Allan Gray Orbis Fellowship Programme for Southern African Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: Varies by level (see eligibility below)

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Citizens of South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Swaziland Application for other countries are set.

Field of Study: All areas of studies is accepted

About Fellowship: The Allan Gray Orbis Foundation offers the exceptional Allan Gray Fellowship to Southern Africa’s pioneering bright young students. This initiative aims to develop students, known as Allan Gray Candidate Fellows, into Southern Africa’s future high impact responsible entrepreneurs.
Every year, the Foundation selects the best and most ambitious Grade 12, first year and second year university students from Southern Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Swaziland to join its vibrant community of Allan Gray Candidate Fellows.
The Fellowship includes comprehensive tertiary education financial support alongside exposure to thought leaders, mentorship and entrepreneurial mindset development. Access to postgraduate funding is available to those who have excelled in their tertiary studies and the Fellowship Programme.

Type: Undergraduate, Entrepreneurship

To be taken at (country): The Allan Gray Fellowship is available to 1st year students at

• University of the Witwatersrand (WITS),
• University of Johannesburg (UJ),
• University of Pretoria (UP),
• University of Cape Town (UCT),
• Stellenbosch University (SU),
• University of the Western Cape (UWC),
• Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU)
• Rhodes University (RU).
• University of the Free State (UFS)
• TSIBA (2nd year intake)

Eligibility:

GRADE 12

• Level 5 in Pure Mathematics for Grade 11 final results
• Level 6 average for your final Grade 11 results (excluding Life Orientation)
• Completion of the National Benchmark Test by 30 September 2018
• Applicants must be under the age of 21 in the year of their application
• The application closing date is 11 May 2018
• South African Citizenship
  Intention to study a degree in Commerce, Science (excluding Medicine), Engineering, Law or Humanities (majoring in Politics, Philosophy or Economics) at WITS, UJ, UCT, NMU,UFS, Rhodes, UWC, Stellenbosch or UP.

1ST YEAR UNIVERSITY

• Minimum average of 65% for your 2018 mid-year (June) exam results
• Studying towards a degree in Commerce, Science (excluding Medicine), Humanities (majoring in Politics, Philosophy or Economics), Engineering or Law
• Studying at one of the following universities: WITS, UJ, UCT, NMU, Rhodes, UWC, Stellenbosch, UFS or UP
• Applicants must be under the age of 22 in the year of their application
• South African Citizenship
• The application closing date is 17 August 2018

2ND YEAR UNIVERSITY

• Minimum average of 65% for your 2017 year-end exam and 65% in 2018 mid-year exam
• Studying towards a degree in Commerce, Science (excluding Medicine), Humanities (majoring in Politics, Philosophy or Economics), Engineering or Law
• Studying at one of the following universities: WITS, UJ, UCT, NMU, Rhodes, UWC, Stellenbosch, UFS or UP
• Applicants must be under the age of 23 in the year of their application
• South African Citizenship
• The application closing date is 17 August 2018

Selection Criteria: Fellowship Applicants need to be able to show a track record of leadership or being entrepreneurially minded. The Foundation’s framework to measure this as follows:

• Achievement Excellence:The ongoing pursuit of excellence with tangible and specific focus on setting goals. A motivation to make a difference and leave a mark.
• Intellectual Imagination:Demonstrated by an established record of intellectual achievement; an ability to see the unseen, challenge the status quo and suggest that things could be done differently.
• Courageous Commitment:The courage and dedication to continue, realising that applying consistent commitment has a way of overcoming.
• Spirit of Significance:A weight of personality that comes from living a life personified by passion and integrity.
• Personal Initiative:A person who makes things happen and celebrates the satisfaction of bringing new things into being. Independent, proactive and self-starting

Number of Awards: The Allan Gray Orbis Foundation awards up to one hundred Fellowships every year.

Value of Award: The Fellowship provides access to quality tertiary education opportunities as part of our belief, which has been supported by research, that there is an increased possibility of success when entrepreneurs have a concrete foundation in their education.
The Fellowship covers the following:

• Full cost of university tuition
• Full cost of university accommodation plus meals, books and tutor allowances
• A monthly living stipend
• Academic support and access to an entrepreneurial and personal development programme
• Mentorship, both from individually assigned Foundation-employed staff, as well as business mentors
• Access to potential postgraduate funding for graduated Candidate Fellows
• No postgraduate contractual obligation

How to Apply: Apply Here

Visit Program Webpage for Details

Scholarship Provider: The Allan Gray Orbis Foundation

Undermining Brazilian Democracy: the Curious Saga of Lula

Vijay Prashad

Over the weekend, Brazil’s former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva turned himself in to the police after having been charged with corruption under the wide-ranging Lava Jato (Car Wash) investigation. Tens of thousands of people blocked roads across the country to protest his impending arrest. Thousands surrounded the metalworkers’ union building where he had waited. When he insisted that he would turn himself in and begin serving his 12-year sentence, Mr. Lula da Silva was carried on the shoulders of the crowd waiting outside. It was a dramatic moment for a man who remains hugely popular in Brazil and is seen by many as a standard-bearer of the aspirations of the poor.

Before he went to prison, Mr. Lula da Silva released a statement of great feeling: “Those who persecute me can do what they want to me, but they will never imprison our dreams.” Brazil is to hold a presidential election in October. Mr. Lula da Silva, who left office in 2011 with high approval ratings, had been chosen by the Workers’ Party (PT) as its candidate. By all indications, he would have swept to victory. He had promised to reinvigorate the pro-poor policies that had been a hallmark of his presidency which began in 2003. Those policies such as Fome Zero (Zero Hunger) had decreased hunger in the country and increased opportunities for children of poor families to go to school and college. One woman carried a sign that read, “Lula condemned for putting the daughter of a domestic worker through university.”

A fragile democracy

Brazil’s democracy is fragile. It was the trade union movement with which Mr. Lula da Silva remains affiliated and other such organised platforms that overthrew a U.S.-backed military dictatorship that had lasted from 1964 to 1985. Over the next 15 years, the civilian government did not uproot the institutions of the dictatorship nor weaken the oligarchy that had benefited from military rule. This power bloc remained firmly in control even during the PT-led governments of Mr. Lula da Silva (2003-2011) and Dilma Rousseff (2011-2016). During this period of high commodity prices, social welfare policies could be enacted but little else was possible. The oligarchy, impatient to retain control of Brazil, did everything possible to undermine any democratic dynamic.

In 2016, Ms. Rousseff was removed from office not by an election but by the shenanigans of political horse-trading in parliament. At that time, it was said that the oligarchy had conducted a ‘soft coup’ against the PT government. Her successor, Michel Temer, has not been elected to his post by the people but was installed there by the National Congress. Most Brazilians view him as a ‘bad’ or ‘terrible’ president. Under Mr. Temer, the government withdrew many of the PT’s social welfare policies. In 2014, Brazil was removed from the UN’s Hunger Map but is likely to return on it.

Over the past year, Mr. Lula da Silva’s Caravan for Brazil has moved from one poor community to another, where he has been defending the PT’s policies and attacking the oligarchy. Mass movements such as Brazil’s Landless Workers’ Movement have backed him totally, even though they had fought his timidity while in office. That he was a symbol for the poor was clear to the mass movements and the oligarchy.

Car Wash and other such investigations were made possible by strong laws against corruption put in place by Mr. Lula da Silva’s government. In fact, few political figures have been immune from charges of corruption. In Brazil, trust in government is very low. It is advantageous to the oligarchy to see the influence of the government diminish. Now, threats to its immense power are not so sharp.

Mr. Lula da Silva has been accused of accepting an apartment from a contractor (OAS) in exchange for government contracts, a charge he has denied. Evidence for the bribe is weak to non-existent, and there is no paperwork to show that he received an apartment or owns it. A convicted executive of OAS whose prison sentence was reduced for his statement against the leader, gave evidence against Mr. Lula da Silva. The presiding judge in the trial, who has demonstrated on wiretaps his partisanship against Mr. Lula da Silva, accepted the statement and convicted him. Appeals were denied and considerations of habeas corpus rejected.

Democratic test

A series of consequential elections are to take place this year in Latin America: Venezuela (May), Mexico (July) and Brazil (October). In Mexico, socialist candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador is the frontrunner. It is almost certain that he won on his first attempt in 2006 but was denied his victory by the ruling establishment. In Venezuela, the right-wing opposition is in disarray, which is likely to allow the Bolivarian movement to retain its hold on government. Each of these contests from Venezuela onwards will have an impact on the Left in the hemisphere. In each of these countries, if the elections were fair, the Left would win. But ‘democracy’ has been increasingly desiccated by institutional manoeuvres, such as the attack on Mr. Lula da Silva.

There is a widespread sense that Mr. Lula’ da Silva’s prosecution, like the removal of Ms. Rousseff, is politically motivated. It would have been virtually impossible for Jair Bolsonaro, the candidate of the Right to defeat anyone backed by the PT.

If the courts now refuse to allow Mr. Lula da Silva to run in the October election as is expected, it will call into question the legitimacy of that vote. Democracy is in crisis in Brazil.

Rapes around the country – A citizen Safety Perspective

Shantanu Dutta

Today, as I write this, the country is outraged at rapes seemingly happening around the country and causing outrage- in Kathua, Unnao, Surat and now Etah. Nothing has much changed since December 2012 when the rape and murder of a 21-year-old college student on a bus in New Delhi shook the conscience of the entire nation. The incident led to public outcry, including widespread protests across India decrying crimes against women and some changes in the law. If anything, things have got worse. The New Delhi rape was not premediated and arguably an act of passion, but the rapes occurring now are brute acts of domination and show of power, against those found inconvenient and not fitting the nationalist stereotype. Back in 2012, the government, shaken by the intensity of protests both in India and abroad, was forced to amend the criminal law by providing for stringent punishments against the perpetrators of sexual offenses. Sadly, the change in law had little effect on the ground, as sexual offenses against women continue to be on the rise. The actual numbers we will never know as so many crimes are never reported and never become part of the data registry.

The National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB) data indicates that “assault on women with intent to outrage her modesty” (previously categorized as “molestation”) constitutes the second-most-reported crime against women. In over 337,992 crimes against women reported in 2014, over 82,000 related to this charge, around the time that the newly elected Prime Minister, Narendra Modi launched the Beti Bacaho, Beti Padhao campaign with much fanfare. The campaign was initially received with much enthusiasm, given that the matter of womens’ empowerment and the larger concern of declining sex ratios in certain North Indian states was perceived to be somewhat neglected. It was hoped that with the Prime Minister himself taking interest, not only would this program show marked differences in the way sex ratios and school enrolment climbed for girls, but it would also have other ripple effects in society, particularly in terms of the safety of girls and women. That hope has been belied today and it seems that girls are being saved from being killed in the womb, only to be abused, raped and killed after being born.

It can hardly be over emphasised that from a citizen safety lens, it is pointless to rescue girls and educate them at one end and then harass and kill them when the begin to manifest one of the hallmarks of education – free and independent thinking. Time has changed, yet attitude towards women have never been changed. Indian society has always had a strong patriarchal streak and this no amount of education seems to have erased. These customs have a deep-rooted place in the core of our minds and hearts of every people of India which has defined our lifestyle, our thoughts, our expressions and our beliefs be it man or a woman. This has given to the males, the feeling of masculinity in every aspect of their acts and thoughts. Indian males have thus perceived themselves as physically, mentally superior than their counterparts. Indian women also have accepted to treat their males as superior. Again, “beti padhao” has not made much of a dent on the way perceive men as this socialization is dominated by entrenched cultural norms.

Overall the justice delivery system for now has failed our women. Although in a knee jerk reaction, people are talking of awarding the death penalty to child rapists and what not, there is little talk of law enforcement – particularly of the existing laws that could have served as an effective deterrent had they been properly enforced. When the law is stringent in a country and vigorously and regularly enforced before committing a crime, at least the offender would think twice before committing one.  But, effective and consistent law enforcement   is necessary to reduce impunity and effective crime control and increase deterrence, although it is easier said than done. India has one policeman for every 720 persons, which is the lowest police-to-public ratio across the world. Of these nearly one third of the police force is deployed for security duties and only around one-third do actual policing. Moreover, there is a huge shortage of policewomen. Going further, our conviction rates are too low.  The NCRB has reported that only around 24 percent of those charged with sexual violence are convicted, while the others are let off, largely because of the inability of prosecutors to prove the case. In India, the burden of proving a criminal act took place is with the victims and because of the attendant social stigma, many crimes do not get registered or reported and are hushed up formally contributing to the sense that crime perpetrators feel that they can rape and molest women with impunity.

In india, the larger political narrative talks of national security. Laws are made, and policies are laid down, all in the name of national security. Peoples’ careers and lives can be tainted if the whiff or treason, sedition and anything said, written or perceived to be done is ever felt to be anti-national. But there is little or no focus on citizen security. While it is seemed sacred to protect at any cost, the national identity and indeed make it a larger than life entity, the security of the ordinary citizen is compromised. When governments do try to improve the performance of their criminal justice system, they confront the legacies these authoritarian traits. All this is further compounded by the fact that the current policing system was created by the British colonial regime, not to protect the ordinary citizen but to safeguard the interests of the then colonial government. Successive governments in independent india have not done much to change the policing model except appoint commissions who have given fine reports, which have come to naught. So, while we express our outrage at the current spate of rapes, on the ground nothing much is going to change till our policing and criminal justice system moves from a national security paradigm to a citizen security paradigm. And even then, it will take at least a few decades for the emphasis on citizen security to take root. Till then we will fight many fires and not all, that too, one fire at a time.

UK government’s racist targeting of Caribbean migrants provokes backlash

Robert Stevens & Thomas Scripps 

The forced apology by UK Prime Minister Theresa May and her Home Secretary Amber Rudd concerning the government’s deportation and persecution of Commonwealth citizens who have lived in Britain for decades should be treated with contempt.

Rudd’s mea culpa in parliament, announcing a task force to investigate the issue, and May’s subsequent apology to the leaders of Caribbean nations on Tuesday, constitute an attempt to portray the deliberate result of a government policy to victimize and expel migrants as mistakes by a few over-zealous civil servants.

In recent months, many Commonwealth migrants have been contacted by the Home Office and told they are not eligible to stay in the UK. They have faced harassment and violations of their rights as well as the denial of health care, housing and employment. The Home Office insisted they prove that they have been in the UK continually since January 1973 by providing four relevant documents for every year of residence.

According to the Migration Observatory at Oxford, there are around 524,000 current UK residents who were born in a Commonwealth country and arrived in Britain before 1971. It estimated that 50,000 people who arrived from the Caribbean between 1948 and 1973 may not have regularised their residency status and are threatened with deportation.

The first of these arrived in the UK after the Second World War on the cruise ship Empire Windrush, which brought West Indian workers to Britain in 1948. Known as the “Windrush generation,” Caribbean migrants—and later migrants from the Indian sub-continent—were invited to the UK to help fill a massive labour shortage in such vital areas as the National Health Service. Many migrants were children when they arrived, often on their parents’ passports.

The government’s belated and reluctant apology came only after harrowing stories began to emerge of the disgusting treatment of Commonwealth migrants.

The case of one man, Albert Thompson, is indicative of the sadistic treatment meted out. He has lived in London for 44 years after having arrived from Jamaica as a teenager and worked and paid taxes for more than three decades. He went for his first radiotherapy session for prostate cancer, only to be told that unless he could produce a British passport he would be charged £54,000 for the treatment. As well as being denied his right to free health care, Thompson was evicted last summer as a result of tighter immigration legislation, leaving him homeless for three weeks.

Following changes to immigration law made during May’s time as Home Secretary (2010-2016), the lives of many migrants have been ruined.

In 2012, legislation was passed requiring people to possess documentation of their right to be in the country in order to work, rent or access health and welfare benefits. But the 1971 Immigration Act did not issue any such paperwork and the Home Office did not keep a record of those who had been granted leave to stay. The onus was placed on individuals to prove they were residents in the UK before the Act went into effect on January 1, 1973.

In 2014, this situation was worsened by the secret removal from the 2014 Immigration Act of a clause that protected long-term Commonwealth residents from deportation.

More evidence emerged Tuesday proving that other measures were enacted whose purpose could only have been to facilitate mass deportations. In 2010, the government destroyed thousands of Windrush-era landing cards of Caribbean migrants. Attempting to play down the destruction of the important archive, the government said the cards did not provide reliable evidence of ongoing residence in the UK or immigration status.

On Wednesday, this claim was exposed as a lie by two Home Office whistle-blowers, who said the cards were used regularly in decision-making. One said the databases “would show who else arrived with you; it would show the parents and the children that they brought with them.”

The tightening of immigration legislation was part of a policy of creating, in May’s words from a 2012 speech, a “really hostile environment” for “illegal” immigrants. This was necessary, she declared, “after thirteen years of uncontrolled mass immigration.” It was directed not just against people who rightly considered that they had full citizenship rights, including three generations of citizens hailing from the Caribbean, but all immigrants.

This was central to the Tory government’s efforts to bring net migration down to the “tens of thousands” as part of their adoption of policies demanded by the UK Independence Party, which was winning over swathes of Tory supporters.

In 2013, the government even hired vans, at May’s direction, to drive around towns and cities with large immigrant populations displaying giant “Go Home or Face Arrest” posters.

Since then, the Home Office has pursued a ruthless anti-immigration agenda. Landlords were required to check on tenants’ immigration status, while hospitals and charities in receipt of NHS funds were required to carry out ID checks on patients prior to treatment in order to bill them if they were not found eligible for free treatment. Banks and building societies were forced to conduct immigration checks on their current account holders. As a result of the 2014 and 2016 immigration acts, a “deport first, appeal later” policy was routinized.

The post-war migrants were granted leave to remain under the 1971 Immigration Act, which came into force in 1973. However, due to the very provisions of that reactionary act, many of the Windrush generation are still not officially classified as British citizens.

The act shut down Commonwealth migration through the introduction of a “patriality clause.” A partial “right of abode” was introduced, lifting all restrictions on immigrants who could prove a direct personal or ancestral connection with Britain. Under this provision, a person’s father or grandfather had to be born in the UK for citizenship to be granted. In effect, this provision meant the applicant had to have a white parent or grandparent. Black and Asian people were effectively barred from citizenship, but not white migrants from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

Those already here for five years were granted permanent leave to remain, but Commonwealth citizens lost their automatic right to remain in the UK. As migration from the West Indies to Britain occurred mainly between 1948 and 1965, the documentation now being demanded of them did not exist. As a result, many of the Windrush generation and their children—some of whom have never traveled outside the UK and did not require a passport—are still not classified as citizens.

This racist act was introduced by the Conservative government of Edward Heath, who declared, “There will be no further large-scale permanent immigration.”

Only three years earlier, leading Tory MP Enoch Powell delivered his fascistic “Rivers of Blood” speech in Birmingham, in which he called for “stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and… promoting the maximum outflow.” Heath was forced to sack Powell from his cabinet after the public outcry at the speech, but cabinet papers confirm that Powell’s politics were critical in formulating the Immigration Act.

In the following decades, many of the Windrush generation, their children and grandchildren would be involved in fighting against the racist policies of Margaret Thatcher and the rest of May’s political forebears.

On becoming prime minister, May tried to strike a newly minted progressive pose. The UK’s leaving the European Union, she said, would be based on a “Global Britain,” which would turn out to the world to grow its trading relationships, in particular with the more than 50 Commonwealth nations. May’s political pretense lies in tatters. She has been forced to make an apology on the eve of today’s Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, which is centred on discussing the strengthening Britain's trading relationships.

Of greater political import still, millions of people are repulsed and angered at the treatment of their lifelong neighbours, friends and work colleagues. It is a stark exposure of the divisive and socially destructive implications of the anti-immigrant rhetoric and associated policies used to divide the working class in the face of the common enemy.

IMF remains upbeat on global economy but trade conflicts sound a jarring note

Nick Beams

The International Monetary Fund has stuck to its forecasts for an upswing in global growth over the next two years, despite signs the world economy may already be slowing and the threat of disruption caused by a developing trade war.

Introducing the IMF’s World Economic Outlook, which predicts growth of 3.9 percent for both 2018 and 2019, the fund’s chief economist, Maurice Obstfeld, struck a sombre tone, somewhat at variance with that of the official report.

“The world economy continues to show broad-based momentum,” he began. “Against that positive background the prospect of a similarly broad-based conflict over trade presents a jarring picture.”

Obstfeld noted that it seemed “paradoxical” that major economies were “flirting with trade war” at a time of economic expansion, “especially when that expansion is so reliant on investment and trade.”

While maintaining its upbeat assessment for the immediate period, the IMF pointed to longer-term downward pressures on growth, leading to a more “sobering” assessment.

“Advanced economies—facing ageing populations, falling rates of labour force participation and low productivity growth—will likely not regain soon the per capita growth rates they enjoyed before the global financial crisis,” Obstfeld said.

In other words, the present situation, which has seen cuts in the real living standards of workers in all the major economies, is as good as it gets.

The report also noted that risks to medium-term growth arising from easy financial conditions remain well above historical norms and financial conditions in the United States could tighten faster than expected.

With global debt levels at an all-time high of $164 trillion—an increase of 40 percent since the 2008 global financial crisis—the normalisation of monetary policies and accompanying increase in interest rates could pose repayment problems in countries facing lower growth rates over the medium term. Three quarters of the increase in global private debt comes from China, as a result of its efforts to boost its economy since 2008.

Trade conflicts were another threat. “Recent import restrictions announced by the United States, announced retaliatory actions by China, and potential retaliation by other countries raise concerns in this regard and threaten to damage global activity and sentiment,” the report stated.

That conflict worsened virtually as Obstfeld was delivering his remarks. The US Federal Communications Commission decided in a 5–0 vote on Tuesday to ban federal funds being spent on any telecom company deemed a threat to national security. The measure is aimed at further restricting the already limited access of the Chinese telecom giant Huawei to the US market. The move followed the Commerce Department’s decision this week to impose a seven-year ban on firms dealing with another Chinese telecom company, ZTE.

China stepped up its response to the threatened US tariff measures, covering up to $150 billion worth of exports, by announcing a 178 percent tariff on US sorghum exports that took effect yesterday.

One key factor boosting the IMF’s short-term growth forecasts is the corporate and personal income taxes in the US. The expected uptick in US growth was responsible for one-third of the upgrade increase in IMF predictions over last October’s forecast.

But US tax policies will not raise living standards for the mass of the population. In fact, the IMF stated, they are “expected to exacerbate income polarisation.”

The Trump administration claims that massive tax cuts, which will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the budget deficit, will stimulate the economy by providing an incentive for investment. But this claim is rapidly being blown apart. Most of the money will be spent to finance share buybacks and boost stock values.

The Financial Times reported this week that US companies are “expected to shower investors with a record amount of share buybacks in the current earnings seasons, as corporate investors take advantage of major tax cuts … to increase their repurchases programs.”

According to a JPMorgan analysis, US companies will buy back about $800 billion of their stock this year, up from $525 billion in 2017.

There is also doubt over the IMF’s predictions for a short-term upturn, particularly because Europe slowed down in the first quarter of this year after experiencing the fastest rise for a decade during 2017.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal: “Industrial production [in the euro zone] fell for the third straight month in February, its longest slide since 2012, and there have also been signs of unexpected weakness in surveys of purchasing managers at manufacturers and service providers, measures of retail sales, and barometers of confidence among households and businesses. The region’s biggest economy, Germany, recorded a surprising drop in industrial production in February compared with January.”

This assessment is reflected in a “tracking index” compiled by the Brookings Institution and the Financial Times. The newspaper reported: “Momentum in the global economy has peaked and risks ranging from higher inflation to trade disputes and debt appear likely to taint prospects for 2018.”

Eswar Prasad of the Brookings Institution said: “The world economy’s growth momentum remains strong but is levelling off as the winds of trade war, geopolitical risks, domestic political fractures and debt-related risks loom, with financial markets already reflecting mounting vulnerabilities.”

With major tax cuts the US was “engaged in a perilous macroeconomic experiment,” Prasad said. The increase in the budget deficit resulting from the handout to corporations could force a significant rise in interest rates.

There are also fears that so-called emerging market economies will be impacted by rising interest rates in the advanced countries, as concerns grow over rising debt and the threat of capital flight.

Obstfeld addressed this danger in a press conference question and answer session. “Debts throughout the world are very high, and lots of debts are denominated in dollars,” he said. “And if dollar costs rise, this could be a strain on countries’ sovereign financial institutions.”

In other words, not only will companies be threatened but major government bodies as well.

Obstfeld was also questioned about the latest data on Europe. He said there were indications of “softness” in March, after the deadline for IMF forecasts had closed.

The major topic in the Q&A session was the trade conflicts. The first questioner asked about the IMF’s definition of the trade war and how close it was.

Obstfeld replied that he did not have a formal definition of a trade war but that it is “certainly the case that the first shots have been fired” and negotiations were taking place largely on a bilateral basis.

After referring to the US Smoot-Hawley Act of June 1930, which was “devastating for the global economy,” he continued: “I think if we get into a cycle of very widespread actions and counteractions, we would begin to see significant economic effects, and that would be, whether you want to call it a trade war or not, very worrisome.”

In his prepared remarks, Obstfeld called for strengthening of the existing multilateral system “rather than risk bilateral fragmentation of international trade,” adding: “Global interdependence will only continue to grow; and unless countries face it in a spirit of collaboration—not conflict—the world economy cannot prosper.”

All the trends of development are pointing to the latter, however, rather than the former.

The Nuclear Consequences of Brexit

Arushi Vig


After the 2016 Brexit verdict, one area of several areas of concern is nuclear energy. The British civil nuclear programme was meshed with Euratom since the UK's inclusion in the EU in 1973. One consequence of Brexit is Prime Minister Theresa May’s seeming determination to part ways with all EU institutions including Euratom. This article evaluates the consequences both for the UK as well as Euratom.

Euratom was set up by EU member states to create a specialist market for nuclear power in Europe. It also oversees the nuclear industry of its members; ensuring free, safe and quick transportation of nuclear materials and manpower, synergising research, and synchronising safety standards, among others. Consequently ,one of the first implications of Brexit would be the costs, which could go up to a few billion pounds, for developing new safety norms and procedures, as it implies the creation of domain knowledge and the associated costs of duplication, including setting up a new agency. Also, a Euratom exit could initially cause delays in materials and manpower which could have a negative impact on UK’s medical industry specifically in the field of chemotherapy where nuclear energy is explicitly used.

If Brexatom were to occur, it could also cause the UK to lose its association with EU countries as well as other major powers such as the US and Japan. Since joining in 1973, any nuclear treaties with other countries (including any signed before that date) were placed under the aegis of Euratom. If the UK leaves the Euratom, all its complex nuclear treaties with the US and the rest of Europe which mesh into an international web would need to be re-ratified in national legislatures and the UK. This is a large international legislative task. If the treaties are not re-ratified by national parliaments on time, then, depending on the treaty, the UK could possibly be in breach of the NPT because of the delay caused. 

Additionally, the UK does not have the same active nuclear research base it once had. Although the UK has more extensive experience of decommissioning than its European partners, this is not uniquely specialised knowledge, and most of the private companies involved are multinational. While Euratom allowed a highly skilled British workforce to benefit from a large Europe-wide ecosystem of research, the prospects of an NPT breach or of a manpower shortage would all severely affect the possibility of cooperation, including and especially research.

Despite all this, there remains a point of view that the Euratom does not remain the same viable nuclear agency it was and had been destroyed by a powerful member state, Germany. Germany's nuclear net capacity of 10.799 MWe (the second highest in the EU), and a total of 8 power plants were severely shrunk with its announcement to terminate its nuclear power plants by 2022 in the wake of the Fukushima incident. Its decision to forego the nuclear option significantly reduced the market viability of European civil nuclear research and cooperation. Aside from Germany, Europe's lack of public consultations, its old treaty systems, and limited role of the European Parliament in overseeing Euratom had made it a public relations disaster. Also, the UK possess the second highest number of power plants in the EU and a net capacity worth 8.918 MWe. Brexit therefore would further weaken Euratom, already reeling from the German decision and compounded by the fact that the UK is a powerful pro-nuclear voice in the organisation.

However for Britain, the dilemma would still be who would inspect British civil nuclear sites that generate power, fabricate fuel and manage waste. Euratom and the IAEA oversee them now, although the IAEA has scaled back because of overlap. Additionally, Euratom includes other powerful members such as France which has a total of 58 reactors and a net capacity of 63.130 MWe and Sweden with 10 reactors and a net capacity worth 9.651 MWe. Thus the benefits reaped by the UK from Euratom are much more than the other way round.

Internally, the British government remains divided regarding its exit from Euratom. MPs in the upper house of parliament maintained the stance that the country should not leave Euratom till a replacement deal is found, voting 194 out of 265. However the PM has explicitly stated that she wants to cut ties with all organisations of the EU, specifically those that come under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). 

There were talks of an associate membership with Euratom once the UK leaves the EU but speculations still surround the case, such as the future of the UK's research funding, its continued inclusion in the European Economic Area (EEA), and whether the UK would still invest in European projects such as the ITER fusion reactor project in France. These impending queries and the complexities associated with it have made an associate membership almost impossible.

Both sides would be adversely affected by Brexatom. However, the pain will be disproportionately felt by the UK, and this is what the government must remember as it negotiates the nuclear aspects of Brexit.

The Chabahar Port Project and Afghanistan’s Alternative Approach to Trade

Jawad Torabi

Historically, and given the tensions in bilateral relations, dependence on the Pakistani market and trade routes has been a point of vulnerability for Afghanistan, a landlocked country. To overcome this vulnerability, Kabul has begun looking for other alternative trade and transit routes, and the trilateral agreement between Afghanistan, Iran and India on the Chabahar Port is at the heart of this pursuit.

Needless to say, the Chabahar project has the potential to provide similar strategic advantages to Iran as was the case with Pakistan. It would provide Iran with opportunities to use those advantages as leverage with Afghanistan over key bilateral disagreements. Moreover, strategic calculations of some other global and regional actors vis-a-vis Chabahar could also impact Afghanistan's interests in the long-term. Thus, Kabul will need take into account a thorough understanding of those challenges and formulate policies that help overcome the obstacles smartly.

Evolving Hydro-Politics in the Kabul-Tehran BilateralWater sharing remains a major bilateral issue between Iran and Afghanistan. Iran is facing a severe rainfall deficit and Afghanistan is concerned about a possible drought like situation and is in dire need of electricity. Iran's President Hassan Rouhani raised his concerns over dam construction in Afghanistan several times and has emphasised that Afghanistan must provide Iran’s share of Helmand River water. Afghanistan has responded by blaming Iran of excessive use of water and construction of 600 dams resulting in the drying up of some of the trans-boundary water bodies. More recently, in a worrisome development, the Special Military Adviser to the Iranian Supreme Leader, Yahya Rahim Safavi, recently described Afghanistan as the ‘source of future of water controversies’ that Iran will face. He further stated that one of the reasons behind the US' presence in Afghanistan is to influence its government to take certain policy actions on shared waters between Afghanistan and Iran.

Regional and Geopolitical ChallengesIn addition to bilateral challenges, there are other regional and geopolitical concerns that may have a bearing on the trilateral agreement. Recently, Iran's ambassador to Afghanistan underscored the necessity of improving relations between the banks of both countries. Earlier Iran had also urged Afghan banks to open branches in Chabahar.

On the other hand, on the regional level, both Pakistan and China consider the trilateral agreement as India's strategic counter to the China-Pakistan cooperation on the Gwadar Port project in Pakistan's Balochistan province. A possible counter-action by Islamabad and Beijing could have consequences for all parties to the Chabahar Project, including Afghanistan. By offering to extend China's Belt and Road Initiative to Afghanistan via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Beijing and Islamabad have already begun work on a counter-balance to Chabahar.

Meanwhile, recently, the US gave assurances of non-interference in the “legitimate” business activities between India with Iran. According to the US' new South Asia strategy that was announced late last year, Washington is in favour of an improved Afghan economy and Kabul's relations with other regional countries, especially India. However, the current position taken by the administration in Washington led by US President Donald Trump on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement—a possible withdrawal in the coming months—and related uncertainties could put both Afghan and Indian banks at risk of facing possible sanctions if they continue their relations with Iranian banks.

Potential OpportunitiesFallout between Iran and Afghanistan over the water issue could potentially impact the trilateral project negatively due to the domino effect on trade interests, transit routes, markets and revenue collections of all three parties—Afghanistan, Iran and India. Conversely, it can also be argued that the port agreement might even help facilitate hydro-diplomacy between Iran and Afghanistan by finding a point of convergence for their interests. Moreover, given its friendly relations with both countries, New Delhi may even be able to mediate to help resolve disagreements between Tehran and Kabul that have a bearing on the Chabahar port, in the long run.

Looking AheadIt is important to consider that Chabahar is only one component of the broader jigsaw of Afghanistan’s alternative approach towards addressing trade uncertainties, and is one of the many steps Kabul is undertaking to insulate Afghanistan from shocks to its economy. Nonetheless, other obstacles such as lack of infrastructure, security concerns etc continue to threaten the future of the Chabahar project. Although Iran recently became Afghanistan's biggest trading partner, Pakistan—with cheaper transit routes for Afghan products—continues to retain the position of a major market.

In the past, despite lack of full implementation, agreements such as the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA) helped implement a rule based system on bilateral trade to some extent. Reaching and fully enforcing new agreements like APTTA between Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan could help establish a rule-based system of engagement in the region. Meanwhile, the Afghan government should continue exploring new cost-efficient areas of opportunities with clearer prospects to ensure it always has more options. Speeding-up the implementation of projects such as the Lapiz Lazuli corridor and establishing more cost-effective air and road corridors to potential markets could be a step in this regard.

Kabul must take in to account key factors—such as risk assessment; tying objectives with tangible outcomes; and looking ahead through a realistic lens—while undertaking an alternative trade and transit approach for Afghanistan.

Bridging the Gap (BTG) Animation Laboratory for Animation Artists (Fully-funded to Tenerife, Spain) 2018

Application Deadline: 29th April 2018

Eligible Countries:

• Latin America and the Caribbean: Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru and the Dominican Republic;
• North Africa and the Middle East: Mauritania, Morocco, Western Sahara and Palestinian Territories;
• Sub-Saharan Africa: Mali, Niger, Senegal, Ethiopia, Equatorial Guinea and Mozambique; and the Philippines.

To Be Taken At (Country): Tenerife, Spain.

About the Award: BTG is organized by Bridging the Gap, with the main sponsorship of the Cabildo de Tenerife through Turismo de Tenerife and INtech Tenerife (Science and Technology Park of Tenerife), the collaboration of TLP Tenerife and the support of Cooperación Española, through the Program ACERCA of Training for Development in the Cultural Sector.
The laboratory aims to strengthen and promote international animation projects from around the world and facilitate the creation of international collaborations and networks.

Type: Training

Eligibility: 

• The program is open to young professionals and students with an animation project of a feature film or a series in state of pre-production, development or production.
• Short films with the potential to become a feature film or a series would also be accepted.
• Among the received projects, twelve will be selected to participate in this laboratory that will include activities like conferences and personalized consulting meetings, given by several prestigious professionals of the sector.

Number of Awards: Bridging the Gap will give 4 scholarships between all received applications. 3 of them will be for
participants from the above indicated nationalities; the fourth will be for participants from the other nationalities.

Value of Award: 

• These scholarships include the course registration, accommodation and meals during the days of the course, as well as the flight to Tenerife.
• BTG will also offer a full scholarship for one participant from the countries not included in the list above and the festival and market 3D Wire one for a Spanish participant.

Duration of Program: July 15th to 21st 2018

How to Apply: 

• For animation series and animated feature-films the following material is required: 3 high quality pictures, characters description, project dossier, production company curriculum & director’s biography/ filmography.
• For animated short films the following material is required: 3 high quality pictures, project dossier, production company curriculum & director’s biography/ filmography.
• The sending of additional material to help to know better the project will be valued positively (graphic materials, teaser, trailer, working demo, etc.).
• Participants must send a scan of their ID or passport.

5.5 All the material has to be sent to: info@bthegap.com
Interested applicants should go through the rules and regulations in the Program Webpage before applying.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers:  Bridging the Gap

International Teaching Artist Conference (ITAC4) for Professionals in Music, Arts, Film and Dance 2018 – New York, USA

Application Deadline: 30th April 2018.

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): New York, USA

About the Award: The International Teaching Artist Conference brings together artists, organizations, funders, and researchers. The conference is inclusive and serves all artists who work in educational and community settings.
An ITAC conference explores key issues related to participatory arts practice, and includes a mix of keynote speeches, panel sessions, curated conversations, practical workshops, round-table discussions, poster sessions and a film program.  Delegates come from around the world to explore the best thinking and practice in participatory arts and teaching artistry informed by projects, practice, and research in the field.

Type: Conference

Eligibility: To be eligible for a financial package, you must meet the following criteria:

• You would be unable to attend the conference without financial support.
• Participation in the conference will clearly contribute to your professional development.
• You work or study in the field of teaching artistry.
• You are not supported by an organisation.

Financial packages are non-transferable. Awardees who are unable to take up the supported package must relinquish it.

Number of Awards: Limited

Value of Award: A limited number of full and partial financial assistance packages are available for artists from around the world to attend the conference. Financial assistance is intended to support artists and students working in the field of teaching artistry for whom the conference costs are a barrier to attending.
Financial assistance packages include:

• Full scholarships: All conference fees, four nights’ accommodation and a contribution towards travel of up to a maximum of $1 000.
• Partial scholarships: All conference fees and a contribution towards travel/accommodation of up to a maximum of $500.

Duration of Program: 13 to 15 September 2018.

How to Apply: Click here to apply.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: International Teaching Artist Conference

DAAD Helmut-Schmidt Masters in Public Policy and Good Governance Scholarship Programme for Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 31st July 2018 (Application opens 1ST JUNE)

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): Germany

About the Award: This programme is designed to further qualify future leaders in politics, law, economics and administration according to the principles of good governance and to prepare them in a praxis-oriented course for their professional life.
Very good graduates with a first university degree get the chance to obtain a master’s degree in disciplines that are of special relevance to the social, political and economic development of their home country.
The knowledge and experience acquired in Germany should enable the scholarship holders to later contribute to the establishment of democratically oriented economic and social systems aimed at overcoming social differences.
In addition, the training at German institutions of higher education should qualify the scholarship holders to become partners in the political and economic co-operation with Germany.

Type: Masters

Eligibility: 

• The scholarship scheme is open to graduates in the field of social sciences, political sciences, law, economics and in public administration from Africa, Latin America, South Asia and Southeast Asia, from countries in the Middle East as well as from the Ukraine.
• The programme is open for very well qualified graduates with a first university degree (bachelor or equivalent) who want to actively contribute to the social and economic development of their home countries.
• The scholarships are offered both for young graduates without professional experience and for mid-career professionals.

Selection Criteria: The main DAAD criteria for selection are the following:

• the study results so far
• knowledge of English (and German)
• political and social engagement
• a convincing description of the subject-related and
• personal motivation for the study project in Germany and the expected benefit when returning to the home country.
• The latest university degree should have been obtained during the six years prior to the application for the scholarship.
• Applicants cannot be considered if they have stayed in Germany for more than 15 months at the time of application.

All master´s courses have further additional requirements that must be fulfilled by the applicants in any case.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Program: 

• Prior to their study programmes all scholarship holders receive a 6- months-German language course from April 2019 to September 2019. The language courses take place at selected institutes in Germany and not at the universities of the selected master´s courses.
• The language course is compulsory also for those who attend a master´s course taught in English. The scholarship holders are offered a special tutoring at their host institutions financed by DAAD.
• Furthermore, there is the possibility to attend networking events. DAAD pays a monthly scholarship rate of currently 750 €.
• The scholarship also includes contributions to health insurance in Germany.
• In addition, DAAD grants an appropriate travel allowance and a study and research subsidy as well as rent subsidies and/or allowances for spouses and/or children where applicable.
• DAADscholarship holders within the Helmut-Schmidt-Programme are exempted from tuition fees.

How to Apply: Applications have to be submitted in German or English. Please indicate that you are applying for the DAAD Helmut-Schmidt Programme (Master’s scholarships for Public Policy and Good Governance).
It is important to go through the Application requirements in the Program Webpage before applying.

Visit Program Webpage for details

Award Provider: Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (German Academic Exchange Service)

Learn Africa Fully-funded Graduate Scholarships for African Women to Study in Spain 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 6th May 2018

Eligible Countries: African countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Spain

About the Award: This program, promoted by the Women for Africa Foundation, aims to promote the transfer of knowledge, exchange and training of African women undergraduate and graduate students through scholarships in Spanish universities that collaborate in this initiative. Thanks to these scholarships, the selected students can complement their university education in our country, and then invest what has been learned to benefit their communities, thus contributing to the progress of African societies.
The scholarships are funded by the universities participating in the program – all of them, members of the Conference of Rectors of Spanish Universities (CRUE) – and cover round trips, tuition and fees, accommodation, maintenance and medical insurance.

Type: Masters, PhD

Eligibility: In general, any person who meets the following requirements:

• Be a woman and have the nationality of an African country.
• Be enrolled in an African university or have a university degree issued in an African country. For Postgraduate Scholarships, the Degree title is required. The required degree can vary depending on the requested scholarship (See details of each scholarship).
• Meet the specific requirements of each type of scholarship.
• Only one application per person

Selection Process: 

• The selection process will be coordinated by the Women for Africa Foundation and will take place between May 7 and June 21, according to the following criteria: academic record, curriculum (previous training, languages, stays in other countries, mobility, Professional experience), motivation letter and, for doctoral fellowships, a research project.
• The final selection will be agreed with each of the participating universities, the results of the selection process will be available at the end of June on the Foundation’s website and will be personally communicated to each of the selected applicants.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• The scholarship includes one return ticket to-from the student’s country of origin, university fees, health insurance, accommodation and food.
• Cost coverage for other extra expenses, such as the cost of opening a bank account, transport in the city and pocket money, is not guaranteed.
• Responsibilities:  Once the scholarship has been completed, they are committed to returning to their place of residence and to providing a report on their personal and academic experience – on the basis provided by the Women for Africa Foundation – so that an evaluation of the outcomes can be carried out and, if necessary, make changes in the scholarship program as appropriate. Likewise, The Foundation and the Spanish universities of destination may make full or partial use, on their website or in some of their publications, regarding the content of the report prepared by the scholarship holders after their stay in Spain. In this case, the Women for Africa Foundation may mention the author (s) of said content.

Duration of Program: 

• The scholarships included in this call have a variable duration depending on the modality agreed with each of the host universities and the training program offered, comprising periods ranging from six months, in the case of some research staying to four years for those aiming to Master and Doctorate.
• All the scholarships of this call will take place during the academic year 2018-2019.

How to Apply:

• For scholarships where Spanish is the main language, a high command of the language is required. This high level of Spanish is to be proven by submitting an internationally recognised certificate or through a phone conversation.
• The student must be aware that she is expected to submit a copy of her university degree duly attested by her country’s ministry.
• The student must remember that certain administrative procedures require payment at her country of origin (visa, certificate/records ratification and translation, etc.)

Apply here

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Learn Africa

EcoBank Fintech Challenge 2018 for Programmers and Developers in Africa

Application Deadline: 17th May, 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): Top teams will be selected to pitch at the bank’s Innovation Fair, which will be held at the global headquarters of Ecobank in Lomé in May, 2018.

Eligible Fields: Teams are to submit applications addressing one or more of the following challenges

• Digital Onboarding / Account Opening / KYC
• Remittances
• Digital Sales / Marketing
• Offline Mobile to Mobile Payments (Dead Zones)
• Multi-Channel Corporate Payments / Collections Ecosystems
• SME Intra-Africa Trade Platform

About the Award:  Ecobank is challenging Africa’s new generation of entrepreneurs to find lasting solutions to the continent’s most pressing banking issues. Submit entries in one or more of our key areas of interest for your Chance to win up to $500,000 funding.

Type: Contest

Eligibility: 

• All African startups and technology innovators are eligible to apply for the challenge. They are to choose from different areas of interest as listed on the website and build a demo to serve as prototype — applicants without demo would be disqualified.
• The Challenge is open to both teams and individuals.
• Teams can submit solutions for more than one challenge but are limited to only one entry per challenge (“Entry”).
• Individuals are not allowed to participate in multiple teams. Switching teams after applying is not allowed. Ecobank will cover travel and accommodation costs for up to two participants from each team.

Selection:  A total of 20 teams will be selected for the Ecobank Fintech Challenge event (“Event”), which will be held at the global headquarters of Ecobank in Lomé in May, 2018.

Number of Awardees: 20 teams

Value of Contest: $500,000

How to Apply: Interested participants can apply here

Visit Contest Webpage for details

Award Provider: Ecobank