Government of Greece International Scholarships to attend Modern Greek Language and Culture Courses 2018/2019

Application Deadlines: 

• The application deadline is 19^th November, 2018. The original documentation along with the application and the curriculum vitae shall have a postal seal by this date.
• The electronic application deadline (only the curriculum vitae and the application form) is 11th November, 2018.

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Greece

About the Award: This programme is intended for foreign nationals, holders of a graduate degree from a non-Greek university outside Greece, who do not permanently reside in Greece. Courses and seminars are being offered since 1992. From 2006 and onwards candidates from all over the world join activities.
Award takes place in any of the public universities in Greece. It covers all levels of language competency.
The programme also includes cultural events and educational visits to Greek sites of historical interest.
A certificate of attendance is awarded upon completion of the programme.

Type: Short courses

Eligibility: Applicants should:

1. Be nationals of any country of the world excluding Greece (not with dual nationality – both foreign and Greek).
2. Hold a graduate degree from a non-Greek University outside Greece.
3. Not exceed the fortieth (40^th) year of age until the 01/01/2018.
4. Be not permanent residents in Greece.
5. The knowledge of the Greek language acquired during this specific course should contribute to enhance the candidates work opportunities and to promote the Greek language and culture in their countries.

Applicants must meet the above requirements by the application deadline.

Selection Criteria: 

• Incomplete, inaccurate or illegible application files will not be taken into consideration.
• Applicants who are or have been on a scholarship by the I.K.Y. will be excluded from the programme with the exemption of ex-scholarship holders of the Modern Greek Language and Culture programme who wish to approve their Greek language competency.
• Candidates under legal prosecution will be excluded from the selection process.
• Applications by undergraduates who have not yet obtained their University degree will not be considered.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The scholarship covers the following costs:

1. Free meals and accommodation in University residence or in flats provided by the University which will undertake the programme.
2. A monthly allowance of 150, 00€ (net amount) for personal expenses.
3. 200, 00€ for initial expenses.
4. Free emergency medical treatment under the Greek National Health Service (only in    public hospitals). European citizens should have the European Insurance Illness Card from their insurance agency of their country.

Tuition fees and other relevant costs.

Duration of Programme: 

• The duration of this scholarship is seven (7) months and is only offered for a specific course in the Modern Greek language and culture organised mainly at one Greek University. The University, which will hold this course, will be decided by the I.K.Y after a selection process.
• The courses will start on December 2018 and will end on June 2019.

How to Apply: 

1. An application form, duly completed, signed and with one recent photograph attached.
2. An up-to-date curriculum vitae according to the european template “Europass” (in English or Greek language).
3. Certified copies of University Diplomas – Degrees.
4. Certificates indicating the knowledge of Greek (if any) or English or French language.
5. Two (2) letters of reference (in Greek, English or French) by a University Professor.
6. A written evidence of employment as a teacher of Greek, if any.
7. A recent (issued 1 month approximately prior to the application submission) health certificate by a national hospital or from the relevant recognized health service stating that the applicant does not suffer from any infectious diseases.
8. A copy of a valid passport / national identity card.

The above original documentation requested shall be submitted through the Greek Diplomatic Authorities. The Greek Diplomatic Authorities will check the documents and send them to the IKY. Only the application form and the curriculum vitae shall also be submitted earlier (as word documents) to the email: foreigners@iky.gr .
Candidates that are in Greece just before the submission deadline are required to contact their Diplomatic Authorities in Greece.

Application forms are available from the Greek Diplomatic Mission or the I.K.Y. or as downloaded copy from the I.K.Y website at: www.iky.gr.
The application shall be submitted according to the annexes 1 or 2: application form in Greek or in English.
If the documentation is not in Greek a certified translation (by the Greek Diplomatic Authorities abroad) into Greek, English or French must be supplied.
In addition, documents numbered 3, 4, 7, and 8 should bear the Apostille or be certified by the Greek Diplomatic Authorities (the Embassy or Consulate) in cases where the candidate’s state of origin is not a member of the Hague Convention (Apostille) of 5 October 1961 abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents.
Applicants must submit only certified copies of the original documents, as these will not be returned.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Finnish Government International Gender Equality Prize 2019 (EUR 300,000 Award)

Application Deadline: 31st December 2018.

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Finland

About the Award: The prize, which will be awarded for the second time in autumn 2019, can go to a person or organisation working to promote gender equality in an internationally significant way.
The prize includes a sum of EUR 300,000, which is intended not for the recipients themselves, but is rather directed to a cause that advances gender equality. Chancellor Merkel granted her prize money (EUR 150,000 in 2017) to an NGO working to promote the rights of women and children in Niger. The organisation, SOS Femmes et Enfants Victimes de Violence Familiale, is using the prize money to build a residential shelter for victims of domestic violence in the Nigerien capital of Niamey.

Type: Contest, Award

Eligibility: The prize will be awarded to a person or organisation that has advanced gender equality in a globally significant way.

Number of Awards: 1

Value of Award: The award sum for the next prize has been increased to EUR 300,000.

How to Apply: Nominate a candidate
The nomination form must be completed in English.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Rondine Cittadella della Pace Program in Conflict Resolution 2019 (Fully-funded to Italy)

Application Deadline: 13th January 2019

Eligible Countries: Countries in MENA, Balkan and South Caucus regions; Nigeria

To be taken at (country): Italy

About the Award: Are you ready to meet your enemy? To learn the art of dialogue? To learn how to transform the conflict into an opportunity and generate social change? The World House is the experience that you are looking for!

Type: Training

Eligibility: Participants will be selected among candidates showing the following characteristics:

• Ages between 21-28;
• Sensibility and readiness to work on the topics of conflict of the country of origin and conflicts in general;
• Predisposition to leadership;
• Predisposition to public speaking and communication;
• Predisposition to team and group work and active listening;
• Predisposition to taking on roles of responsibility;
• Predisposition to team building and active involvement;
• Predisposition to civic engagement and volunteering;
• Predisposition to entrepreneurship and Social Innovation
• Project-oriented attitude, aiming at implementing social projects upon return to his/her home country;
• Knowledge about civil society and the non-profit sector;
• Sensibility about global sustainability or at least about some of the following topics: climate change, cooperation, welfare, civil and social economy;
• A wish to deal with conflict management, during his/her own personal professional growth

Please, note that Italian is the official language for communication and activities in Rondine. For this reason, the program starts with a 3-month intensive course of Italian language and culture. Knowledge of English is also required for a profitable participation in the Rondine training.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: During the whole period of the participant’s stay, the association takes responsibility of covering the following costs:

• Cost of the training activities in Rondine
• Cost of the lodging
• Cost of the academic or vocational training (enrolment fees, learning material, transportation)

A more detailed description of the economic aspects will be part of the Learning and Participation Agreement that the candidate will be asked to read and sign before the start of the trial period.

Duration of Programme: Two-year training program (July 2019 to June 2021)

How to Apply: Those interested in participating in the Rondine program must send the documents mentioned below before the 13thJanuary 2019 to the following email addresses: international@rondine.org, or international.rondine@gmail.com
The required documents are:

• Application form (here attached or to be filled online at: https://goo.gl/forms/fHea9mcpUqZmo19g1);
• Copy of passport, valid at least until June 2020;
• Motivation letter;
• Curriculum Vitae or Resume;
• Copy of the last qualification or certificate, diploma or degree earned;
• The social impact project proposal that the candidate is planning to develop during his/her experience at Rondine and to implement upon return to his/her home country. The project should include the following points:
• ◦Social and geographical contest in which the project will be developed;
• ◦Objectives of the project;◦Expected activities;◦Methodologies to be used;
• ◦Expected time-frame;
• At least one recommendation letter, signed by a professor from the student’s university, or a supervisor of a non-profit or association in which the candidate is active;
• Copy of the driving license;
• Notice on personal data protection (hand-signed

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Young Scientists Summer Program 2019 – Italy

Application Deadline: 11th January 2019.

Eligible Countries: Applicants from all countries are welcome, although IIASA gives priority to citizens or residents of member countries.

To be taken at (country): Vienna, Italy

Field of Study: 

• Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases
• Advanced Systems Analysis
• Ecosystem Services and Management
• Energy
• Evolution and Ecology
• Risk and Resilience
• Transitions to New Technologies
• Water
• World Population

Type: Training, Research

Eligibility: The program is designed for PhD students (ideally about 2 years prior to receiving their PhD) working on a field compatible with ongoing research at IIASA and a wish to explore the policy implications of their work. Participants will be working under the direct supervision of an experienced IIASA scientist in a unique interdisciplinary and international research environment. They will produce a paper (serving as first step towards a publishable journal article) and will get the opportunity to build up contacts for future collaboration within IIASA’s worldwide network.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

• The stipend varies slightly among NMOs, but usually it is EUR 1310 per month plus airfare. If you are not citizen of or resident in an NMO country you must find alternative funds (either from your home institution or other sources) to finance participation.
• IIASA will finance up to 3 candidates from developing countries which are not members of IIASA
• IIASA does not charge a tuition fee. In general, participants are expected to cover all expenses associated with their stay (3 months rent; meals; local transportation; expenses for any accompanying dependents; and health insurance) from their NMO grant or their other funding source.

Duration of Programme: 3 months

How to Apply: 

• Candidates apply via the online application form.
• Applicants can chose 1-2 programs. If there is additional is interest in one of our flagship projects this can be indicated in the box provided in the application form (under “please justify your choice of programs here”).
• We strongly encourage contacting the various program representatives and carefully read through all program descriptions before making your decision.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) 2019 Science Communication Fellowship (Funded to Vienna, Italy)

Application Deadline: 11th January 2019.

Eligible Countries: Applicants from all countries are welcome, although IIASA gives priority to citizens or residents of member countries.

To be taken at (country): Vienna, Italy

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility:

• A Bachelor’s or equivalent degree in science or journalism, and/or current student or graduate of a science journalism program.
• Applicants from all countries are welcome, but IIASA gives priority to citizens or residents of countries in which IIASA has a National Member Organization. We encourage applications from developing countries.

Qualifications:

• Experience in writing about science for the general public via blogs, newspapers, university web sites, or other outlets.
• Written and oral fluency in English and proven ability to understand complex scientific research.
• Experience with or interest in social media, video, photography, or other multimedia is a plus.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The fellowship covers the cost of travel to and from Vienna and the awardee’s home country at the beginning and end of the fellowship, as well as a modest stipend to offset living expenses during the period of the fellowship.

• The science communication fellow will gain experience in communicating complex systems science for a general audience through a variety of platforms including blogs, website content, video, and articles for our magazine, Options.
• The successful candidate will work in the IIASA Communications Department, assisting with a variety of tasks including editorial work, web publishing, media relations, event coverage, multimedia, social media, and other communication activities.
• The fellow will also work closely with participants in the IIASA Young Scientists Summer Program (YSSP), producing several pieces of work covering research from the program.

Duration of Programme: The fellowship starts on 27 May and ends on 30 August.

How to Apply: To apply, please email the following documents to Ms. Alia Harrison, Recruitment Coordinator, Human Resources Department, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis at harrison@iiasa.ac.at

• CV/Resume
• Cover Letter
• One writing sample of no more than 800 words (longer texts will not be considered) about a scientific topic and aimed at a general audience (e.g., article for a newspaper or magazine, blog post, or op-ed)
• A letter of recommendation

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Archbishop Tutu Fellowship Programme 2019 for Young African Leaders

Application Deadline: 15th December 2018.

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): South Africa. Other locations will be split between Oxford University and London (UK)

About the Award:  Offered on a part-time basis over six months, the Programme includes two 9-day Group Learning Modules with an impressive array of distinguished leaders and faculty. These are intensive interactive workshops; one at the historic Mont Fleur conference facility (South Africa), and the other split between Oxford University and London (UK).
The Programme has been designed specifically for African leaders in consultation with our African faculty and advisors and with Oxford, whose famous tutorial style has been adopted. It provides participants with an intensive learning and broadening experience on the principles and application of leadership, and an opportunity to explore the issues and specific characteristics of leadership in Africa, as well as the global challenges and dimensions of an African leader.
The programme places emphasis on learning and experiencing, not teaching, offering a variety of formal and innovative informal learning opportunities to enhance the leadership capabilities of the candidate. Emphasis is also placed on peer interaction and feedback, and the participants highly value being able to share pan-African perspectives and experiences. Overall it provides a unique environment for mid-career self reflection on one’s leadership journey in transforming Africa, and has been described as life changing by many participants.
Upon completing the Programme, Tutu Fellows return to play active roles in their respective communities, countries and spheres of influence. Great value is placed upon becoming a member of an established exclusive and supportive network of Africa’s future leaders – the Tutu Fellows. As part of this network of global leaders, all Fellows are expected to attend AFLI alumni events, as well as function as ambassadors for the Fellowship across all segments of society.

Type: Fellowship

Selection Criteria: In terms of selection criteria, AFLI emphasizes integrity, strong values and responsibility, courage and a demonstrated ability to lead and inspire. A candidate must demonstrate a commitment to Africa and to serving the greater community. We seek leaders not managers.

Selection Process: Competition is extremely tough for the 20 fellowship places available; each year we receive over 200 top quality nominations from all over Africa, which are put forward by our existing Fellows, Partners and network of influential leaders.
Only once candidates have been nominated, may they submit an application to AFLI.

Number of Awardees: 20

Value of Fellowship: 

• Entry into awards
• Thought-leadership and speaking opportunities
• Advocacy opportunities
• Networking opportunities and network memberships
• Access to projects, causes and campaigns
• Collaborating with like-minded peers on projects
• Job opportunities
• Pan-African exposure
• Attendance of multi-country meetings
• Leadership of, and participation in, multi-country organisations and projects
• International exposure
• Opportunities for ongoing debate and knowledge-exchange
• Profiling in the media
• Peer to Peer accountability
• Selected as board members or trustees to high profile companies/organisations

Duration of Fellowship: 1 year

How to Apply: Only once candidates have been nominated, may they submit an application to AFLI.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details


Award Provider: African Leadership Institute (AFLI)

Why a Neoliberal Society Can’t Survive

T. J. Coles

Humans are complicated creatures. We are both cooperative and sectarian. We tend to be cooperative within in-groups (e.g., a trade union) whilst competing against out-groups (e.g., a business confederation). But complex societies such as ours also force us to cooperate with out-groups – in neighbourhoods, at work, and so on. In social systems, natural selection favours cooperation. In addition, we are biased toward ethical behaviours, so cooperation and sharing are valued in human societies.

But what happens when we are forced into an economic system that makes us compete at every level? The logical outcome is societal decline or collapse.

NEOLIBERAL DOGMA IN THE 20TH CENTURY

In “The Individual in Society,” Ludwig von Mises, teacher of Friedrich Hayek (the granddaddy of modern neoliberalism), wrote that in a contractual society, the employer is at the mercy of the mob. But in a self-interested market economy, “[t]he coordination of the autonomous actions of all individuals is accomplished by the operation of the market.” So, in this fantasy-world, employers can fire workers and replace them with cheaper ones without incurring the social costs associated with contractual societies.

Particularly after the 1970s, this kind of thinking began to permeate the culture of “free market” planners in Ivy League economics courses.

Robert Simons of the Harvard Business School notes that economics is by far the dominant academic discipline in the United States today, and that many graduates take that acquired ideology of self-interest into the workplace of asset management, hedge funds, insurance, liquidity, and so on. Simons criticises what he calls “the unquestioning and universal acceptance by economists of self-interest—of shareholders, managers, and employees—as the conceptual foundation for business design and management.” Simons notes that workers are self-interested “tribes,” as are managers, in that they try to gain more benefits. “To remedy this potentially catastrophic situation” of worker rights, “market economists attempt to channel errant behaviors by using stimulus-response theory” in the form of anti-union legislation, cuts to social services, and the threat of outsourcing jobs. Market economists “have elevated self-interest to a normative ideal.”

INFECTING THE LEFT

In 1988, then-Chancellor and Tory, Nigel Lawson, wrote that by the 1970s, “capitalism, based on self-interest, was felt to be morally disreputable” by the majority of Britons. But equally immoral for Lawson is state-intervention: “there is nothing particularly moral about big government,” he said (unless it is a big government to rescue big business). But, fortunately for the Tories, “the tide of ideas turned,” allowing them to re-enter office and impose further neoliberal reforms.

Perhaps the worst aspect of neoliberalism was its infection of the Labour party. To give some examples: one US neoliberal, Lawrence Summers (later Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary), taught a young Ed Balls, soon to become the economic adviser to future Chancellor, Gordon Brown. Then still an MP, Brown met with US Federal Reserve Chair, Alan Greenspan. This began in the UK a period of further financial deregulation under the self-styled “New Labour.”

Economists in the mid-2000s just prior to the crash, began seeing cracks in the ideology, noting:

“We see in the general public widespread unease about market solutions. Free trade and globalization, privatization of social insurance, and deregulation of energy markets all elicit opposition from many consumers, sometimes reasoned but often inchoate. It is no coincidence that support for market solutions is concentrated among the economically successful, and opposition among the less successful. Free choice has moral appeal, but moral fiber is strongest when not cut by self-interest.”

In 2008 the US, and thus global, economy was in meltdown. Greenspan testified to the House of Representatives: “I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interest of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and equity firms.” But self-interest means self-interest. The CEOs and top managers saw no need to honour their supposed obligations to their shareholders, let alone the general public.

THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES

The political consequences of decades of neoliberalism have led to disenfranchisement, particularly during the expansive period (1970s-2008), as marked by declining or stagnating voter turnout and the embrace of so-called extremist politics in the aftermath of the collapse (2009-present). But the ideology is deep-rooted among the ruling class. So, even after the inevitable crash of ’08, both the European Central Bank and the Bank of England continued with neoliberalism by imposing austerity on the populations of Europe and the UK, respectively.

Against this backdrop, predatory transnational financial institutions are profiting from the chaos. The collapse of the construction giant Carillon is a case in point. The company was allowed to collapse and its decline profited several hedge funds, including some based in the US.

The societal consequences of neoliberalism are even more dire. The American middle class has declined since the 1970s, as individuals become either very poor or very rich. A study in Harvard Business Review noted that by the early-1980s, up to 49% of Americans thought that the quality of their products and services had declined over the last few years. Male and female suicide rates have continued to rise since the mid-1990s. And a recent study suggests that life expectancy has dropped across high-income countries

In the UK, Tory-driven austerity has created over a hundred thousand corpses over a ten-year period, according to the BMJ. Populations in more fragile countries have suffered even more. Between 1990-2005, Sub-Saharan countries whose governments adopted neoliberal IMF and African Development Bank structural adjustment loans experienced an additional 231 and 360 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, respectively. Latin American countries which experienced just a 1% rise in unemployment between 1981 and 2010 experienced “significant deteriorations in health outcomes,” according to another report in the BMJ, including a rise of 1.14 child deaths per 1,000 births. All of this translates into millions of deaths.

As I’ve documented elsewhere, the most vulnerable societies, namely indigenous communities dedicated to maintaining their traditional ways of life, are literally going extinct, as “civilization” encroaches.

CONCLUSION

If this decades-long model continues to be imposed across the world, especially in nations with huge populations like India and China, which are increasingly adopting neoliberal policies, today’s divisive politics and crumbling infrastructure will seem like a minor headache, particularly against the backdrop of diminishing resources and climate change. If the cultural shift against neoliberalism that we are seeing today, taking expression in everything from progressive social movements to workers’ strikes, can sustain and expand, we might just save ourselves and plant seeds for a more equitable future.

India’s Farmers Plan Mass March to the Nation’s Parliament as Agrarian Crisis Reaches “Civilization Proportions”

Colin Todhunter

With over 800 million people, rural India is arguably the most interesting and complex place on the planet. And yet it is also one of the most neglected in terms of both investment and media coverage. Veteran journalist and founder of the People’s Archive of Rural India P. Sainath argues that the majority of Indians do not count to the nation’s media, which renders up to 75 percent of the population ‘extinct’.

According to the Centre for Media Studies in Delhi, the five-year average of agriculture reporting in an Indian national daily newspaper equals 0.61 percent of news coverage, while village-level stories account for 0.17 percent. For much of the media, whether print or TV, celebrity, IT, movements on the stock exchange and the daily concerns of elite and urban middle class dwellers are what count.

Unlike the corporate media, the digital journalism platform the People’s Archive of Rural India has not only documented the complexity and beauty of rural India but also its hardships and the all too often heartbreaking personal stories that describe the impacts of government policies which have devastated lives, livelihoods and communities.

Rural India is plagued by farmer suicides, child malnourishment, growing unemployment, increased informalisation, indebtedness and an overall collapse of agriculture. Those involved in farming and related activities are being driven to migrate to cities to become cycle rickshaw drivers, domestic servants, daily wage labourers and suchlike.

Hundreds of thousands of farmers in India have taken their lives since 1997 and many more are experiencing economic distress or have left farming as a result of debt, a shift to (GM) cash crops and economic liberalisation. According to this report,  the number of cultivators in India declined from 166 million to 146 million between 2004 and 2011. Some 6,700 left farming each day. Between 2015 and 2022 the number of cultivators is likely to decrease to around 127 million.

The core problems affecting agriculture centre upon the running down of the sector for decades, the impact of deregulated markets and profiteering corporations (Monsanto and its Bt cotton seeds being just one case in point), increasing debt and lack of proper credit facilities, the withdrawal of government support, spiralling input costs and the effects of cheap, subsidised imports which depress farmers’ incomes.

The root causes of India’s agrarian crisis have been well documented, not least by policy analyst Devinder Sharma, who says:

“India is on fast track to bring agriculture under corporate control. Amending the existing laws on land acquisition, water resources, seed, fertilizer, pesticides and food processing, the government is in an overdrive to usher in contract farming and encourage organized retail. This is exactly as per the advice of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as well as the international financial institutes.”

From the geopolitical lending strategies of institutions like the World Bank to the opening up of food and agriculture to foreign corporations via WTO rules and the US-India Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture, there is an ongoing strategy to displace the existing system of smallholder cultivation and village-based food production with one suited to the interests of global seed, pesticide, food processing and retail corporations like Monsanto-Bayer, Cargill and Walmart.

In outlining the nature of the agrarian crisis, P. Sainath encapsulates the drive towards corporate farming in five words: “Predatory commercialization of the countryside.” He uses another five words for the outcome (referring to the mass migration from rural India): “The biggest displacement in history.”

By deliberately making agriculture economically non-viable for smallholder farmers (who form the backbone of food production in the country) the aim is to lay the groundwork to fully incorporate India into a fundamentally flawed and wholly exploitative global food regime that is undermining the country’s food security and food sovereignty as well as its health, soils, water supply and rural communities.

Rural India is in crisis. And with hundreds of millions destined to be forced to migrate to cities if current policies persist, the suffering will continue because the urban centres are not generating anything near the required levels of employment to soak up those whose livelihoods are being eradicated in the countryside. Jobless ‘growth’ haunts India, which is not helped by a global trend towards increasing automation and the impacts of artificial intelligence.

There are growing calls for liberating farmers from debt and guaranteeing prices/levels of profit above the costs of production. And it is not as though these actions are not possible. It is a question of priorities: the total farm debt is equal to the loans provided to just five large corporations in India.

Where have those loans gone? A good case has been put forward for arguing that the 2016 ‘demonetisation’ policy was in effect a bail-out for the banks and the corporates, which farmers and other ordinary folk paid the price for. It was a symptom of a country whose GDP growth has been based on a debt-inflated economy (the backbone of neoliberalism across the world). While farmers commit suicide and are heavily indebted, a handful of billionaires get access to cheap money with no pressure to pay it back and with little or no ‘added value’ for society as a whole.

The trigger point of the Mandasur farmer’s uprising in Central India in 2016, in which six farmers were shot dead was the demonetisation action. It meant that farmers faced a severe crash-crunch on top of all the other misery they faced. This was the last straw. That incident epitomised the fact that agriculture has been starved of investment while corporations have secured handouts. Farmers have been sacrificed on the altar of neoliberal dogma: food has been kept cheap, thereby boosting the disposable income and consumer spending of the urban middle classes, helping to provide the illusion of GDP ‘growth’ (corporate profit).

But both urban and rural Indians are increasingly coming together to help place farmers’ demands on the national political (and media) agenda. For instance, a volunteer group called Nation for Farmers, comprising people from all walks of life, is in the process of helping to mobilise citizens in support of the All India Kisan Sangharsh Co-ordination Committee’s (AIKSCC) march to parliament that is planned for the end of November.

The AIKSCC is an umbrella group of over 200 farmers’ organisations, which is calling for a march to Delhi by farmers, agricultural labourers and other distressed rural Indians from all over the country. The aim is to mobilise up to one million people. A similar march took place early in 2018 from Nashik to Mumbai. This time, however, the aim is to place the issues on the agenda of the nation’s parliament.

On behalf of the AIKSCC, two bills – The Farmers’ Freedom from Indebtedness Bill (2018) and The Farmers’ Right to Guaranteed Remunerative Minimum Support Prices for Agricultural Commodities Bill (2018) – have already been placed before parliament and are awaiting discussion. While the AIKSCC has focused on ensuring proper minimum support prices for farmers, there is now also the demand for a special 21-day joint session of parliament where the AIKSCC’s concerns can be heard.

To this end, the organisers of the march have written to the President of India Ram Nath Kovind. In their letter, they say that the agrarian crisis has now reached “civilizational proportions”.

They argue:

“… successive governments have witnessed the destruction of the countryside and the unchecked destitution of farmers and yet little has been done to alleviate their misery. They have witnessed the deepening misery of the dispossessed, including the death by suicide of well over 300,000 farmers these past 20 years.”

The letter makes clear to the president that the AIKSCC is fighting to save the livelihoods of tens of millions of rural Indians and has organised a ‘Kisan Mukti March’ to Delhi for three days from 28 to 30 November. The president is urged to pay heed to the demand for a special, 21-day joint session of parliament, dedicated entirely to discussing the agrarian crisis and related issues.

The letter states:

“We request your intervention as the President of the Republic of India and the Constitutional head to ensure that a crisis of this scale that renders 70 percent of Indian citizens vulnerable is addressed by a joint session of the Parliament of this country… Surely the precariousness of the lives of millions of citizens merits the undivided attention of Parliament and thereby its commitment to find enduring solutions.”

A special parliamentary session is called for because – after numerous protests, petitions, pleadings by distressed farmers, labourers, forest communities, fisher folk and the foot soldiers of India’s literacy and health care programmes – have failed to garner the attention of successive governments to the agrarian crisis.

The aim is that any special session on the crisis will be rooted in the testimonies of its victims, who need to be heard from both outside and inside the parliament. The session would enable them to address their fellow citizens and representatives from the floor of the parliament and explain the impact of devastating farming policies, the lack of rural credit and fair prices, and the unbearable violence of privatising water, healthcare and education.

We can only hope that the media and its well-paid journalists might be galvanised into action too!

HIV prevention: Bridging the gap between research and impact

Shobha Shukla

We are at an incredible moment in the history of the HIV/AIDS response, which reflected in the vibrancy of the HIV Research for Prevention (HIVR4P 2018) – the only global scientific conference focused on the fast-growing field of biomedical HIV prevention research. Today, the latest research in different areas of biomedical HIV prevention, including vaccines, rings, microbicides and other female-controlled forms of prevention, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and long-acting delivery systems, offer the greatest promise of significantly slowing the toll of the disease.

And yet we are far away from ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030, and are also falling short of achieving the 90-90-90 UNAIDS targets by 2020.

While there has been immense progress in the field of HIV science, we are yet to see its public health impact on the ground.

“It is not just about R&D but about R&D and D – research and development, and delivery. If you take anyone of those three letters out, we fail. Each of them is equally important. Undoubtedly, it is difficult to successfully complete the clinical study for a new product, but delivering that product to the people for whom it was designed, is harder. Whether it is the ARVs, PrEP, vaginal rings, multipurpose prevention tools like the female condom, we see a huge gap in delivery”, said Mitchell Warren, Executive Director of AVAC, in an exclusive interview given to CNS onsite at the HIVR4P Conference being held in Madrid.

Every new infection of HIV could have been averted

Till to date, more than 35 million people have died of HIV-related illnesses, and another 37 million people are living with HIV worldwide. In 2017 alone there were 1.8 million new infections (87,580 in India) and 940,000 deaths (69,110 in India). Governments have promised to end AIDS by 2030.

But the new cases graph is not dipping towards that steeply enough. Why are we failing to prevent new HIV transmissions?

According to Mitchell, “We are failing for a number of reasons. One is our failure to translate science into programmes fast enough. The second is the fundamental failure of the system in which people who need prevention and treatment most are least likely to be able to access it. To bridge this wide access gap we need to do two things simultaneously. We clearly need additional prevention options. But more importantly, we need to simultaneously focus on our (delivery) systems. Countries need to build prevention programmes that respect people’s choices and needs and are capable to deliver any new prevention method. If there is anything we need to do differently, it is that we need to listen to the people who are in need of the product(s). We have to act upon what people want, when they want and how they want it. We have to listen to them in their diversity and respect their different choices. One size will never fit all. A successful HIV/AIDS response is the one that takes in all the imperfect things we have and bundles them together in the most perfect programme.”

Promoting female-initiated prevention methods

Women seem to be shortchanged as far as their own sexual and reproductive health is concerned. This is true not just in HIV prevention but for many other public health issues as well. Mitchell laments that even though sexuality is a part of human nature, people are scared to talk about sex. They are not comfortable about letting women make choices about what they want to put in their vagina.

“We want young women to have choices. But more often than not (we know this from reproductive health programmes) those choices are made by governments, by health providers and by their male partners— whether they can use an injectable contraceptive or the pill or an implant. Despite having so many wonderful family planning options, women cannot choose the one they want. Many a times their public health programme offers them just one or two choices, because those who dictate their choices are often men. So, patriarchy, coupled with moralising conservative governments, creates a complex eco system. But we need to inform people better, rather than moralise. We need to talk about the female initiated prevention options and let the product user decide for herself. In fact, all adults, irrespective of their age or sex, should be free to make informed choices about which product to use for the benefit of their own health and not be influenced by their partners, peers, parents or by the moralising politicians, health providers and clinicians”, he says.

New treatment and prevention options should not make us complacent

People know that HIV is no longer a death sentence, that they can get a pill everyday and live healthy and long, and not infect others once they have undetectable viral load. This is an empowering and important message. But if not communicated properly, it could have unintended consequences of making individuals and governments complacent that getting HIV is no big deal. Let us not forget that HIV still is a big deal. It is an epidemic. Even though we can treat it, but the more people are infected, the harder it would be to treat them all from a financial perspective. We have to stop new infections. So we got to find the right balance to not scare people, not stigmatise PLHIV, but at the same time make them realise that being HIV free is possible and is important.

Mitchell’s sane advice is to be laser sharp in our focus – not only around new technologies, but also upon the programmes and infrastructure that can deliver a whole range of products. We need to do both— technology development and building systems that address the fundamental structural barriers—in a comprehensive, integrated and sustained way. If we do one and not the other, we cannot end the AIDS epidemic. We have to create a demand for all the available effective prevention tools and make all of them available to people so that they can choose what suits their needs best. But all this has to be in an ecosystem where one can talk about sex and about prevention of HIV in a human rights based comfortable way.

Land Reforms as political agenda for 2019

Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Land Reforms are a forgotten subjects for the political parties and the policy makers. It is ironical that the ‘biggest’ democracy of the world does not give the issue of land reforms a priority. Even the political parties have paid merely lip services. The social movements that we have seen during the past few years were actually against the transnational corporations land grabbing but remained silent on the grabbing by the caste elite in rural areas which grew on the encroachment of the land belonging to the marginalised sections of society especially the Dalits and Adivasis.

Land Reform remain quintessential towards democratisation of society. Worldover, it is attributed that land reforms are the best guarantee towards alleviation of poverty. In fact, the farmers organisations and those working against hunger and poverty as well as the UN are advocating the issue of family farming as a measure for growth of organic food and eradication of poverty and counter to growing corporatisation of the agriculture.

India saw an obscene growth of Income of an individual to the extent of over Rs 300 crore per day. The same family owns various Indian banks over Rs 40,000 crores as debt. By December end of 2017, most of the NPAs in India was over Rs 8,40,958 crore rupees as per a report published in the Times of India.

As per reports, India have over 14 crore landless families who are engaged in sharecropping process without any guarantee or social security. They are not even called farmers. 22.5% farmers in India are below the poverty line. Over 26.3 crore families are depended on farming in India as per 2011 census as quoted by various papers.

The problem is why has land reform not become a major political agenda ? Why even the parties claiming for social justice have not been able to raise this issue when we all want to eliminate poverty. Poverty in India is caste based. Frankly speaking, who are the landless people. Let us give the government figures. More than 79% of the Adivasi household are considered to be ‘deprived’ as per the economic Census 2011 which is 73% of the Dalits. The landlessness among the Dalits and Adivasis is very high. If we see the hunger deaths in India and look at their land status, we will find that a majority of those dying of hunger are a direct result of their landlessness. Again, who are the people dying of hunger ? They are the most marginalised Dalits or Adivasis. Is caste based discrimination not responsible for failed land reforms ? If that is the case then to abolish the caste system we must demolish and dismantle the sources of land accumulations in our rural hinterland. This will pave the way for social democracy which Baba Saheb Ambedkar wanted for the success of our political democracy.

Over the year, we only indicate the failure of Public Distribution System and other entitlement based scheme responsible for the hunger deaths but having known and work closely with many of these absolutely landless communities, I can vouch that it is a complete failure of the movements which do not highlight the issue of the landlessness as a major region for the hunger deaths as well as violence on the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

While the governments have failed in honoring the promises made in our constituent assembly, the growing accumulation of land by the powerful cronies who are looting the nation, is a matter of grave concern. When there is a Below the Poverty Line, there should be an ‘Ameeri Rekha’ as actually demanded by former prime minister V P Singh long back. How will we eradicate poverty if we have no control over how much land one can own, how much money one can make and so on. The growing inequalities are not a result of merely poor not working or are lazy and some rich people, highly hard working or great managers. All the big money is a result of the loot of the poor people. If we do not think of a ceiling on high earning and land, we will fail. It is in this regard, we would demand that land ceiling laws must be implemented and no organisations or companies can be allowed to capture public land as per its whims and fancies. It is an open loot. You can not give these companies a licence to loot our natural resources apart from looting our public money from the banks.

For making space for the poor and democratisation of society, all the religious institutions must be taxed and the vast land occupied by them should be leased out to the poor. All the big gaushalas must also fall under the land ceiling act. That apart, government must form a commission and give it a time bound responsibility to find out as what happened to the Bhudan land and whether it really went to the rural poor. All the Bhudan land must be distributed to the Dalits and Adivasis. Government must place a moratorium on land grab in the name of ‘development’. In fact, the term ‘public good’ must be clarified. Can land given to Ambanis and Adanis be ‘described’ as ‘Public Good’ but these days land given for corporate hospitals which look more as five star hotels and where even the middle class families would not be able to enter for their treatment despite their ‘insurance’, are being termed as ‘public good’.

India has not developed a mechanism for fair implementation of things. Our bureaucracy and judiciary survives on papers. If you are alive on papers that means you are alive otherwise you are dead. So, government’s land redistribution data must be verified at the ground level. We have seen huge number of people particularly in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and other regions having the land entitlements but without possession of their land. It is important for the authorities to find out why have people not got land entitlement.

Land is the basic as well as the biggest source of Savarna power which make them dominant and manipulate with the democratic rights of the rural poor particularly belonging to the Dalit-Adivasi communities. A huge number of the OBCs who we call MBCs as per the Mandal Commission Reports too are landless but the Mandalite forces have rarely spoken regarding that. It is disgraceful because the top leadership protect their own interests and feel that any talk of land reform would go against their community interests. It is the same people who talk of Bahujan unity. How can there be Bahujan unity without talk of distribution of land and equal sharing of power particularly at our villages. Are the big farmers and farming communities ready to embrace the landless who are predominantly Dalits ?

It is time for the political parties and policy makers to think about these issues. I know this is not a ‘lucrative’ subject and many feel that these are the issues raised by the ‘lal jholawallas’ of JNU which itself is wrong because it is failure of not only ‘red’ but the ‘blue’ forces too. How can we expect the brahmanical capitalist parties to raise these issues which would democratise the society and help end the feudal caste order? It is not merely the parties, many of the movements too are working to maintain status quo as they know once the ‘poor’ who are mainly Dalits and Adivasis know their right, they will snatch it and break the nefarious caste order.

Caste system is not merely a social structure. It’s culture developed with complete disempowerment of the Dalits through their economic deprivation. The power in our villages flows through the might of the land. It is the landed people who manipulate our democracy, our social structure and define our culture. While there is growing assertion of the marginalised yet parties cant take them for granted for ever. They are also getting frustrated because their issues are rarely raised. It is time, we dedicate ourselves to land and agrarian reforms and democratise our society and break the bone of feudal caste system which only an equitable distribution of our resources could do.

Let us see how many of our political parties and political analysts put this on the national agenda for the 2019 elections.

Distress Signals from Colombo

 K M Seethi

Sri Lanka has landed itself in an unexpected, unprecedented crisis with the President Maithripala Sirisena taking decisions having tricky political implications. Citing differences over a host of issues, Sirisena cast out Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, dismissed the cabinet and suspended Parliament.  President’s extraordinary move to suspend Parliament and appoint Mahinda Rajapaksa as new Prime Minister raised many eyebrows in Sri Lanka as well as in other countries in the region. While Wickremesinghe refused to step down, calling the action of President ‘anti-constitutional,’ the Speaker of Parliament, Karu Jayasuriya, warned that unless order is established, Sri Lanka would witness ‘bloodbath’ with the unfolding political crisis  assuming a dangerous dimension. What surprised many was the installation of Rajapaksa who ruled Sri Lanka for a decade since 2005, but eventually earned widespread criticism and global condemnation for human rights violations. Curiously, he issued a statement pledging that he “eschew the politics of hate and set up an interim government that will protect the human rights of all citizens that will protect the independence of the judiciary and establish law and order.”

There were reports of protests in the Island which even took a life in police firing. Reports also indicated that Sri Lankan state media has been captured by Rajapaksa’s followers. They are also apparently blocking access to ministers who belonged to Wickremesinghe’s party.   Meanwhile the differing postures of Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa have created a feeling that there would be contesting claims of majority in Parliament which would enable one or the other to run the Government. Even as uncertainty continued, Rajapaksa announced that he would appoint a new cabinet without any delay.

In an address to the nation on 29 October, Ranil Wickremesinghe said that in January 2015 all the political parties and the forces got together and made Sirisena the President of the country. He said he was appointed as the Prime Minister with the confidence of the majority of the Parliament. While functioning as a National Government, President Sirisena resorted to measures that violated the provisions of the Sri Lankan Constitution. He said that the powers of the President are curtailed under the 19th amendment of the Constitution. As per Article 42(4) of the Constitution, the member of the Parliament who commands the confidence of the house should be appointed as the Prime Minister. However, in his address to the nation, President Sirisena said that “in view of the political crisis, economic crisis and assassination plot against him the only option left to him was nominating former President Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister.” But, Article 42(4) of the Constitution is clear that only a Member of the Parliament who commands the confidence of the house could be appointed as Prime Minister. Accordingly, President’s action declaring that he nominated the Prime Minister (who has no command of the majority of the House) is “an illegal, anti-constitutional and opportunistic act.”

President Sirisena, on the other hand, argued that there were acute differences with Wickremesinghe for more than three years. He even cited Wickremesinghe’s role in the controversial Central Bank bond sale, which was alleged to have resulted in a huge loss. He accused a cabinet minister of having a hand in a plot to assassinate him. Hence, under these circumstances, the ‘only alternative’ was to bring Rajapaksa back as prime minister, according to the President.

Interestingly, Sirisena and Wickremesinghe were together to pull down Rajapaksa in the 2015 Presidential election. But they could not pull together over many issues—from the mismanagement of the economy to relations with China and India. It may be noted that the Sri Lankan economy has already been facing a crisis with the declining value of its currency, the rise in oil prices and the burgeoning debt which Colombo owes to China. It was also reported that Sirisena and Wickremesinghe had serious differences over the government’s plan to lease a port to India.

The Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and his United National Party (UNP) came to power promising accountability for alleged atrocities committed in Sri Lanka’s civil war and during Rajapaksa’s a decade-old rule. Curiously, Sirisena himself was a minister under the Rajapaksa Government before turning against him.  Rajapaksa continued to make a claim that he brought the country back to order and stability with the ending of the civil war in 2009. But he had to encounter world-wide criticism for the means by which he registered victory – as many as 40,000 Tamil civilians were reported to have been killed by the government forces in the last stage of the fighting. In less than three decades, nearly 100,000 people were killed with both sides alleged to have perpetrated war crimes. However, Rajapaksa was reported to be responsible for mass killings and widespread displacement of innocent Tamil civilians. International human rights agencies even sought to book him for war crimes against civilians.

Though India has high stakes in Sri Lanka, it faces multiple challenges. For example, China has put in high financial investment in the Island, especially in infrastructure projects. Moreover, China has been considered as a strong supporter of Rajapaksa. Beijing has already congratulated him on his coming back as prime minister.  On the other side, those who backed Wickremesinghe (who seek to have strategic ties with India) saw a Chinese role in his attempted replacement – albeit dismissed by Beijing.

India has obvious concerns in Rajapaksa’s return. It was he who facilitated Sri Lanka’s main port to Chinese naval submarines which caused irritants in New Delhi. Naturally, Rajapaksa’s another innings would generate further concerns in India that China would hold sway over the Island that lies along the strategic circuits.  South Block officials reported to have indicated that they were willing to do business with the new leader so long as his appointment was in line with the country’s constitution. A spokesman of the MEA said that “India will continue to extend our developmental assistance to the people of Sri Lanka.” However, the Tamil political parties in India view the situation with considerable anxiety. There are even fears that if the uncertainty continues, it would trigger civil war leading to further displacement, casualties and cross border migration. Eventually, the Tamil population will have to bear the burden of any political stability in the Island, for several historical reasons.

Sri Lanka entered an era of political instability when depression has already set in the country.  Various studies say that Sri Lanka’s national output had declined from its peak of 9.1 per cent in 2012 and reached at 3.1 per cent by 2017. During the first quarter of 2018, the country’s national output was at a level as low as 2 per cent. Annual reports of the Central Bank recorded this trend of the economy and the challenging role of the government in maneuvering the trends.  These reports confirmed that the national output has been drastically declining and the economy as a whole performing very badly. Whoever is emerging ‘victorious’ in the current political bargain has a daunting task to put the economy back on track, besides facilitating the safe return of  thousands of internally displaced Tamils living in several camps for almost a decade.