17 Oct 2018

Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) Fellowship Programme for Member Countries 2019

Application Deadline: 1st March 2019

Eligible Countries: FAO Member countries.

To Be Taken At (Country): Multiple. FAO Regional, Sub-regional, Country Offices or Headquarters.

About the Award: The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) leads international efforts to defeat hunger and to support development in member countries in the areas of agriculture, fisheries and forestry. FAO’s mandate is to raise levels of nutrition, improve agricultural productivity, better the lives of rural populations and contribute to the growth of the world economy.
The Fellowship Programme is designed to attract fellows, typically PhD students, researchers and professors, who have an advanced level of relevant technical knowledge and experience in any field of the Organization. They are willing to fulfil their specialized learning objectives and at the same time, contribute their technical expertise and knowledge through time-bound arrangements with FAO. Assignments should be in line with FAO Strategic Objectives and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: 
  • Graduate or post-graduate degree (Master’s or PhD) or be enrolled in a PhD programme.
  • Working knowledge of at least one FAO language (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian or Spanish).
  • Knowledge of a second FAO language will be considered an asset. Only language proficiency certificates from UN accredited external providers and/or FAO language official examinations (LPE, ILE and LRT) will be accepted as proof of the level of knowledge of languages indicated in the online applications.
  • Be nationals of FAO Member Nations
  • Age: no age limits.
  • Candidates should be able to adapt to an international multicultural environment and have good communication skills.
  • Candidates with family members (defined as brother, sister, mother, father, son or daughter) employed by FAO under any type of contractual arrangement are not be eligible for the Fellows Programme.
  • Candidates should have appropriate residence or immigration status in the country of assignment.
Selection Criteria: Candidates may be assigned in a field relevant to the mission and work of FAO.

Number of Awards: Numerous

Duration of Program: According to time bound agreement with hiring office

How to Apply: Apply, visit the iRecruitment website here and complete your online profile.
  • Only applications received through iRecruitment will be considered.
  • Candidates are requested to attach a research proposal.
  • Vacancies will be removed from iRecruitment at 23:59 Central European Time (CET) on the deadline for applications date. We encourage applicants to submit the application well before the deadline date.
Visit Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO)

Important Notes: 
  • Qualified female applicants and qualified nationals of non- and under-represented member countries are encouraged to apply.
  • Persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply.
  • All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence.
  • FAO strongly encourages candidates from the Global South and Indigenous Peoples to apply to this Call for Expression of Interest

World Bank/RUFORUM Strengthening Higher Agricultural Education in Africa (SHAEA) 2018

Application Deadline: 30th November 2018

Eligible Countries: African countries

About the Award: The proposals are part of the preparations for the Strengthening Higher Agricultural Education in Africa (SHAEA) project, which aims to strengthen linkages between selected African universities and regional agricultural sector needs for developing required human resources needed to accelerate agri-food system transformation in Africa in six countries across the continent. The six participating countries are Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Mozambique. With an expected $190 million in financing from the International Development Association (IDA), the project will support the selected universities to become RAUs designed to meet regional agricultural sector needs in human resource development required for accelerating this transformation through partnerships with other tertiary education institutions, including post-secondary agricultural vocational institutions, and key agricultural sector actors both public and private.
SHAEA complements the Africa Centres of Excellence for Development Impact (ACE Impact) project with a focus exclusively on agricultural higher education,and particularly emphasizes its integration with the agricultural sector. The project aligns with the region’s development priorities as outlined in: Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want; the Science, Technology, and Innovation Strategy for Africa 2024; the 2014 Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation; and the global Sustainable Development Goals.

Type: Grants

Eligibility: To submit a proposal to become a Regional Anchor University (RAU), applicants must:
  • Be from one of the participating countries which have IDA funding availability;
  • Has had at least 5 cohorts of graduates with master’s degrees in relevant areas;
  • Offers postgraduate programs at the Master’s level (preferably also at the PhD level) in agri-food systems related topics and preferably one within the identified regional key knowledge gap areas;
  • Has at least one existing active and functional regional partnership in the area of agriculture;
  • Demonstrates on-going effort in reform/change for institutional improvement;
  • No land acquisition needed if civil works are expected to be financed under the project;
  • If a university has an existing agricultural ACE, it can apply as long as the proposed focus area for being a RAU is not the same as what is already supported by the agricultural ACE; and
  • Only one proposal per university may be submitted
All proposals must also address at least two of the following six regional key gap areas:
  • Agribusiness and Entrepreneurship
  • Agri-food Systems and Nutrition
  • Rural Innovation and Agricultural Extension
  • Agricultural Risk Management and Climate Change Proofing
  • Agricultural Policy Analysis
  • Statistical Analysis, Foresight and Data Management
Number of Awards: Not specified

How to Apply: Apply Here

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Why is the Radical Right Still Winning?

John Feffer

Less than a month ago, the candidate leading in the polls in the Brazilian presidential election was a jailed ex-politician who technically couldn’t even run for office.
It gets even weirder. Brazilian voters have put corruption near the top of the list of their concerns this political season. Yet Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the country’s most popular politician, has been jailed on corruption charges. And because of a law that Lula himself signed into law, politicians charged with crimes upheld by an appeals court can’t run again for eight years.
Weirder still, in a country where only 14 percent of the population has any confidence at all in Donald Trump’s global leadership, the voters have rallied around a candidate who’s often tagged the Trump of the Tropics.
When Brazilians went to the polls this Sunday, nearly half of them voted for this pro-Trump and anti-Lula candidate. Jair Bolsonaro is a free-market ideologue who frequently goes on homophobic, misogynist, and racist rants. He loves guns, torture, and autocracy. Brazilians who fear a return to military rule refer to Bolsonaro as “the Thing.”
Bolsonaro nearly won the race in the first round, coming only a few percentage points from capturing the simple majority required to declare outright victory. It’s remotely possible that the opposition could pull together for the second round, scheduled for October 28, just as the French did to deprive Marine Le Pen of the presidency last year.
But I doubt it.
Brazil is on the verge of being Trumped. And given the perilous state of the country’s economy — unemployment over 12 percent, extreme poverty on the rise, widening gap between rich and poor — Bolsonaro will wreak even greater devastation in Brazil than his gringo inspiration has already done in the United States.
The Thing’s political success in Brazil demonstrates that the radical right is far from peaking in its global influence.
Elsewhere in the world, the right has certainly mobilized resentment against  neoliberal globalization. But that doesn’t explain the situation in Brazil. After all, Bolsonaro’s chief economic advisor, banker Paulo Guedes, adheres to the same University of Chicago philosophy that gave the world Augusto Pinochet’s brave new Chile in the 1970s. Thanks to Guedes, Bolsonaro has reversed his previously anti-liberal positions on economics. Now he promises widespread privatization and cuts in government spending, while also calling for fewer taxes.
I’m not sure that Bolsonaro’s supporters, aside from the very wealthy ones, are paying much attention to his economic program. What Brazilians are disgusted with is the status quo, which is corrupt and economically unsustainable. They don’t just want reform.
They want a Reformation.
Against the Globalists
In the sixteenth century, the Catholic Church aspired to control the world. Its influence spread well beyond Europe to the New World and, thanks to Jesuit missionaries, to Asia as well. Orthodox Christianity was well ensconced in Russia, and Islam controlled the Middle East and North Africa. But Rome was powerful, wealthy, and corrupt enough to compete with these rivals. The Pope commanded no armies, but he still claimed the allegiance of millions of people, including any number of kings and queens.
And then along came Martin Luther.
As a young monk and then a theologian, Luther absorbed the teachings of the Vatican. But he grew to despise what he saw as the corruptions of Catholicism, chiefly the sale of indulgences as a method of buying one’s way into heaven. His attacks on the Catholic order attracted a flock of like-minded protesters and reformers. And thus was born Protestant theology and the Reformation.
Luther challenged the globalists of his era, a political order based on a bogus and highly polarizing economic system (the sale of indulgences). He assailed the bureaucracy of this order, asserting instead that individuals could have a personal relationship with God without the mediation of the priests. He preferred the language of the people, rather than Latin, and translated the Bible into German.
Even before nationalism became a coherent ideology, Luther was asserting national prerogatives against the demands of the global (Catholic) order. He wasn’t a big fan of minorities either, considering the anti-Semitism of his treatise, “On the Jews and Their Lies.”
Luther also effectively deployed the technology of the era. The printing press, invented in Europe by Johannes Gutenberg around 1439, had become a tool of mass production by the early sixteenth century. Thanks to this new technology, Luther’s tracts and his German-language bible spread rapidly around Europe, undermining the Holy See’s authority.
Protestantism has proven to be an enduring phenomenon. As a schism, it has itself broken into dozens of denominations. But Catholicism, too, has endured. It has instituted some reforms, like Vatican II, and has become even more globalized since Luther’s time.
The Populist Reformation follows the same pattern as Luther’s earlier revolution. It targets a global elite. It criticizes a corrupt economic order. It speaks in a national language that the average person can understand. It uses the latest technologies — social media — to spread its message. It is full of fire and fury. And with Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential elections, it has spread to the very nerve center of the global order.
If it continues to follow the earlier example, this Populist Reformation will establish a powerful rival “church” that survives past the next election cycle. It may force some changes in the global order, but that order will survive as well. Protestants and Catholics generated one war after another in Europe. The current era looks to be equally contentious.
Modern Day Protestants
The modern-day Luthers are everywhere, railing against the globalists and tweeting their 95 theses around the world.
Eastern Europe is the center of this Reformation.
Poland’s Law and Justice Party and Hungary’s Fidesz are in firm control of their countries. In the Czech Republic, Prime Minister Andrej Babis, a corrupt media mogul, is trying to Berlusconi his country into submission, with the help of former leftist and current Islamophobe President Milos Zeman. In Bulgaria, the far right-wing United Patriots coalition named six ministerial positions as a reward for helping Prime Minister Boyko Borisov form a government. In Bosnia, the ultra-nationalist Miroslav Dodik was just elected as the Serbian member of the country’s unwieldy three-person presidency.
Elsewhere in Europe, the right wing is also on the rise — in control in Austria, sharing power in Italy, and racking up significant parliamentary numbers in Germany and Sweden. These insurgents are gearing up for the 2019 European Parliament elections in the hopes of securing a large enough minority to block legislation. “We are not fighting against Europe, but against the EU, which has become a totalitarian system,” the National Front’s Marine Le Pen has said. In France, the National Front polls just a fraction behind Emmanuel Macron’s ruling party.
On the borders of Europe, Turkey has been ruled for 15 years by a right-wing autocrat with an Islamist cast — Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Vladimir Putin, meanwhile, has been in charge in Russia for nearly two decades. This oligarch masquerading as a president aspires to create a vast conservative network — corrupt, anti-liberal, nationalist, and anti-immigrant — with Moscow at its center.
In Asia, right-wing nationalist Shinzo Abe is on track to become Japan’s longest serving prime minister. After winning his party’s presidency last month, Abe is expected to go after his long-sought prize: dismantling the country’s “peace constitution.”
Southeast Asia is full of right-wing militarists: in Thailand, Cambodia, and Myanmar. Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines has a predilection for extrajudicial murder and other authoritarian policies that place him firmly among right-wing populists. The surprise presidential victory of 92-year-old Mahathir Mohamad in Malaysia in May suggests that this former authoritarian leader has figured out how to reinvent himself along populist lines. And, of course, Narendra Modi has been busy imposing his Hindu nationalism-inflected right-wing approach in India.
In Latin America, Bolsonaro is not alone. In Colombia, Ivan Duque won the presidential election last June. Like Bolsonaro, Duque embraces a neoliberal economic program of tax cuts and a pro-military approach to security. Daniel Ortega, though he started out as a leftist, has moved further and further toward right-wing clerical militarism in Nicaragua.
The wave of right-wing populism hasn’t completely covered the world. Mexico took a long-heralded turn to the left with the election of Andrés Manuel López Obrador. South Korean progressive Moon Jae-in is charting a new course for his country after 10 years of conservative rule. Jacinda Ardern is doing great things in New Zealand as is Katrín Jakobsdóttir in Iceland. More traditional conservative parties, like the Christian Democrats in Germany, are holding the line against the far right.
But globally speaking, that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the influence of the right-wing populists.
The Roots of Right-Wing Radicalism
Some of the countries that have shifted hard to the right have done pretty well economically in recent years, like Poland and the Czech Republic. But the populist parties that did well at the polls still managed to mobilize the resentment of those who didn’t benefit from that economic success. The task of appealing to the disgruntled is even easier in countries that haven’t recovered fully from the financial crisis of a decade ago.
The actual economic programs of the populists are largely immaterial. They might advocate some kind of welfare state. They might prefer, as in Brazil, the same kind of neoliberal nostrums that pass for orthodoxy among international financial institutions.
In general, however, the populists are interested in state capture: using the mechanisms of state power to enrich themselves and their circle of supporters. It’s crony capitalism raised to the nth degree.
Politically, the new right-wing populists are taking advantage of a widespread disgust for political elites. This disgust has been focused in particular on the corruption scandals that have engulfed so many countries. Because they’re focused on corruption, voters are willing to embrace candidates who are also members of the political elite and personally corrupt to boot — as long as these firebrands promise to “drain the swamp.”
But it’s perhaps hot-button cultural issues that provide the most direct method by which the right-wing populists can distinguish themselves from the competition.
Obviously this cultural populism takes different forms around the world. Duterte challenges the Catholic Church in the Philippines while Ortega embraces it in Nicaragua. But a common denominator is nationalism. It’s not just an outward-facing nationalism against globalists and immigrations. These right-wing populists deliberately stoke the anger of majority populations who somehow feel left behind by a world of greater equality and diversity.
Martin Luther King Jr. once envisioned a Poor People’s Campaign that brought together a rainbow coalition of the dispossessed. Right-wing populists have discovered an equally powerful coalition: the Privileged People’s Campaign that brings together rich and poor on the basis of the color of their skin, not the content of their character. King emphasized the importance of dignity. The insurgent populists make a similar appeal but to the dignity of the dominant race, class, or gender.
The left is compromised on all three grounds. It remains committed to multiculturalism. Once in office, it has often proven just as corrupt (or, at least, status-quo-oriented) as any other political bloc. And left parties have pushed forward economic globalization as vigorously as the right, if not more so — the Democrats under Clinton, Labor under Blair, the French Socialists under Mitterand, former Communist parties in Eastern Europe, and so on. No surprise, then, that None of the Above has become so popular.
What’s remarkable about many of the new right-wing populists is how long they’ve managed to hold onto power through the ballot box. Putin, Erdogan, Ortega: They’ve all been in charge for more than a decade apiece. Viktor Orban’s been the head of Hungary since 2010, Abe the head of Japan since 2012. Zeman has been the Czech president since 2013.
This Populist Reformation is no recent or temporary blip. Let that be a warning to the U.S. electorate. Even if Donald Trump manages to lose his reelection bid, the populist fury that produced his improbable 2016 victory is not going away any time soon.

Why Afghan Girls Are Out of School?

Rohullah Naderi

The agenda of education in Afghanistan got added attention from the international community due to the Taliban’s notoriety vis-à-vis girls’ education. The extremist group’s inclination toward a religious-oriented educational system, and its detrimental policy of excluding girls from getting an education, made them infamous both in the eyes of the Afghan people and the international community. This was the reason that after the overthrow of the group in 2001, the global community paid undivided political and financial attention to girls’ education. The campaign to provide educational opportunities for Afghan women received global media attention and technical-cum-financial support from numerous international organizations. The significant enrollment of Afghan girls in schools became one of the key achievements of both the international community and former Afghan President Hamid Karzai. He would boast the achievement regularly via the international forums to appeal for more aid and support.
But the educational project is also experiencing setbacks. Despite financial and technical support from the various international agencies, the number of Afghan girls going to school and completing primary and secondary education is shrinking. It is a disturbing trend which has massive repercussions for women’s empowerment, the health of women, political participation of women, and the future of the country. So, what led to this disturbing trend? Why are Afghan girls out of school?
Government Failure 
Throughout Afghanistan’s modern history, educating the Afghan population has been a challenge for its government. This challenge becomes even more towering when it comes to educating Afghan girls. All kinds of Afghan governments – under-monarchy, republic, and the so-called democratically elected government that assumed power in the post-Taliban era – have struggled to address the vital agenda of education. None of them have been able to implement a mass literacy program successfully, although the communist governing system of the late 1970s and 1980s made a little headway on education and capacity building. Overall, the benefits of education have not penetrated the Afghan society the way it has penetrated the Turkish and Iranian societies. The ongoing violent conflict that traces its origin to 1979 has made the situation even direr, destroying whatever remained of the education system that was built by governments before the Soviet invasion and after. The current government’s resources are mostly spent on the security and defense sectors to tame the tide of insurgency, rather than on the education sector. Most insurgent groups operating in Afghanistan follow an anti-education policy, targeting schools, teachers, and students. Their misogynistic policies have made life for female students extremely risky, forcing their parents to stop their education.
The failure of the Afghan government in educating the population can be attributed to lack of sufficient financial resources to invest in education and build capacity, absence of an industrialized and modern economic system to produce revenues to fund educational projects, a lack of a visionary leadership to articulate a progressive vision for the country in which education takes a central role, limited institutional and administrative capacities, lack of political stability, and the never-ending political rivalry among Afghan elite, sometimes leading to bloodshed and chaos. A successful mass literacy program needs a strong government with technical, financial, administrative and intellectual capacities, and more importantly, political legitimacy. These ingredients have hardly been part and parcel of Afghan government’s national education strategy. Thus, much remains to be achieved in relation to education, and specifically with regard to encouraging literacy among young girls. To modern day, the Afghan government continues to perform poorly in the arena of education.
Deteriorating Security
Afghan girls experienced a severe repression under the brutal Taliban regime, creating an insatiable demand for learning and education. The post-Taliban Afghan ministry of education, along with its international partners, made commitments to rebuild the education system and accommodate as many students as possible. The education ministry achieved some success, as millions of children began to attend schools, although concerns about the quality of their education were raised. Still, the most important thing was that the doors of schools were opened to girls, which were shut for almost five years under the Taliban regime. As far as girls’ education is concerned, a new chapter had been opened, with much fanfare and excitement.
The excitement, however, did not last long. The insurgent groups led by the Taliban regrouped in Pakistan, and began their offensives by targeting both Afghan security and US/NATO forces, thus undermining the already fragile security situation in the post-Taliban period. Now there is a full-blown insurgency that has resulted in brazen attacks on major city centers, leading to the destruction of at least two cities. These offensives have had a damaging impact on education, and particularly girls’ education.
In its 2017 report, Human Rights Watch states that “an estimated two-thirds of Afghan girls do not go school.” According to the Afghan education ministry’s 2017 statistics, “there are 9.3 million children in school, 39 percent of whom are girls.” These statistics suggest that out of more than three and half million female students more than two million of them do not go to school. The report lists a worsening security situation as one of the major obstacles in preventing girls from attending classes. Worsening security results in school shutdowns, which have forced the female students to rely on home-based schools (HBS) where a trusted teacher from the community is hired to teach them. The aim of HBS is to improve access to education for girls and play a complementary role to compensate for the limited resources of the ministry of education. With the high enrolment from within the country, and the overspill of Afghan refugees who have returned from Pakistan and Iran, the ministry’s capacity has been “overstretched.” Now with the deteriorating security situation, HBS might be considered as the only alternative for girls to become literate. My elder sister was a beneficiary of HBS. It is a worthwhile educational initiative, but it can never replace a formal education system, which is needed for an economic upward mobility and a decent livelihood.
What the HRW highlights in its 2017 report is the “donor disengagement,” which is the direct result of insecurity. The Afghan education ministry needs the continuous support of donors to keep the schools running, pay and train its teachers, and build more schools. A prolonged donor disengagement might seriously undermine the education sector, as Afghanistan does not have a self-sufficient economy to foot the bills. Insecurity might put additional limitations on the education ministry. Its financial and human resources will be targeted, resulting in a loss of teachers and money.
Preference for a Boy Child
In a male-dominated Afghan society, there is an explicit preference among mothers and fathers for boy children. This way of thinking has an adverse impact on girls’ education and their prospects for completing high school, or in rare cases completing a college degree. I was personally witness to this tragic culture. I was brought up in a family where I, as a son, had an advantageous position. The priority was given to my education. The financial resources of my family largely went toward my schooling and development. I was sent to a good school and had good teachers with an up-to-date curriculum. I never faced a shortage of funds in my English language training courses but my elder sisters faced significant limitations. Their education was not taken seriously and they had to resort to an accelerated education model where they would complete two grades in one academic year, putting added pressures on themselves. Attending language classes to pick up English was not looked upon favorably. As a result, my eldest sister secretly attended English language and computer skills classes. So, the path to education for my sisters was laid with thorns. And this happens almost to all Afghan families. Investing in girl’s education does not constitute a priority for Afghanistan, although there are educated Afghan families that don’t discriminate against their daughters, providing full support to their educational endeavor.
Even if we assume that the first hurdle of enrolling one’s daughter in a school is passed, she is at constant risk for a variety of reasons. Security for these women is one major concern. They constantly face physical risks, in addition to struggling to balance between their school commitments and domestic chores. For example, I vividly remember that my sisters were reminded regularly that family came first and they ought to show more commitment toward domestic obligations. In contrast, I was at liberty to focus on my education without worrying about who washed my clothes and who cooked my food.
As long as the cultural preference for a boy child persists in Afghan families, the number of girls going to school is unlikely to increase significantly, and may even see a decline if violence against women intensifies. Moreover, a significant number of Afghan parents indoctrinate their daughters with the notion that their primary role in a society is rearing children and taking care of homes. This indoctrination robs girls of their confidence. The idea of achieving independence, and becoming free-thinking individuals with their own financial agency, become alien to them. One of the strategies that I can think of to address these two challenges is launching a country-wide awareness campaign to educate Afghan families about the importance of girls’ education. The campaign’s message could be linked to the Holy Koran’s directive, where Muslims are obligated to educate both their daughters and sons with an equal attention. The campaign would be a long-term project.
Lack of Adequate Facilities
Resource-wise, the Afghan ministry of education is overstretched. Institutionally, financially and administratively, it cannot cope up with increasing public demand. On the top of it, the ministry suffers from rampant corruption. The already limited financial resources are pocketed by the corrupt officials, leaving even lesser resources for schools and teachers. The pervasive corruption, coupled with budgetary constraints have resulted in a poor education infrastructure. According to one HRW report, 41 percent of the schools don’t have an actual building. Classes are held in tenets, UNICEF plastic shelters, under the trees, under makeshift roofs, and in open spaces/deserts. Inadequate infrastructure is the biggest obstacle for girl’s education, and a leading cause for the burgeoning dropouts. It is very hard to retain female students in these kinds of setups. One big motivator for the parents is to be sure that the school has at least a functional physical structure. Teaching girls in tents and open spaces will put them at the risk of weather and hygiene-related health problems. Nor will they feel secure.
Those schools that have buildings often lack other facilities such as a heating system in the winter and air conditioning in the summer. The students might consider themselves lucky if the building has a toilet facility – a fundamental requirement for girls considering the cultural sensitivities of Afghan society toward females. Most of the time the infrastructure for indoor plumbing is there, but buildings are not fully furnished, misused or not properly maintained. In 2013, I visited a boy’s school in Kabul and the toilet facility was not maintained properly making its use almost impossible for the students. If a girl student complains about the toilet facility to her parents, the likelihood of dropping out for her is high. In addition, the distance between a girl’s home and her school is a barrier, too. If the school is far from home, the enrollment might not take place in the first place. If she is admitted, the possibility of dropping out is stronger.
Girls face the additional burden of transportation. Boys can go to school on foot, even if it is far. For girls, the option of walking is limited. Parents may not allow it, fearing for the security of their daughters and the sexual harassments they might face. Sexual harassment is the most common form of discrimination that Afghan girls face on the streets.
And the problems do not stop there, as schools also complain about lack of books– the basic building blocks of an education. The absence of books can drastically impact learning. Reading skills will take longer to develop and it is hard to imagine a student and a school without books. Lack of desks, tables, and stationery have also been reported, further impeding the process of learning.
Lack of Qualified Teachers
One of the greatest advantages of Afghanistan’s education system is its free primary and secondary education. Students are not required to pay any remittance. A privatized model threatens to restrict educational opportunities for students from lower economic strata. It would be particularly detrimental for girls, as parents would surely prefer to pay the school fees of their sons only. In a privatized model, girls would be the scapegoats – sacrificing for their brothers. For a poor country like Afghanistan, public education appears to be the only viable option. However, it has created problems in terms of training, supervision, and appraisal of teachers. The ministry of education is a big institution with a national mandate of managing funds, developing policy, designing curriculum, evaluation, and providing training to teachers. In addition, it has to oversee the 34 provincial departments of education.
In terms of efficient management, the ministry has always struggled – doing a poor job in implementing its mandates. Teacher training has not been a success story either. And the paucity of trained teachers is a vital factor in dissuading girls to call it quits. The newly recruited teachers either do not undergo training at all or are not trained adequately to prepare them for the job. Due to corruption and nepotism, the official requirements to be a qualified teacher are hardly met. For example, a number of hired teachers posted in remote rural areas usually do not require higher education degrees. Applicants are offered jobs after completing their high school diploma. According to the ministry of education,“80 percent of the country’s 165,000 teachers have achieved only the equivalent of a high school education or did not complete their post-secondary studies.”
The frustrating part for the students is the lack of preparation on the part of untrained teachers. They struggle to explain academic concepts to students. They often do not encourage new ideas, creativity and, curiosity or critical thinking. As a result, many students fail to develop critical thinking skill or to think outside the box. Their approach is usually exam-based, where students are prepared for the tests rather than preparing them for the bigger responsibilities such as leadership, personal development, navigating job market challenges, living a peaceful and productive life, cultivation of a spirited citizenry, and understanding and fulfilling civic responsibilities. Limiting education to passing exams is not a visionary approach to teaching. It becomes monotonous and uninteresting, and makes it difficult to keep the students engaged.
High teacher to student ratios represent another problem that deters girls from going to school. Due to an overflow of Afghan refugees from neighboring countries, the ministry is facing a shortage of teachers. There are not enough trained and qualified teachers to meet the increasing demand. Some of the schools don’t have full-time committed teachers. In other schools, the number of students is so large that teachers are unable to effectively manage classes, thereby limiting the available attention to cater to students’ educational, developmental and, cognitive needs. Female teachers are in short supply, too. In a religiously conservative country like Afghanistan, the lack of female teachers for girls’ school is a rigid obstacle for girls to access education.
The above-mentioned obstacles can be addressed through long-term planning. With the right policy intervention, their damage can be mitigated and the retention rate of girls in school can be improved. What Afghanistan badly needs is a strong commitment on the funding front. The ministry of education is still dependent on foreign aid. To address the obstacles and to stop girls from dropping out, regular and reliable sources of funding are needed. With the poor leadership and unsatisfactory performance of the ministry of education, securing funding commitments from international organizations and the international community are a challenge. Except for the preference for boy children, all the other obstacles are directly/indirectly linked to widespread corruption in the education ministry. Endemic corruption has very badly tarnished Afghanistan’s image. Any proposal for funding might not receive a positive welcome from funders and donors. Hence, by starting to curb the menace of corruption, the ministry can help funnel funds toward addressing various obstacles to facilitate the learning process and to keep girls in the school. Reliable and regular funding might depend on the success of the fight against corruption in the education ministry. Establishing the credibility of the ministry might lead to success, and to the reduction of barriers to girl’s education.

Is China Winning the War for Africa?

Cesar Chelala

While traveling in Africa in the 1980 and 1990s, I was surprised to see Chinese crews building roads, schools, and houses. Although at the time this meant little to me, I later realized it was part of a policy of Chinese insertion into the African countries’ economies.
Historically, the African continent has been plundered by foreign powers, mainly but not exclusively European, who have extracted valuable resources, corrupting African elites, and destroying feeble attempts at democracy throughout the continent. On January 17, 1961, Patrice Lumumba was assassinated. He was the first legally elected prime minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Ludo De Witte, an author of a book about this event, called Lumumba’s murder “the most important assassination of the 20th century.” It was carried out with the joint complicity of the American and Belgian governments, which used Congolese accomplices and a Belgian execution squad. This assassination forever changed the African continent’s political landscape and its economic and political prospects.
China’s approach is different from that of the traditional colonial powers. Its main interests in the African continent are twofold: searching and exploiting oil and mineral resources, and creating new markets for Chinese goods. In addition, building and repairing infrastructure provides jobs for Chinese technicians and laborers.
Unlike other big powers, China has shown relatively minimal interference in the domestic affairs of African countries, while at the same time providing generous aid and loan packages. As Clifton Pannell, Director of the Center for Asian Studies at the University of Georgia said, “Its oft-stated policy in dealing with African states is to stress the notion of mutual benefits, and it has long promoted itself as a partner in solidarity with African states in opposition to colonialism and economic dependency.”
Aid to local economies
Not everybody in Africa is happy about China’s presence on the continent. Although China employs Africans in some of its economic endeavors, many locals resent China’s competition with local factories and entrepreneurs. China, however, has a steady policy of providing assistance and training in agricultural techniques and public health issues.
At the 2018 Beijing Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation which took place in Beijing, President Xi Jinping unveiled eight major initiatives which included purchasing more African goods and encouraging Chinese companies to expand investments to promote industrialization in Africa. Other major areas of cooperation are energy, information, transportation and use of water resources. To ensure the proper development of these initiatives, China will provide $60 billion in support for Africa’s development.
President Xi Jinping encouraged these countries to join in building the Belt and Road Initiative to achieve common developmental goals. In the financial area, China promised support through the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the New Development Bank, and the Silk Road Fund. In addition, Xi Jinping pledged to provide 50,000 government-funded scholarships for African youngsters and invited 2,000 of them to visit China.
Medical aid
China’s medical aid to Africa started in 1963 when it sent 100 healthcare workers to Algeria after it gained independence from France, and has been steadily increasing its numbers since then. By 2014, China was spending about $150 million annually in medical aid to African countries. China now ranks among the top 10 bilateral global health donors to the continent.
Although the exact number is unknown, China has dispatched several Chinese medical teams (CMT) to Africa and assisted in the construction of health facilities and training of African healthcare workers. It has also provided medical equipment and drugs. It is estimated that by 2014 China had helped build 30 hospitals and 30 malaria prevention and control centers, and trained over 3,000 healthcare workers from several African countries.
Malaria is one of the main diseases the Chinese are trying to help prevent and control. China has donated over $26 million in anti-malarial drugs to 35 African countries. China also provided important aid to control the Ebola epidemic that killed more than 11,000 people between 2013 and 2016 and has helped in the prevention and control of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases.
In its medical aid to Africa, China makes use of its own experience as a developing country, limitations and advantages included. At the same time, China uses its assistance in public health to strengthen its diplomatic relations with African governments.
Military assistance
Although in the past China mainly targeted economic trade and assistance to Africa, Beijing is increasingly developing policies aimed at strengthening military ties in order to gain a stronger geopolitical influence and expand weapons sales in the continent. In that regard, China has been extremely active in selling small arms and light weapons to several African countries.
President Xi Jinping promised to provide $100 million of free military assistance to the African Union to support the establishment of the African Standby Force and the African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crisis. In addition, the Chinese government has invited thousands of African military officials to China for workshops and training courses.
“The concern from a lot of partners is exactly what role China is going to be playing in the region and how it is going to exist with existing military organizations and security forums,” said Duncan Innes-Ker, Asia Regional Director at the Economist Intelligence Unit. Those who ignore China’s assertive policies in Africa will do so at their own risk.

Turkey plays Khashoggi crisis to its geopolitical advantage

James M. Dorsey

With Turkish investigators asserting that they have found further evidence that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed when he visited the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul two weeks ago, Turkey appears to be leveraging the case to enhance its position as a leader of the Islamic World and reposition itself as a key US ally.
To enhance its geopolitical position vis a vis Saudi Arabia as well as Russia and Iran and potentially garner economic advantage at a time that it is struggling to reverse a financial downturn, Turkey has so far leaked assertions of evidence it says it has of Mr. Khashoggi’s killing rather than announced them officially.
In doing so, Turkey has forced Saudi Arabia to allow Turkish investigators accompanied by Saudi officials to enter the consulate and positioned President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as the kingdom’s saviour by engineering a situation that will allow the kingdom to craft a face-saving way out of the crisis.
Saudi Arabia is reportedly considering announcing that Mr. Khashoggi, a widely-acclaimed journalist critical of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman who went into self-exile because he feared arrest, was killed in either a rogue operation or an attempt gone awry to forcibly repatriate it him back to the kingdom.
US President Donald J. Trump offered the Turks and Saudis a helping hand by referring this week to the possibility of Mr. Khashoggi having been killed by rogues and dispatching Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Riyadh and Ankara.
Mr. Khashoggi, seeking to obtain proof of his divorce in the kingdom so that he could marry his Turkish fiancé, visited the consulate two weeks ago for the second time after having allegedly received assurances that he would be safe.
Turkey emerges as the crisis moves towards a situation in which an official version is agreed that seeks to shield Prince Mohammed from being held responsible for Mr. Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely murder with its international status significantly enhanced.
Turkish leverage is further boosted by the fact that Saudi Arabia — its image in government, political and business circles significantly damaged by the crisis — and the Trump administration that wants to ensure that the kingdom’s ruling family emerges from the crisis as unscathed as possible, are in Ankara’s debt.
As a result, the denouement of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to alter the dynamics in the long-standing competition between Turkey and Saudi Arabia for leadership of the Islamic world.
It also strengthens Turkey’s position in its transactional alliance with Russia and Iran as they manoeuvre to end the war in Syria in a manner that cements Bashar al-Assad’s presidency while addressing Turkish concerns.
Turkey’s position in its rivalry with Saudi Arabia is likely to also benefit from the fact that whatever face-saving solution the kingdom adopts is likely to be flawed when tested by available facts and certain to be challenged by a host of critics, even if many will see Turkey as having facilitated a political solution rather than ensuring that the truth is established.
Already, Mr. Khashoggi’s family who was initially quoted by Saudi Arabia’s state-controlled media as backing Saudi denials of responsibility, insinuations that his fate was the product of a conspiracy by Qatar and/or Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood, and casting doubt on the integrity of the journalist’s Turkish fiancée, has called for “the establishment of an independent and impartial international commission to inquire into the circumstances of his death.”
Turkey and Saudi Arabia differ on multiple issues that divide the Muslim world. Turkey has vowed to help Iran circumvent Saudi-supported US sanctions imposed after Mr. Trump withdrew in May from the 2015 international agreement that curbed the Islamic republic’s nuclear agreement.
Turkey further backs Qatar in its dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that has diplomatically and economically boycotted the Gulf state for the last 16 months. The credibility of the alliance’s allegation that Qatar supports terrorism and extremism has been dented by the growing conviction that Saudi Arabia, whether in a planned, rogue or repatriation effort gone wrong, was responsible for Mr. Khashoggi’s killing.
Mr. Khashoggi’s death, moreover, highlighted differing approaches towards the Brotherhood, one of the Middle East’s most persecuted, yet influential Islamist groupings. Saudi Arabia, alongside the UAE and Egypt, have designated the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
Many brothers have sought refuge in Turkey with Mr. Erdogan empathetic and supportive of the group. A former brother, Mr. Khashoggi criticized Saudi repression of the group.
The Saudi-Turkish rivalry for leadership of the Muslim world was most evident in the two countries’ responses to Mr. Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and his as yet unpublished plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Turkey emerged as the leader of Islamic denunciation of Mr. Trump’s move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and recognition of the city as Israel’s capital after Prince Mohammed tried to dampen opposition. Ultimately, King Salman was forced to step in a bid to clarify the kingdom’s position and counter Turkish moves.
No matter how Turkey decides to officially release whatever evidence it has, Saudi Arabia figures out how to respond and halt the haemorrhaging, and Mr. Pompeo holds talks with King Salman and Mr. Erdogan, Turkey is likely to emerge from the crisis strengthened despite its increasingly illiberal and increasingly authoritarian rule at home,
Turkey’s success is all the more remarkable given that it has neither Saudi Arabia’s financial muscle nor the mantle the kingdom adopts as the custodian of Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina.
A successful political resolution of the Khashoggi crisis is likely to earn it the gratitude of the Trump administration, Saudi Arabia, and its other detractors like the UAE who support the kingdom even if it may help it to regain popularity in the Arab world lost as a result of its swing towards authoritarianism, alliance with Iran and Qatar, and support for Islamism.
One immediate Turkish victory is likely to be Saudi acquiesce to Mr. Erdogan’s demand that Saudi Arabia drop its support for Kurdish rebels in Syria that Ankara sees as terrorists – a move that would boost Turkey’s position the Turkish-Russian-Iranian jockeying for influence in a post-war Syria. Turkey is also likely to see Saudi Arabia support it economically.
Turkey may, however, be playing for higher stakes.
Turkey “wants to back Saudi Arabia to the wall. (It wants to) disparage the ‘reformist’ image that Saudi Arabia has been constructing in the West” in a bid to get the US to choose Ankara as its primary ally in the Middle East, said international relations scholar Serhat Guvenc.
Turkey’s relations in recent years have soured as a result of Turkish insistence that the US is harbouring a terrorist by refusing to extradite Fethullah Gulen, the preacher it accuses of having engineered the failed 2016 coup; detaining American nationals and US consulate employees on allegedly trumped up charges, cosying up to Russia and purchasing its S-400 surface to air missile system, and aligning itself with Iran. Relations were further strained by US support for Syrian Kurds.
Mr. Trump, however this week heralded a new era in US-Turkish relations after the release of unsubscribe Andrew Brunson, an evangelist preacher who was imprisoned in Turkey for two years on charges of espionage.
Mr. Guvenc argued that Turkey hopes that Saudi Arabia’s battered image will help it persuade Mr. Trump that Turkey rather than the kingdom is its strongest and most reliable ally alongside Israel in the Middle East.
Said journalist Ferhat Unlu: “”Turkey knows how to manage diplomatic crises. Its strategy is to manage tensions to its advantage,”

World Food Day: A Holistic World Food Policy is Needed

Rene Wadlow

Since the hungry billion in the world community believe that we can all eat if we set our common house in order, they believe also that it is unjust that some men die because it is too much trouble to arrange for them to live.
String-fellow Barr Citizens of the World (1954)
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (2015-2030) aims by 2030 to “Double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets , and non-farm resources.”
There is a consensus that radical measures are needed to deal with world-wide growing food needs. These measures must be taken in a holistic and coordinated way with actions going from the local level of the individual farmer to the national level with new government policies to the world level with better coordinated activities through the United Nations System.
A central theme which citizens of the world have long stressed is that there needs to be a world food policy and that a world food policy is more than the sum of national food security programs. Food security has too often been treated as a collection of national food security initiatives. While the adoption of a national strategy to ensure food and nutrition security for all is essential, a focus on the formulation of national plans is clearly inadequate. There is a need for a world plan of action with focused attention to the role which the United Nations system must play if hunger is to be sharply reduced.
The FAO did encourage governments to develop national food security policies, but the lack of policies at the world level has led to the increasing control of agricultural processes by a small number of private firms driven by the desire to make money. Thus today, three firms —Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta — control about half of the commercial seed market worldwide. Power over soil, seeds and food sales is ever more tightly held.
There needs to be detailed analysis of the role of speculation in the rise of commodity prices. There has been a merger of the former Chicago Mercantile Exchange and the Chicago Board of Trade to become the CME Group Market which deals in some 25 agricultural commodities. Banks and hedge funds, having lost money in the real estate mortgage packages of 2008 are now looking for ways to get money back. For the moment, there is no international regulation of this speculation. There needs to be an analysis of these financial flows and their impact on the price of grains. The word needs a market shaped by shared human values structured to ensure fairness and co-responsibility.
There is likewise a need for a serious analysis of the growing practice of buying or renting potential farm land, especially in Africa and South America, by foreign countries, especially China and the Arab Gulf states. While putting new land under cultivation is not a bad policy in itself, we need to look at the impact of this policy on local farmers as well as on world food prices.
There is a need to keep in mind local issues of food production, distribution, and food security. Attention needs to be given to cultural factors, the division of labour between women and men in agriculture and rural development, in marketing local food products, to the role of small farmers, to the role of landless agricultural labour and to land-holding patterns.
Fortunately, there is a growing awareness that an integrated, holistic approach is needed. World Citizens stress that solutions to poverty, hunger and climate change crisis require an agriculture that promotes producers’ livelihoods, knowledge, resiliency, health and equitable gender relations, while enriching the natural environment and helping balance the carbon cycle. Such an integrated approach is a fundamental aspect of the world citizen approach to a solid world food policy.