demons. Stronger the General, the better the script would work.
And thus, a nation-state, called Pakistan, with potentially great promise, will be threatened with an unfortunate extinction.  The military needs to engage in consequentialist analysis before it overthrows a functioning democracy, how imperfect it might appear to the generals.