French Embassy Fully-funded Masters and PhD Scholarship Programme for South African Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 20th March 2018.

Eligible Countries: South Africa

To be taken at (country): France

Type: Masters and PhD

About the Award: Launched in 2010, the French Embassy Masters and PhD scholarship programmes form part of the commitment between France and South Africa to establish fruitful partnerships between their universities while building a vast network of academic and professional contacts.

Masters Scholarships

Eligibility: The Embassy of France invites students who wish to continue their tertiary education at Masters Level in France to apply for its bursary programme for the academic year September 2018/2019

• Students must hold at least a Bachelor’s degree.
• As more and more Master programmes are taught in English, basic knowledge of French is desirable, but not required.

Number of Awardees: 20

Value of Scholarship: Tuition fees, the Schengen visa fees, a monthly stipend towards living expenses, health insurance and the flight tickets.

Duration of Scholarship: Students can either apply for the first year of a Master’s degree (M1) or, if they have an honours degree, the university may admit the student into the second year of a Master’s degree (M2) in order to complete their degree after one year. The duration of the grant is therefore one year, once renewable should a student originally admitted in M1 continue with the M2 programme.

How to Apply: Download Information sheet 2018-2019 and Masters Application form 2018- 2019

PhD Research Grants

Eligibility: The French Embassy of South Africa bursary programme is currently proposing grants for 2017 to facilitate international academic and scientific mobility for researchers towards French institutions of higher education.

• Candidates must hold a Master’s degree or its equivalent.
• There is no deadline for applications, and students are invited to apply throughout the year. It is however advised that students apply early in the year due to limited available funding.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The bursary includes visa expenses, round-trip flight tickets, social and medical insurance and a monthly stipend for living expenses.

Duration of Scholarship:  3 – 6 months per year, with an option of renewing it for the next 2 years.

How to Apply: For PhD’s application forms or more information concerning the bursaries, please contact CampusFrance South Africa at pretoria[at]campusfrance.org.

Download information sheet 2018 and PhD Application form 2018.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: French Embassy

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Fully-funded Undergraduate Scholarships for Rwandan Students 2018 – USA

Application Deadline: 15th December 2017

Eligible Countries: Rwanda

To Be Taken At (Country): USA

About the Award: The CUSP Scholarship is a full scholarship that covers all tuition, books, living expenses, and fees for a 4-year (120 credit hour) bachelor’s degree in Integrated Sciences.

Fields of Study: Students selected to participate in the CASNR Undergraduate Scholarship Program (CUSP) will pursue a Bachelor of Science degree in Integrated Science that is focused on conservation agriculture, entrepreneurship, leadership, and innovative thinking and is aligned with the areas of need as identified by the Rwandan Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources. Students will also have the opportunity to explore other areas of agriculture including: food production – animal, plant and food systems; soils, water quantity and availability, energy and environmental stewardship; nutrition, food safety, food engineering and processing; business, communication, public service and extension education; ecology, conservation biology and climate; and engineering, irrigation, mechanization and technology. Upon completion of the program, participants will return to Rwanda and commit a minimum of 5 years of their career to advancing the Rwanda agricultural sector.

Type: Undergraduate

Eligibility: Applicants will be considered based on a combination of meeting Nebraska undergraduate admission requirements, academic performance, a commitment to the goals of the scholarship program as well as a qualitative in-country interview conducted by members of CASNR and the university’s Office of Admissions.

Selection Criteria: At the time of application, an applicant must:

• Meet all University of Nebraska-Lincoln admission requirements
• Hold Rwandan citizenship
• Have graduated from high school by the start of the academic year the applicant is applying for or be a transfer student from university. If you have already completed a Bachelor degree program, you are not eligible to apply for the scholarship. Cambridge International curriculum and exam results are accepted.
• Must meet University of Nebraska-Lincoln English proficiency requirements for full admission1
  • TOEFL score of 70 with a written subscore of 20
  • IELTS score of 6.0 with a written subscore of 5.5
• Interest in agricultural field of study (food production – animal, plant and food systems; conservation agriculture, soils, water quantity and availability; energy and environmental stewardship; business, entrepreneurship and leadership; nutrition, food safety, food engineering and processing; communication, public service and extension education; ecology, conservation biology and climate; and engineering, irrigation, mechanization and technology)
• Be able to provide the following:
  • Stamped copy of S4, S5 and S6 academic transcripts with class ranking. If your school does not provide class rankings, please note “0/0” on your application
  • Copy of national exam results after interview selection
• 500-word essay answering “Why are you passionate about pursuing a career aligned with Rwandan agriculture?”

Number of Awards: 50

Value of Award: Full scholarships to include tuition, fees, living expenses, and travel costs.

Duration of Program: 4 years

How to Apply: CUSP ONLINE APPLICATION

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: University of Nebraska-Lincoln

US Government TechWomen Program for Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) Fields 2018

Application Timeline: 

• Application closes: 17th January, 2018.
• Semifinalists will be contacted via email in/around March 2018.
• Final decisions will be made no later than early May 2018.
• September 2018: TechWomen program begins in San Francisco, CA
• October 2018: TechWomen program concludes in Washington, DC

Eligible Countries: Algeria, Cameroon, Egypt, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories, Rwanda, SierraLeone, South Africa, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe.

To be taken at (country): USA

Eligible Field of Study: Any STEM fields

About the Award: From the moment the Emerging Leaders arrive, they are immersed in the innovative, constantly evolving culture of Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area. Emerging Leaders work closely with their Professional Mentors to design meaningful projects while exploring the San Francisco Bay Area with their Cultural Mentor and fellow program participants.

TechWomen Emerging Leaders will:

• Challenge themselves with new questions and concepts
• Collaborate with like-minded women in their fields on an innovative project
• Network with influential industry leaders
• Discover their own innovative leadership style
• Create meaningful friendships with women from all over the world
• Explore the diverse communities of the San Francisco Bay Area and Washington, D.C.
• Inspire the next generation of women and girls in their home countries

Type: Training, Fellowship

Eligibility: Applicants must

• Be women with, at minimum, two years full-time professional experience in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) fields. Please note that internships and other unpaid work experience does not count toward the two-year professional experience requirement.
• Have, at minimum, a bachelor’s degree/four-year university degree or equivalent.
• Be proficient in written and spoken English.
• Be citizens and permanent residents of Algeria, Cameroon, Egypt, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe at the time of application and while participating in the program.
• Be eligible to obtain a U.S. J-1 exchange visitor visa.
• Not have applied for an immigrant visa to the United States (other than the Diversity Immigrant Visa, also known as the “visa lottery”) in the past five years.
• Not hold U.S. citizenship or be a U.S. legal permanent resident.

Preference will be given to applicants who

• Demonstrate themselves as emerging leaders in their chosen professional track through their work experience, volunteer experience, community activities and education.
• Are committed to return to their home countries to share what they have learned and mentor women and girls.
• Have limited or no prior experience in the United States.
• Have a proven record of voluntary or public service in their communities.
• Have a demonstrated track record of entrepreneurialism and commitment to innovation.
• Demonstrate a willingness to participate in exchange programs, welcome opportunities for mentoring and new partnership development, and exhibit confidence and maturity.

TechWomen encourages people with diverse backgrounds and skills to apply, including individuals with disabilities.

Selection: TechWomen participants are selected based on the eligibility requirements above. Applications are reviewed by independent selection committees composed of industry leaders and regional experts. Semifinalists may be interviewed by United States Embassy personnel in their country of permanent residence.

Number of Awardees: 100 women

Value of Scholarship: International travel, housing, meals and incidentals, local transportation and transportation to official TechWomen events are covered by the TechWomen program. Participants are responsible for the cost of any non-program activities in which they wish to partake, such as independent sightseeing and non-program-related travel.

Duration of Scholarship: The 2018 TechWomen program will occur over five weeks from September – October 2018. Due to the fast-paced nature of the program, arrival and departure dates are not flexible.

How to Apply: Interested TechWomen participants should apply based on the application requirements in link below.

Visit Programme Webpage for details

Award Provider: US Department of State

EducationUSA Scholars Program (ESP) for Rwandan Students 2018

Application Deadline: Monday 11th December, 2017.

Eligible Countries: Rwanda

About the Award: EducationUSA’s mission is to assist our Scholars in negotiating the admissions process in U.S. colleges and universities to better their academic futures, with the goal of producing highly-skilled and widely-educated leaders to build tomorrow’s Rwanda.

We do not limit the program geographically; however, students must be able to reach our offices in Kigali  as required for full participation. ESP students will work with the EducationUSA Adviser in 2018 to try and secure admission and financial aid to begin classes at U.S. colleges and universities for the Fall 2019 school term.

Type: Undergraduate

Eligibility: 

• A VERY strong academic record, be actively involved in co-curricular and leadership activities, have a strong record of giving back to your community and demonstrate financial need.
• Only students who will graduate from secondary schools in November 2017 and those who graduated in 2016 or 2015 are eligible to apply. Students who graduated in 2014 and years prior are not eligible.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The Education USA Advising Center works with students through regularly scheduled training sessions to assist them throughout the application process to secure admission and financial aid from universities in the United States. The Centre in turn expects a sincere commitment from the students to give back their energy and time to the program and to their communities.

How to Apply: To apply for the 2018 EducationUSA  Scholars Program (ESP), students must fully complete the application.

It is important to go through the Application requirements and process in the Program Webpage (See Link below) before applying.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: The Education USA Advising Center

Important Notes: ENTRANCE INTO THIS PROGRAM DOES NOT GUARANTEE ADMISSION OR FINANCIAL AID TO STUDY IN THE U.S.  CANDIDATES WHO COMPLETED SENIOR 6 IN 2014 AND YEARS PRIOR ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO APPLY.

Climate Food and Farming (CLIFF) Research Program for Students from Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017.

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

About the Award: CLIFF-GRADS is a joint initiative of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change (CCAFS) low emissions agriculture flagship and the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (GRA). CLIFF-GRADS aims to build the capability of early career agricultural students in developing countries to conduct applied research on climate change mitigation in agriculture. CLIFF-GRADS integrates the GRA’s new Development Scholarship and the Climate Food and Farming (CLIFF) Research Network with the common goal of providing grants to graduate students to expand their knowledge and experience in quantification of agricultural greenhouse gases.

Type: Research

Eligibility: 

• Applicants should have a background in agriculture and climate change research and be pursuing graduate research related to agricultural greenhouse gas quantification.
• Applicants must be currently enrolled PhD students in a field related to quantification of greenhouse gas emissions or carbon sequestration in agricultural systems.
• Applicants must be students from a developing country. (Includes all countries NOT listed as “high income economies” by the World Bank http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-and-lending-groups)
• Women are particularly encouraged to apply.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Selected students will be sponsored in the amount of 10,000-12,000 USD for short-term (4-6 month) scientific training and research stays to collaborate with projects associated with CCAFS and GRA. Specific topics will depend on the student’s and host institution scientists’ interests.

The grants will be used to support living and research costs at the host institution. Grants may not be used for tuition or unrelated personal expenses.

Duration of Program: 4-6 months

How to Apply: The application must include the following documents merged into one pdf file:

• 1-2 page motivation letter (described below)
• 1-page curriculum vitae that includes your contact details
• Letter of support from your university supervisor
• All applications must be in English

The motivation letter, which must be no more than two A4 pages, must include the following:

1. Your name, citizenship and the country where you are conducting your graduate study
2. The objectives of your graduate research
3. The specific research opportunity to which you are applying (see list below)
4. Research experience with greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture or soil carbon storage in agricultural systems (especially if you are applying to work with a project with ‘”preferred skills or experience”)
5. A description of how scientific training with CCAFS/GRA scientists will improve your graduate research

• Please submit your application by email to Meryl Richards, Science Officer for CCAFS Low Emissions Agriculture (meryl.richards@uvm.edu)
• Please also contact Meryl with questions.
• Successful applicants will be matched with a project and notified by email in late January of 2018.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Funding for CLIFF-GRADS is provided by the Government of New Zealand and the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security.

Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) Grants for Research Collaboration 2018

Application Deadline: 2nd February 2018 (Phase 1)

Eligible Countries: 

• Window 1: Research-based institutions in Denmark, Ghana, and Tanzania are encouraged to apply.
• Window 2: Only research-based institutions in Denmark are eligible and only if they are iin partnership with research institutions in Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Colombia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Kenya, Mexico, Myanmar, South
  Africa, Turkey, and Vietnam.

About the Award: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark (MFA) provides grants for development research activities as part of Denmark’s international development cooperation. Two windows are available in 2018, providing grants for research with partners in Danida priority countries and for research with partners in growth and transition countries.

Phase 1 is the first step of a process in which applicants submit research proposals leading to prequalification. Phase 2 is the submission of a full application by those selected (“prequalified”).

Type: Research Grants

Eligibility: 

• In accordance with the overall objectives of Danida’s support for research, grants will be awarded to strategic research cooperation which generates new knowledge relevant to the needs and strategies of the growth and transition countries and contributes to strengthening research capacity in these countries.
• It is important to note that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in 2015 constitute an overall thematic framework for development cooperation and research.
• Applications can only be submitted by universities or by a research-based institution (public and private) in Denmark, which will be responsible for the grant. The project coordinator must be attached to that institution.
• At the time of submitting the application, the project coordinator must hold a PhD or equivalent qualification, documented clearly in the CV. Documented evidence that he/she is a Professor, Assistant Professor, or Associate Professor is regarded as equivalent to a PhD.

Selection Criteria: The relevance of the proposal is evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:

• The focus of the project is well-defined with respect to the announced research theme in the chosen partner country;
• The project contributes to the overall objectives of the Danish strategic sector cooperation in the country (where relevant) or is otherwise relevant for strengthening commercial or political cooperation with Denmark;
• Preferably, the project includes private sector partners or has potential for such a partnership in a possible subsequent funding phase.

The scientific quality of the proposal is evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:

• The research experience and qualifications of the project coordinator and the team;
• The originality and innovative nature of the project, in terms of generating new knowledge;The effect of the research is evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:
• The potential direct effects with respect to the selected sustainable development goal (s);
• The effects of the project in terms of the partnerships with public and private sector which could take the research to the next step;
• Strengthened research capacity of the project, which should add value for both the Danish and the partner institution.

Selection: A Consultative Research Committee for Development Research (FFU) is tasked with assisting the MFA by providing professional and scientific advice in relation to research applications and projects.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• DKK 5 million for each project.
• The total budget available for this research window is approximately DKK 60 million. The funding is conditional of the Danish Parliament’s approval of the 2018 Finance Bill.
• It is envisaged that the extension project could be up to 5 years’ duration with an additional grant of up to DKK 10 million.

Duration of Program: 18 to 36 months

How to Apply: 

• The e-application system is accessible from DFC’s website via the following link here
• The e-application form may contain information which is important in relation to the application albeit not covered in this Call.

It is important to go through the Application Requirements and instructions on the Program Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: The Danida Fellowship Centre (DFC)

Elsevier Foundation/TWAS Sustainability Visiting Expert Program 2018

Application Deadline: 1st March 2018

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): Developing Countries

About the Award: The Elsevier Foundation – TWAS Sustainability Visiting Expert Programme supports visits of distinguished scientists to institutions in developing countries, especially those in the 48 Least Developed Countries (LDCs).

The programme aims to provide institutions and research groups in developing countries, especially those with limited outside contacts with the opportunity to establish long-term links with world leaders in sustainability and further build capacity in their countries.

Under the programme, prospective host institutions can invite distinguished scientists in sustainability to collaborate in research and training. The visiting expert will be expected to interact closely with faculty and students of the host institution with the aim of strengthening its existing activities and/or assisting in the establishment of new lines of research. The visiting expert could also deliver lectures and seminars to research students, supervise students, conduct research and discuss future collaborative partnerships.

This effort is in line with the new Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda.

Type: Research

Eligibility: The Visiting Expert Programme places a strong emphasis on equal opportunities, and nominations of women scientists will be particularly welcomed. Please note: only persons who are experts in the field of sustainability will be considered for the programme.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The sponsoring organization, through TWAS, will provide the visiting expert with up to USD4,000 to cover the cost of travel, visa, accommodation and other expenses related to the visit.

Duration of Program: Minimum two weeks

How to Apply: Institutions wishing to be considered for this programme must complete the online application form. While filling in the online application, the following documentation needs to be uploaded:

• brief CV of the Sustainbility Visiting Expert (maximum 10 pages);
• list of publications of the Sustainbility Visiting Expert;
• letter from the Sustainability Visiting Expert detailing the research and teaching programme with which he/she could assist at the host institute;
• supporting statement from the head of the host institution.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: The Elsevier Foundation, TWAS

Commonwealth Class Short Story Writing Competition for Young Students 2018

Application Deadline: 2nd January 2018.

Eligible Countries: Commonwealth countries

To be taken at (country): Candidate’s Home Country

About the Award: This competition is operated by the British Council to publicise the Commonwealth Class programme and to increase participation amongst pupils aged 7-14 years in Commonwealth Countries. It will be open to two age categories – 7-10 year olds and 11-14 year olds.

Type: Contest

Eligibility: The Competition is open to residents of a Commonwealth country aged between 7 and 14 years. As the entrants are under the age of 18 years, his/her entry must be submitted on their behalf by a
parent/guardian over the age of 18 years who, in submitting the entry, agrees to and accepts these Competition Rules:

• Only one entry per person is allowed.
• The theme of the story is ‘Peace’.
• The story must be written in English.
• The maximum word limit of the stories is:
  • 300 words from 7-10 year olds
  • 500 words from 11-14 year olds
• Entry to the Competition is free of charge although entrants are responsible for any costs associated with entry.
• All entries must be submitted online.

Selection Process: Entries will be shortlisted and judged by a panel of judges selected by British Council in the UK.

Value of Contest: The following prizes will be given to students awarded first, second and third place in the competition:

• The 1st prize winner will receive a £100 book token or equivalent voucher and a certificate.
• The 2nd prize winner will receive a £50 book token or equivalent voucher and a certificate, and
• The 3rd prize winner will receive a £30 book token or equivalent voucher and a certificate.

Prizes are personal to the winners and cannot be transferred to any third party. Prizes cannot be exchanged for money or any other goods or services.

How to Apply: Participants are invited to write a story set in their own country and can enter one of two age categories (7-10 year olds or 11-14 year olds). Students must adhere to the competition rules, which include eligibility criteria (see above) and submit their story via the online form (see ‘Enter now’ link below).

Creative ways to approach the theme

How should students approach the theme of ‘Peace’ in their writing? They could go for a story that is personal, magical, funny or scary. The possibilities are simply endless.

Enter now

Good luck!

Visit Contest Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Commonwealth

Your Tax Dollars are Funding GMO Propaganda

Anna Meyer

While Congress hasn’t accomplished much in 2017, it did manage to pass a budget resolution — and within that budget, a sum of $3 million stands out.

Congress appropriated that $3 million to fund the Agricultural Biotechnology Education and Outreach Initiative. That’s a partnership between the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) “to provide consumer education on agricultural biotechnology and food and animal feed ingredients derived from biotechnology.”

What they’re really talking about is a promotional campaign for genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

There are two major flaws with this plan.

First, the FDA is tasked with building a campaign around the “safety and benefits of crop biotechnology.” But what about the risks, concerns, and unknowns?

Leaving those out means using government agencies and taxpayer funds for corporate propaganda. It benefits companies like Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, Syngenta, and Bayer, which collectively earn billions of dollars from these technologies, but does little to inform consumers.

Second, the initiative will push forward “science-based” education. The question is: Whose science are they using?

There’s very little independent or government research on GMOs and their corresponding pesticides. The lack of unbiased and comprehensive science on biotechnology is a result of corporations controlling who can do research on biotech products.

Much of the existing research is either industry-funded or straight out of biotechnology companies’ own labs. The existing regulatory framework relies on voluntary reporting and doesn’t require independent verification to prove the safety of new products before they land on dinner plates across the country.

If the government’s going to educate consumers on biotechnology, it must first do its own unbiased studies on the long-term environmental and health impacts of existing GMOs and pesticides. It also needs a much more rigorous — and mandatory — regulatory process.

The government must tell consumers the full truth, presenting balanced and unbiased information on the benefits, risks, and concerns around biotechnology. The FDA must openly address consumer concerns about long-term environmental impacts, corporate influence on government research, and corporate control of our industrialized food system.

We’re at a turning point in history where we can reverse the harm that we’ve done to our communities, farmland, and environment.

Industrialized, chemical-intensive agriculture designed to work around biotechnology is a failed system. It’s increasing herbicide use, exacerbating pesticide resistance, polluting our waterways, soil, and air, and promoting highly processed food and confined animal production.

In order to build a more sustainable food system for our health and our climate, we need to move away from chemical-intensive agriculture. Rather than promoting corporate interests, that $3 million would be much better used to promote the transition to regenerative organic agriculture, to build urban food hubs, and to aid the next generation of farmers in accessing land and resources.

The FDA doesn’t need a biotechnology marketing initiative. It needs an initiative to bring back public trust in federal regulatory agencies, and move the country forward towards truly sustainable agriculture.

Why Must We Sanction Russia?

TOMMY RASKIN

Donald Trump is no peacenik. In the footsteps of Barack Obama, he has worsened the man-made famine in Yemen, now the epicenter of the world’s largest humanitarian crisis since 1945. He has decertified Iranian compliance with the JCPOA, even though the IAEA, U.S. intelligence agencies, and Israeli intelligence agencies all agree that Iran is respecting the agreement. On top of that, he has killed civilians in Iraq, extended the 16-year occupation of Afghanistan, and issued terrifying verbal threats to the North Korean government. But just as a broken clock is right twice a day, an otherwise dependable militarist sometimes falls into a peaceful position. For Trump, who earlier this month seemed to lament that “Russia has been very, very heavily sanctioned,” now might be one of those times.

Criticizing sanctions against Russia, even in the implicit way that Trump does, means questioning the widespread assumption that our government has a moral obligation to punish Russia’s crimes. But this mainstream wisdom, which sometimes construes Russian President Vladimir Putin as an almost uniquely evil and implacable Hitlerian, dangerously misrepresents the nature and context of the Kremlin’s misbehavior. In reality, many of Putin’s battlefield opponents are just as illiberal as he is, and nonviolent engagement with Putin—the sort that Trump pursued earlier this week—is probably adequate to improve Putin’s treatment of the United States. Even if we disregard the general failure of sanctions to achieve their supporters’ stated objectives, then, we have good reason to oppose our government’s provocative, lopsided, and civilian-harming sanctions against Russia.

For a glimpse of the misguided anti-Russia fervor currently motivating U.S. action, consider the sanctions bill that Congress passed in July to punish Putin for facilitating nefarious activities in such places as Syria. Proponents of that legislation certainly have great reasons to despise Russia’s allies in the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, but exactly which of the real-world alternatives to Assad would our pro-sanctions compatriots prefer? Having struck out for Syria’s “moderate” rebels, a good many of whom joined forces with Islamists, the U.S. should realize that Assad is quite possibly the least atrocious figure capable of maintaining some semblance of Syrian stability through these final (or simply newest) stages of the Syrian Civil War. Putin’s aid to Assad is still condemnable, of course, but it does not justify the United States’ sweeping retaliatory sanctions and the resulting deterioration in U.S.-Russian relations.

The same is true of Russia’s interventions in Ukraine, where Putin is not the only criminal and maybe not even the most malevolent one. Although our government endlessly criticizes the Kremlin for annexing the once-Ukrainian Crimea, many Crimeans—probably most—actually prefer Russian rule. Their lives under Moscow are far from perfect, but the majority of them are ethnic Russians who tend to consider Kiev the greater enemy for its attacks on Russian culture. By trying to force a Russian withdrawal, the U.S. is therefore working to undermine many Crimeans’ pursuit of self-determination.

Russian violence in the Donbas does not justify sanctions either. Put simply, the region’s Russian separatists align with Moscow’s villains, while the Ukrainian counterinsurgents align with Kiev’s villains, some of whom are genuine fascists and even more of whom routinely overlook fascist hooliganism in their country. Neither warring party is particularly attractive, in other words, so the U.S. should stay out of the melee and eliminate sanctions that increase hardship in Russia without decreasing it in Ukraine.

As for Putin’s interference in the U.S. presidential election? We still do not know precisely what happened, but it seems clear that any Russian intrusion was largely defensive. Putin was understandably discomfited by the West’s illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the killing of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, the former of which Hilary Clinton endorsed as a voting U.S. senator and the latter of which she helped facilitate as secretary of state. It is no far stretch to suppose that when Clinton then joked about the grisly assassination of Gaddafi, questioned the legitimacy of Russia’s 2011 parliamentary elections, and called Putin’s militarism “reminiscent” of Hitler’s, the Kremlin resolved to prevent this tried-and-true militaristic busybody from antagonizing Russia as the United States’ next president.

We should take comfort in the fact that Russia has not always been this confrontational towards the U.S. Although his authoritarian sympathies and skepticism of the West probably date back to the Cold War, Putin and President George W. Bush actually managed to maintain an amicable relationship before the Bush administration’s headlong march to Baghdad. It was only after more than a decade of Western mischief overseas that Putin may have decided to defend himself by striking back in such a significant way. That being the case, it might not be too late for Trump to reverse our course by talking to Putin, removing sanctions, and promoting a more nuanced understanding of the Kremlin’s foreign policy. If he does not, peace will slip further away.

Myanmar Conflict: Geopolitical Food Chain

GERRY BROWN

For more than a year, Washington held its tongue as the Rohingya humanitarian crisis raged on. Western corporate media condemned Aung San Suu Kyi, Nobel Peace laureate cum the West’s poster girl, for not speaking out against the atrocities committed by the Myanmar military.

Just as Myanmar and Bangladesh accepted China’s mediation based on a three-point peace plan for the Rakhine state, US Foreign Secretary Tillerson condemned the Myanmar government, saying the atrocities against the Rohingyas amounted to ethnic cleansing. The timing is no mere coincidence.

China’s mediation can restore peace to the warring Rakhine state, facilitate an orderly return of Rohingyas to Rakhine and promote development along the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor, one of the six in Belt and Road Initiative.

That’s bad news for the empire which regards BRI as China’s geostrategy to bring prosperity to the region. When that succeeds, which is more than likely,  it’ll  demonstrate to the world at large that China’s win-win formula to secure peace and development is far superior to the American way of perpetual war and destruction. BRI is anathema to the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which seeks to prevent the emergence of a strong rival that will threaten American hegemony.

As in the Korean peninsula, the Middle East and other powderkeg regions, the empire isn’t interested in peace which would deprive the American arms industry of obscene profits and a pretext for the empire’s military presence and intervention in foreign land. Unclassified CIA documents show that the US supported Myanmar’s military junta in the past in its relentless and continuing wars against the minorities since1948. Washington’s  concern was that “a Burma divided by ethnic interests would be more apt to fall under China’s influence”.

Tillerson’s Johnnie-come-lately denunciation of the Myanmar military will backfire on the empire. Moreover, as an analyst has pointed out, America’s belated condemnation of Myanmar is frustrating India’s attempt to bring Myanmar into its sphere of influence:

“In officially putting itself on the opposite side vis-a-vis India, the US has shown that the policy being sold to New Delhi, that Washington will India’s side in every major issue from China and Pakistan, to One Belt–One Road and the war in Afghanistan, is at best, incomplete and being approached in a totally one sided manner.”

“The US clearly sees India not as a co-equal but as a geopolitical useful idiot…When it comes to pouncing on a Chinese peace initiative, the US is willing to trample on the interests of its Indian “ally”, without apparently thinking twice.”

Like America, India is taking a one-sided position, albeit on the opposing side, in the Rohingya crisis. In so doing, India has no regard for the interest of  Bangladesh, often touted as a strong ally of New Delhi. This should serve as a wake-up call to the largely pro-India politicians in Dhaka, that India is a hegemon in South Asia and doesn’t regard Bangladesh as an equal.