13 Nov 2018

Brazil’s Bolsonaro prepares most right-wing government since end of US-backed dictatorship

Miguel Andrade

The first two weeks since the election of the far-right populist Jair Bolsonaro as Brazil’s president are further confirming that the next administration will be the most right-wing since the return to civilian rule after a 21-year US-backed military dictatorship in 1985.
Bolsonaro defeated Workers Party (PT) candidate Fernando Haddad in what became a referendum on the catastrophic social conditions facing Brazilians after 16 years of rule by the PT and its former allies. He built his campaign mainly around anti-corruption demagoguery and an economic nationalist platform—on many issues emulating Donald Trump’s “America First” rhetoric. This was mainly directed at Chinese investments in Brazil and what he called “handouts” to “ideological allies” of the former PT government, i.e., Brazilian foreign investments in African and other Latin American nations.
Bolsonaro blamed the worst economic crisis in Brazilian history and a stagnant 12 percent unemployment rate on the massive corruption uncovered by the so-called “Lava-Jato” (Carwash) investigation into a bribes and kickbacks operation centered on a Brazilian economic pillar, the state-run oil giant Petrobras, and—in Trump-like fashion—supposedly uneven economic relations with China, Africa and the rest of Latin America.
However, as has been the case with Trump and other right-wing populists succeeding Latin America’s “pink tide” governments, the real content of Bolsonaro’s economic nationalism is the destruction of workers’ living standards. This includes the rolling back of environmental regulations, which Bolsonaro repeatedly blamed for an “industry of environmental fines” against capitalist industry and agribusiness. All of his policies are being justified in the name of “increasing national competitiveness,” joining the race to the bottom in the destruction of working class rights that has been vastly accelerated by world governments since the 2008 crisis.
The first warnings of the situation facing the working class came with the announcement that Bolsonaro’s senior economic adviser, Paulo Guedes, would not only head Brazil’s traditional Finance Ministry, but would be given a “super-ministry” for the economy, incorporating the functions of the Planning Ministry, the Industry and Foreign Trade Ministry and the Labor Ministry. This massive reorganization is to take place in order to “phase in” the implementation of a sweeping deregulation program including massive privatizations, an increase of capital concentration and, most importantly, the slashing of workplace regulations, wages and pensions.
Guedes has already stated that the first issue on the government’s agenda—to be negotiated with Congress even before Bolsonaro takes office on January 1—is to approve a pension reform. The reform is set to raise the minimum age for retirement to 65 and create an individual capitalization scheme. This would end Brazil’s public pension system, enshrined in the 1988 Constitution, which is the sole guarantee of old-age income for millions of workers who work most of their lives in the informal sector, the situation of fully 40 percent of the workforce. Furthermore, the northern regions of Brazil, where 40 percent of the population is concentrated, have a male life expectancy of barely 68.7 years.
Guedes, who is considered a radical “Chicago Boy,” took a full professorship at the government-controlled Chile University under Augusto Pinochet’s fascist-military rule before heading back to Brazil to work in private investment funds for almost 40 years. He is reportedly using Pinochet’s pension system as a model for the proposed “reform.”
The extinction of the Labor ministry places Guedes’ control over the ministry’s “treasury,” the Employment Policies Department, which controls most of the funds paid into by employers and which are used for paying unemployment insurance and benefits provided for by Brazil’s 1943 Labor Code.
The Economy “super-ministry” is thus expected to facilitate Bolsonaro’s plans for a full-blown attack on labor rights, vaguely described during the campaign as the creation of a “green-and-yellow” work permit—Brazil’s work permits have a blue cover, and green and yellow are considered the national colors.
The so-called “green and yellow” work permit was only mentioned in the campaign as a “patriotic” work permit, reminiscent of Brazil’s history of corporatist trade unionism and in line with Bolsonaro’s declarations that in order to fix the economy it was necessary “to end all activisms.” The true content of the policies it embodies—although it is unclear whether a new work permit will actually be proposed—was hidden beneath the anti-corruption and anti-Chinese demagoguery.
Bolsonaro’s plan would also create the possibility of individual work contracts, through which workers would “voluntarily” choose to work outside of conditions covered by the Labor Code or collective-bargaining agreements, regulated only by the Labor articles in the Constitution—which covers the eight-hour day, but not overtime, for example, nor the bulk of workplace regulations specific to each sector.
For its part, the Labor Code—covering only 60 percent of the workforce—was already largely weakened by the 2017 labor “reform” laws, approved by Congress, allowing for generalized contract work, part-time contracts, workday extension to up to 12 hours and, most significantly, allowing unions to negotiate away provisions of the Code, the measure which was most hated by workers mistrustful of the treacherous unions controlled by the Workers Party, the Communist Party, and the pseudo-lefts. The “reforms” passed with no resistance from unions, amply confirming workers’ fears.
Significantly, even with the main trade unions canceling at least three proposed general strikes to protest proposed pension reform, the measure is considered so toxic that it has been discussed for almost three years without even the most right-wing Congress since 1985—elected in 2014, and now surpassed by the incoming one elected on October 7—able to vote for it for fear of voter punishment. The reform was first proposed by the Workers Party to fend off the 2016 impeachment by appealing not to workers, but to the Congressional right wing. Until today, it has failed to make it to the floor of Congress.
With most of the cabinet so far unknown, Bolsonaro has been quick to announce his nomination for Justice Minister: district court justice Sergio Moro, who first sentenced former PT president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to jail on money-laundering charges. The sentence was later upheld by Brazil’s 4th Appeals Circuit court, resulting in Lula being arrested and barred from the elections under the so-called “Clean Slate” (Ficha Limpa) law Lula himself had signed in 2010, suspending political rights for those with corruption sentences upheld by an appellate court.
Beyond a sop to Bolsonaro’s far-right base, Moro’s nomination signals the aim of vastly expanding state powers.
The PT’s sprawling corruption schemes and hated austerity policies gave the right wing plenty of ammunition for pushing the whole political system far to the right. The Lava Jato prosecutorial team has shown systematic contempt for democratic rights, most notably by wiretapping lawyers and treating them as “collaborators.”
As soon as he accepted Bolsonaro’s nomination, Moro declared to the press that he considered the fascistic former army captain a “moderate,” and that he agreed with a whole series of his far-right proposals, including reducing the age of criminal responsibility to 16, exempting police and army officers from charges if they murder suspects, and bringing criminal charges against demonstrators, especially the PT-linked Landless and Homeless Workers movements.
These groups, successors to the Land Reform movements from the pre-1964 military coup period, work strictly legally under the provisions of the Brazilian Constitution, covering the conditions for urban or rural properties to be declared of public interest in case it is proven they are being used in speculative operations.
Members of these groups have been the target of numerous massacres by mercenaries working for land speculators. Bolsonaro’s program promised to scrap “any questioning of the right to private property,” essentially pushing these movements and tens of thousands of unorganized squatters into illegality.
Bolsonaro’s first two weeks as president-elect have already succeeded in pushing the PT to the right, with the defeated party casting itself as the “respectable” trustee of the interests of the Brazilian state and focusing its opposition almost exclusively on Bolsonaro’s economic and foreign policy “blunders.”
The language of the PT’s mouthpiece, Brasil247, is indistinguishable from that of Brazil’s traditional right wing, consisting largely of denunciations of the “unpreparedness” of Bolsonaro’s team and expressions of concern over the “national interest.”
The Workers Party is unable and unwilling to challenge Bolsonaro on his extreme neoliberal policies, which it largely shares, and his lies on the campaign trail.
The PT was deserted by the working class precisely after it nominated the “Chicago Boy” Joaquim Levy as finance minister on the first day of Rousseff’s second term. Levy is now set to join Bolsonaro’s cabinet as head of the National Development Bank (BNDES).
For decades, the PT’s affiliated CUT trade union federation has defended corporatist union-management agreements, imposing upon angry workers exactly the policy advocated by Bolsonaro when he says: “you can have every right and no jobs, or less rights and jobs.”
The PT’s opposition has thus been concentrated on finding common ground with what it expects will be dissenting business circles, first and foremost industrial and agribusiness monopolies. After attempting to red-bait Bolsonaro over Venezuela in the second round of the elections, the PT-oriented circles are rallying against Bolsonaro’s “ideological” environmental and foreign policies, which they warn will hurt Brazil’s “geopolitical position.”
To Bolsonaro’s nomination of a “beef caucus” hardliner as agriculture minister and his threats to shut down the Environmental Ministry, with his far-right allies accusing “international NGOs” of “hidden interests,” Brasil247 has counterposed the “warnings of the European Union” that they will not “reopen negotiations” on issues “affecting the quality of our agricultural imports.” Under the suggestion of the agribusiness moguls themselves, Bolsonaro has decided to keep the Environmental Ministry.
In reaction to Bolsonaro’s stated intention to transfer the Brazilian embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and to scrap commercial agreements with Argentina—both with the potential of hurting Brazilian exports (the first announcement provoked the canceling of the Brazilian chancellor’s visit to Egypt)— Brasil247columnist Jeferson Miola wrote that the Industry Federation (CNI) should “react to the ultraliberal policies which threaten the very existence of industrialists as a class.”
After the commander of the Brazilian Army, Gen. Eduardo Villas Bôas, admitted in an interview with Folha de São Paulo on Sunday that he had threatened the Supreme Court on the eve of its decision regarding Lula’s habeas corpus plea on April 4 that freeing the former PT president could lead to “a breakdown of the hierarchy” within the armed forces—i.e., a potential coup—Rousseff’s former spokeswoman Helena Chagas praised the general for distancing from Bolsonaro. She wrote: “Villas Bôas’ words should be widely reproduced as reassuring” of the Army’s restraint, which “displeased Bolsonaro’s allies.”
There is nothing progressive in the attempt to present institutions tearing themselves apart, like the European Union or a coup-monger like Villas Bôas, as pillars of the “reasonable” democratic order, or disagreeing with Bolsonaro on which side to take in the trade war initiated by Trump. The PT is exposing that it will not, as many of its pseudo-left apologists say, react to its electoral defeat by “turning left.” On the contrary, it is shifting further to the right. An irreconcilable break with the PT and those who cover up for it is the first task of Brazilian workers.

Polish government officials march with the far-right

Clara Weiss

On Sunday, officials of the Law and Justice (PiS) government made a point of marching alongside neo-fascist forces to celebrate Poland’s 100th Independence Day. The “March of Independence” in Warsaw attracted some 250,000 people, according to the Polish police. This would make it the largest single march in the history of Warsaw, a city of 2 million people. Smaller demonstrations took place throughout the country.
On November 11, 1918, Poland was officially granted independence from what was then Soviet Russia, Germany and Austria. This followed some 123 years during which the country, formerly the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, was partitioned between the Habsburg Empire, the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia. In the ensuing 21 years, up to the Nazi invasion in 1939, Poland became a major bulwark of French and US imperialism in their struggle against the Soviet Union.
For many years, the anniversary of this date has been exploited by Polish nationalists and fascists. However, Independence Day has also been claimed by other forces across the political spectrum, including the liberal opposition, which has long joined in the glorification of the authoritarian Piłsudski regime that ruled Poland for much of the inter-war period.
Last year, November 11 was the occasion for an internationally organized gathering of far-right forces. With about 60,000 participants, including white supremacists from the US and Europe, it was the largest far-right march in post-World War II European history. Banners at the rally, which sent shockwaves throughout the world, included: “White Europe of Brotherly Peoples,” “Europe Will Be White or Depopulated,” “Pure Poland, White Poland!” “Death to the Enemies of the Fatherland,” “Pray for Islamic Holocaust,” and “Refugees, Get Out!”
The announcement that government officials, including President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, would join the march with far-right nationalist groups such as the National Radical Camp (ONR), came only on Friday. The ONR is an openly neo-fascist organization. It is named after the organization in the inter-war period most closely linked to the fascist terror against both workers’ organizations and Jews that swept Poland in the 1930s. Before the Nazis invaded Poland, the ONR distinguished itself by its fascination with and admiration for Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, particularly its anti-Jewish policies, which inspired the ONR’s own political program.
Another co-organizer was the far-right All-Polish Youth (Młodzież Wszechpolska), also named after an inter-war youth and student organization of the same name, which was responsible for anti-Semitic assaults and murders at universities. On its Twitter feed, the organization posted a picture of its procession with the comment “Life and Death for the Nation.”
Government officials had reportedly tried to form a coalition of organizers that would have included the government, the liberal opposition and the far-right. However, that failed and the liberal opposition parties ended up boycotting the march. An attempt last week by Warsaw’s outgoing mayor, from the opposition party Civic Platform (PO), to ban the march was thwarted by a court decision.
The participation of Duda and Morawiecki in the march was also meant to underscore the fact that they were staying away from the celebrations of the end of World War I in Paris that same day.
Military police were deployed to protect the marchers, and Polish soldiers stood side-by side with members of the ONR and the Italian neo-Nazi party Forza Nueva. At the beginning of the march, Duda addressed the far-right crowd, saying: “I want us to walk under our white-and-red banners together [the colors of Poland’s national flag] and with an air of joy. To give honour to those who fought for Poland and to be glad that it is free, sovereign and independent.” He then led the crowd in chants of “Glory and praise to the heroes” and sang the national anthem with them.
Most participants carried Polish flags, but some also displayed the falanga, a symbol of European fascism in the 1930s and the main symbol of the ONR, as well as white supremacist symbols such as the Celtic cross. Racist chants were reported. At one point, an EU flag was reportedly burned by rightists shouting, “Down with the European Union.”
Spokespeople for Duda and the government tried to downplay the involvement of far-right forces in the march, but it is clear that the open alignment of the government with the far-right was a calculated political move. It was encouraged by the general lurch to the right by the entire ruling class in Europe, and is aimed at intimidating workers and youth in Poland and Europe who are opposed to the policies of war and austerity of the bourgeoisie.
A few days before the PiS announced that it would march with the far-right, French President Emmanuel Macron hailed the fascist dictator of the collaborationist Vichy regime during the Second World War, Philippe Pétain, as a “great soldier.” In neighbouring Germany, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) enjoys close ties with leading circles in the state. It has been promoted by the entire media and political establishment and placed in the official position of leading opposition party in parliament. In the US, the Trump administration has systematically encouraged far-right racism and anti-Semitism, resulting in several violent attacks before the midterm elections, including the massacre of 11 people at a Pittsburgh Synagogue.
In Poland, the PiS has for years encouraged the far-right and integrated it into the state apparatus. A huge paramilitary militia has been created under the supervision of Defence Minister Antoni Macierewicz, himself a notorious anti-Semite. This force relies largely on the organized far-right.
The government has promoted anti-Semitism and racism toward refugees for years. Earlier this year, it passed a law censoring speech on the Holocaust that mentions the involvement of Polish nationalists in the murder of the Jews. Most recently, a leaked tape brought to light anti-Semitic remarks by Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki dating from 2014.
Beyond a significant overlap of political views, the PiS government relies on the far-right for its preparations for war against Russia and the suppression of the working class at home. With the support of the Trump administration, it is pursuing a revival of the “Intermarium” strategy of the inter-war period, in which the Piłsudski regime, with the support of sections of the French and British elites, sought to undermine both the Soviet Union and Germany through an alliance of right-wing nationalist regimes in Eastern and Central Europe. Similarly today, with the support of US imperialism, the PiS government seeks to build an alliance of far-right regimes throughout Eastern Europe to counter the threat of revolution, undermine Germany’s position in Europe and prepare for war against Russia.
There is widespread hatred of fascism among workers and youth throughout Europe, including in Poland, which was turned into a center of fascist terror and destruction under the Nazi occupation during World War II. Poland was the geographical center of the genocide of 6 million European Jews, over 3 million of whom had lived in Poland before the war.
Within the framework of the current political system, however, this opposition to war and fascism finds virtually no expression. In order to fight the preparations for war and civil war by the bourgeoisie and its promotion of the far-right, workers and youth need to turn to an internationalist and socialist program.

Germany’s grand coalition closes ranks and steps up right-wing offensive

Johannes Stern 

Germany’s grand coalition government, consisting of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Christian Social Union (CSU) and Social Democratic Party (SPD), has responded to major defeats in recent state elections and growing opposition by stepping up its right-wing policies.
Just before the official meetings to commemorate November 9, the centenary of the November Revolution and the 80th anniversary of Germany’s night of pogroms (Reichspogromnacht), it was announced Friday morning that the country’s military budget will increase next year in excess of what was originally planned. In 2018, this budget totaled €38.5 billion. It is now due to exceed €43 billion in 2019. This corresponds to an increase of 12 percent and is €323 million more than the previous planned total.
In a nearly 16-hour “clean-up” session, the cabinet made further changes to the draft budget of Social Democratic Finance Minister Olaf Scholz, paving the way for rapid military rearmament. According to media reports, so-called “commitment appropriations” were adopted permitting arms projects costing billions.
The largest single item is the purchase of a heavy transport helicopter, involving an investment of about €5.6 billion by 2031. This was reported by the military blog Augen geradeaus! An additional purchase is a new multi-purpose combat ship (type MKS180), estimated to cost about €5 billion by 2028.
According to the blog, “One of the most expensive projects,” the Tactical Air Defence System (TLVS), was “initially planned in the new budget in a merely symbolic manner.” However, “the plan provides that, if necessary, funds from other budget items can be shifted here.”
Already in its coalition agreement, the conservative “union parties” (CDU and CSU) and the SPD had pledged to increase defence spending to 2 percent of gross domestic product by 2024, resulting in an annual military budget of more than €75 billion. They are now working feverishly to achieve this goal.
“There is little public knowledge of the billions that will flow in future to the federal armed forces for procurement of the Eurofighter combat aircraft,” Augen geradeaus! notes. Some €2.5 billion in commitment appropriations have been earmarked to replace older fighter jets with new Eurofighters, which will be “upgraded for further tasks, such as combat against ground targets.” Additional appropriations target the acquiring of new submarines and some 140,000 sets of modern combat clothing.
The centenary of the November Revolution and the 80th anniversary of Germany’s night of pogroms was marked by speeches by a number of leading government politicians, whose unctuous words about “democracy” and the “lessons of history” cannot hide the fact that German imperialism is once again preparing for war, including against its allies of the post-World War II period.
Following the US midterm elections, Foreign State Minister Nils Annen (SPD), demanded a strong German-European foreign and defence policy in response to Donald Trump. “We have to do our homework in Europe and keep together, especially in the case of a trade dispute,” he said. “On those issues where we disagree, the Americans have a strong position. We can answer ‘America first’ only with ‘Europe United.’ ”
The aggressive foreign policy of the grand coalition goes hand in hand with intensified attacks on social and democratic rights. The pensions package passed by the German government on Thursday serves only to reinforce the meagre levels of pensions, which are already leading to rampant poverty in old age, while preparing for further attacks on state pensions in the future. On the same day, the government, with the support of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), tightened up the country’s asylum law and imposed further restrictions on refugees.
Following the country’s bitter historical experiences, the overwhelming majority of the population rejects war and fascism, but the ruling class is intent on reviving its anti-democratic, militaristic and authoritarian traditions.
This became clear again on November 8 in discussions in the Bundestag about the UN Global Migration Pact. The leader of the AfD, Alexander Gauland, used the occasion to rant against the “left-wing dreamers and globalist elites” who “secretly wanted to transform our country from a nation-state into a settlement area.”
Instead of drawing the obvious parallels between Gauland’s ravings and the policies of Hitler and Goebbels, the other parties in parliament accused him of acting “against the national interest of Germany.”
The UN migration pact is a measure to reduce the number of refugees in Germany, they stressed. “Is there anyone with a clear mind who seriously believes that fewer migrants come to Germany when they have no access to basic services in other countries?” declared the union party politician Stephan Harbarth, to applause from the CDU, the CSU, the SPD, the neo-liberal FDP, the Greens and the Left Party. “Not at all,” he continued. “Anyone who supports the Global Migration Pact creates the conditions that will reduce incentives to come to Germany.”
The SPD plays a key role in promoting the government’s right-wing and anti-working class policies against growing opposition. Although the SPD has slumped in the polls and is now ranked at just 13 percent, it is determined to continue its deeply unpopular alliance with the union parties.
“We have linked arms and rely on the power of cohesion,” declared SPD leader Andrea Nahles, following a meeting of the party executive committee last week. There will be no special party meeting to discuss remaining in the grand coalition. Any such proposition had been ruled out by a large majority of the executive, Nahles said.
There are two main political considerations behind the SPD’s resolve to maintain the grand coalition. On the one hand, it is determined to push ahead with the revival of German militarism and re-establish Germany as a major military power following the defeats suffered in two world wars. Germany was “too big and too strong economically for us to comment on world politics from the sidelines,” the then-foreign minister and current federal president Frank-Walter Steinmeier (SPD) declared at the Munich Security Conference 2014.
Second, the SPD fears a mobilisation of the working class against its reactionary policies and is preparing to forcefully suppress all opposition. Significantly, during the commemoration in the German parliament of the November Revolution, Steinmeier justified the counterrevolutionary alliance between social democratic leaders and the German army (Reichswehr), which drowned the revolutionary uprising of the workers in blood.
SPD Chairman Friedrich Ebert, who took over as head of the German government on November 9, 1918, “initially wanted to prevent chaos, civil war and military intervention by the victorious powers; he was driven by the desire to give people work and bread,” Steinmeier claimed.
He admittedly had “no justification whatsoever for unleashing the brutality of the nationalist Freikorps.” At the same time, it was true, however, that “the people’s representatives around Friedrich Ebert had to defend themselves against the attempt of the radical left to prevent the elections to the National Assembly by force.”
All of the parliamentary parties—from the right-wing extremist AfD to the governing parties to the Left Party and the Greens—applauded Steinmeier. This underscores that the entire ruling class is closing ranks to press hard with its right-wing policies, while preparing for future revolutionary class struggles.
The Left Party and the Greens are vying with one another to establish closer cooperation with the grand coalition, and both demand a more aggressive government policy. When the Bundestag debated “equal living conditions” last Thursday, Left Party leader Dietmar Bartsch begged to be involved in the future work of the government. “At least those who govern in the states or have responsibilities in the municipalities” must be involved, he declared.
As for the Greens, party leader Annalena Baerbock said in an interview with Der Spiegel: “The SPD has declared that it continues. The Union has declared that it continues. The chancellor has declared she will continue in office. So we have a government and it has to do its job: govern this country and tackle problems.”
Baerbock also called for a more aggressive great-power policy: “The EU must be able to conduct world politics in a dramatically changed situation,” she said.

12 Nov 2018

Johnson&Johnson Africa Innovation Challenge 2019 for African Health Entrepreneurs ($100,000 funding + mentorship)

Application Deadline: 16th January, 2019

Eligible Countries: Countries in Africa

Eligible Fields: There are three different categories, however you can apply to all three:
  • Promoting Early Child Development & Maternal Health: Improving maternal health helps nurture happy, healthy babies and generates positive child development. We are looking for non-pharmaceutical product and technology solutions that will help ensure women and newborns in Africa stay healthy during pregnancy, childbirth and throughout child development.
  • Empowering Young Girls: Access to good education and basic needs such as feminine care products is important to make sure young girls across Africa realize their full potential. We are looking for consumer product, technology and educational innovations that address these needs, making a brighter future possible for young women.
  • Improving Family Wellbeing: Families need reliable healthcare information and access to healthcare professionals and effective products in order to thrive. We are searching for innovative technology-driven solutions that help promote access to healthcare knowledge, advice and products and enhance the well-being of consumers in Africa.
About the Award: With its focus on consumer health care, the Africa Innovation Challenge will help tackle important issues impacting local communities. We are looking for an idea that has a clear project plan to progress towards commercialization. Commercialization is the process of introducing a new product or solution into commerce – making it available on the market. As you are submitting your application, you will find a downloadable project plan template that will guide you step-by-step so that we can better understand the feasibility of your idea. If you have a business plan to share, that is great.

Categories: Citizens and permanent residents of African Countries can apply. Applications should only be submitted by authorized representatives of the Applicant applying for the AIC. To qualify, each Applicant must submit an innovative idea in at least one of the following categories:
  1. Botanical Solutions – we are seeking naturally-derived, plant-based solutions that tap into traditional knowledge and deliver consumer health and wellness benefits through topical application;
  2. Packaging Innovations – We are seeking sustainable innovations for packaging of single dose units and other affordable product sizes that will reduce or eliminate waste, while protecting the product;
  3. Mental Health – We are seeking innovations that create awareness for mental illness as a public health problem and offer solutions for patients, caregivers, and their communities to address these issues.; and
  4. Essential Surgical Care – We are seeking innovations that promote access to timely, safe and skilled surgical care.
  5. Digital Health Tools – For one or more of the areas of HIV, Tuberculosis, Mental Health, Maternal Health and Ebola, We are seeking digital tools (including apps and other mobile/web/data enabled tech) for these important health care areas that can inform, educate, communicate and connect people to treatment, support and care through their reach and information and improve health outcomes especially for women.
  6. Health Worker Support – We are seeking innovations that support the wellbeing and resilience of nurses, midwives and community health workers at the heart of delivering care.
Type: Entrepreneurship

Eligibility: 

Selection Criteria: One or more individuals, teams or companies from Africa are encouraged to make their submissions. Solutions will be evaluated based on their ability to meet the following criteria:
  • Solution submission addresses at least one of the three critical health areas mentioned earlier.
  • Submission must be innovative and creative.
  • Submission must be scalable.
  • Submission outlines a commercialization plan and how the award would help the applicant reach a critical milestone within the timeframe of a single yea
Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: Participant(s) with the best solutions will receive up to $100,000 in funding and mentorship from scientists, engineers and researchers in the Johnson & Johnson Consumer Research & Development organization. The winner(s) of the challenge could also receive dedicated space at a lab facility in Africa throughout their product or service development, dependent on the needs of the solution submission.

How to Apply: To apply to the challenge, visit the Africa Innovation Challenge application page

Visit Contest Webpage for details

Award Provider: Johnson and Johnson

WHO Africa Innovation Challenge 2019 for African Entrepreneurs (Fully-funded to Brazzaville, Congo)

Application Deadline: 10th December at midnight (GMT+1).

Eligible Countries: African countries

About the Award: “This Innovation Challenge recognizes the critical need for innovations to address the continent’s challenges in healthcare,” said Dr Matshidiso Moeti, WHO Regional Director for Africa. “WHO champions the promotion of homegrown solutions to address health challenges in reproductive, maternal and child health, infectious diseases, noncommunicable diseases and other key areas. We hope this challenge will spark the entrepreneurial spirit of innovators and lead to credible health innovations across the continent”.

Type: Contest

Eligibility: This Challenge is open to solutions that comply with the following eligibility criteria listed below – solutions that are:
  • Solutions that are developed in and/or relevant to Africa in addressing one or more health-related problems or applying an innovative approach for delivering solutions in Africa.
  • Solutions that address one or more problems in a new and different way often through a simpler and more effective means that is novel.
  • Solutions that are realistic and have the capability and potential to be enlarged and replicated.
Other eligibility criteria include that:
  • This Challenge is open to individuals, teams, for-profit, non-profit entities (including hybrid entities i.e. social enterprises), academic institutions or research institutions.
  • Entrants are not required to be formally registered in order to qualify for the Challenge
  • Applicants must be:
    1. Africa nationals residing in Africa or outside of Africa; or
    2. Foreign nationals either based in Africa or, if not based in Africa, then working with an African-based entity.
Selection Criteria: 
  • This Challenge will prioritise innovative and scalable healthcare solutions for selection. The three submission categories are Product, Service and Social Innovation.
  • Entries will be assessed by a panel of independent evaluators based on the innovation’s potential impact on health in Africa as well as the possibility of being replicated or scaled-up.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Selected Finalists will be awarded a sponsorship covering flights, accommodation to attend the Forum. At this event, they will get the opportunity to exhibit their innovations and meet with top political, government and business leaders in the health space. They will also get a chance to exhibit their solutions at the annual meeting of Ministers of Health from the WHO African Region in August 2019, in Brazzaville, Congo.

How to Apply: Apply here

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

African Business Education Initiative for Youth (ABE Initiative) Masters Scholarship + Internship Program 2019 for African Students – Japan

Application Period: Late November 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries:  African countries

Eligible Group: Target participants are from among the following three types of personnel.
  1. Persons from the Private Sector
    Young individuals who are or will be involved in economic activities in the local private sector maintaining and developing strong ties with Japanese companies.
  2. Governmental Officials
    Young officials, such as civil servants, who take part in governance and policy-making in order to enhance industries to whose development Japanese companies can contribute, and has a recommendation by a Japanese company.
  3. Educators
    Young individuals who are responsible for educating in Higher Education and TVET (Technical and Vocational Education and Training) institutions in Africa, in order to enhance capacity building in related industries, and has a recommendation by a Japanese company.
To be taken at (country): Japan

Eligible Field of Study: In this program, participants will be accepted in any fields of study for master’s courses at Japanese universities while engineering, agriculture and economics/business administration are specified as key fields. Proposed research topics must be relevant to the program objectives to form network of potential contributors to the development of African industries, who have strong ties with Japanese companies.
A full list of eligible study fields can be found on the scholarship webpage (link below)

About the Award: The objective of the ABE Initiative master’s degree and internship program is to support young personnel who have the potential to contribute to the development of industries in Africa. This programme offers opportunities for young African men and women to study at master’s courses in Japanese universities as international students (hereafter referred to as participants) and experience internships at Japanese enterprises. The aim is for them to develop effective skills in order for them to contribute to various fields. Beyond acquisition of skills and knowledge, this program also intends to cultivate excellent personnel who can recognize and understand the contexts of Japanese society and systems of Japanese enterprises. The expected outcome of the program is a network of potential contributors to the development of African industries who will also lead Japanese businesses to engage further in economic activities in Africa.
JICA has been appointed to implement a master’s degree and internship program within the ABE initiative framework developed for countries whose official requests have been approved by the Government of Japan.

Offered Since: 2011

Type: Masters, Internship

Eligibility: 
    1. Citizens of one of the 54 African countries
    2. Between 22 and 39 years old (as of April 1st in the year of you arrival in Japan)
    3. A bachelor’s degree
    4. Applicants from government sectors/ educators who have both of the following:
-At least 6 months working experience at their current organization -Permission from their current organization to apply
  1. Have adequate English proficiency, both in written and oral communication (IELTS score of over 5.5 is preferred)
  2. Clearly understand the objective of this program and have a strong will to contribute to the industrial development of their country while broadening and strengthening the linkage between their country and Japan
  3. Not currently applying or planning to apply to scholarship programs offered by other organizations
  4. Have good health condition, both physically and mentally, to complete the program
Number of Awardees: 200 participants from the 54 countries in Africa

Value of Scholarship and Internship: JICA will provide the following expenses for participant of the program which is equivalent to similar JICA schemes.
  • Tuition at Japanese university master’s degree programs (and research student)
  • Allowances for living expenses, outfit, shipping etc.
  • A round-trip airfare
  • Expenses for support programs during the study in Japan, including the costs of observation tours and internship
  • Other costs should be covered by the participants’ organizations or other individuals.
Participants are not allowed to work while their stay in Japan.

Duration of Scholarship and Internship: It is expected that the duration of stay in Japan will be a maximum of 3 years. (6 months as a research student, 2 years as a student for master course and 6 months as an intern)

How to Apply: Visit the scholarship webpage to apply

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details


Award Provider: The African Business Education Initiative for Youth (ABE Initiative)

United Nations Junior Professional Officer (JPO) Programme 2018/2019 for Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 14th December 2018 (3.00 PM CET)

Eligible Countries: Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Indonesia, Kenya, Kiribati, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Palestinian Territories, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Candidates from any OTHER country are NOT ELIGIBLE

About the Award: JPOs are usually nationals of Donor countries, however some Donors also finance nationals of developing countries. The JPO programme is open to applicants from participating countries. Candidates from developing countries may apply for positions in the framework of the Dutch and Italian JPO Programme.
The following position is open in the context of the Dutch JPO Programme and is exclusively addressed to candidates from developing Countries (i.e. least developed countries).
  • JPO in Protection of Civilians (pdf)
    [VA#18P024]
    United Nations Secretariat, Departments of Peacekeeping Operations and Field Support,
    Division for Policy, Evaluation and Training, Policy and Best Practice Service (DPET/DPKO), New York
Type: Jobs/Internship

Eligibility: 
  • Be born on or after 1 January 1988 (1 January 1985 for graduates in medicine)
  • Candidates Must be nationals of a developing country that appears on the list of eligible countries (above). 
  • Part of the academic training MUST have taken place in one of the above listed countries to be eligible.
  • Candidates should possess a Master’s degree and a MINIMUM of 2 and a MAXIMUM of 4 years of relevant work experience.
    • – Please note that candidates with more than the maximum amount of work experience can not be considered.
    • – Candidates who only hold a BA may be considered if in possession of 2 additional years of work experience.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Duration of Program: Appointment is for a period of one year, with a possibility of an extension, depending on the performance and available funding from donor countries.

How to Apply: Please SUBMIT YOUR APPLICATION for the above-mentioned position via this online application system

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Donor countries The Netherlands and Italy, through the UN.

Afghanistan and Russia: Still Searching for Appropriate Structures of Governance

Rene Wadlow

On Friday, 9 November 2018, at the invitation of the Russian Government and under the chairmanship of the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov began what has been called “The Moscow Format” to end the armed conflicts and to find appropriate structures of governance in Afghanistan. Present for the first time were representatives of the Afghanistan High Peace Council – a government-appointed body charged with overseeing the peace process first appointed by then President Hamid Kassai and a five-member delegation of the Taliban from its political office in Doha, Qatar.  Indicating an awareness of the trans-frontier aspects of the Afghanistan armed conflicts, there  were representatives from China, Pakistan, Iran, India, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. In practice each country has its favored groups within Afghanistan. The U.S.A. declined to participate but sent its  chief political officer from the Moscow Embassy as an “observer”.
This was the first time that representatives from all the concerned parties were in the same room at the same time.  In the past there have been back-channel bi-lateral meetings with the Taliban, especially in Qatar and bilateral discussions among government representatives elsewhere. However the Moscow Format was the first discussion held in public.
Sergei Lavrov articulated the long-range aim. “Russia stands for preserving the one and undivided Afghanistan in which all of the ethnic groups that inhabit this country would live side by side peacefully and happily.”
The Taliban and Afghanistan High Peace Council each reiterated their unacceptable demands, but said that they were willing to meet again.  There were no sudden break-though to positions that could lead to negotiations and compromise, but none were expected.  The Moscow Format is a necessary first step on what is likely to be a long and difficult n process.  The Format recognizes that there are  important trans-frontier aspects and consequences of different types.
The trans-frontier aspect has been recently highlighted by the presence of fighters from the Islamic State (ISIS) in Afghanistan but also in Turkmenistan, Tajikistan , and Uzbekistan.  As ISIS is pushed out of Syria and Iraq, fighters have wished to continue their fight elsewhere and have joined with existing militant Islamist groups existing elsewhere such as those in the Central Asian States and Afghanistan.  However, the ISIS fighters have not been welcomed by the Taliban and seem to be operating separately.
It is not clear that the Government and the Taliban are in a position to negotiate a country-wide cease-fire and the creation of a structured government administration.  It is thought by observers that 30 per cent of the  country is under the control of the Government and four per cent under the Taliban.  However, “control” does not necessarily mean  that there are administrative services of health, education and agricultural development.
Afghanistan began its first post-Royal republican life in 1972 under the leadership of Sadar Mohammed Daoud who ruled until 1979.  There were few changes from the royal period, the King having been a cousin  and brother-in-law of Daoud.  However, some ideas about the need to plan on a national level were introduced by Afghan students who had studies in the Soviet Union.  The coming to power of the Presidents Hafizullah Amin and Nur Taraki, both from rival factions of the Afghan Communist Party led to a vision of national planning and agricultural reform.  However, both reforms were undertaken with little development of a favorable public opinion.  The agricultural reforms in particular led to resistance from local power holders.  This opposition seemed to put the whole State structure into question, leading to the Soviet intervention in the first days of 1980 to support the Government.
The Soviet intervention led to armed opposition and large areas of the country fell out of the range of any form of government services.  The Soviets withdrew in 1988 leaving a country without a national administration but with a host of armed groups holding political influence over small areas of the country.
By 1996, some of these armed groups which had come together under the name of Taliban (students of theology) were able to take control of Kabul and said that they were the government of the country.  In 2001, the Taliban were pushed out of power by U.S. forces, the U.S. Government holding them  responsible for the September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, D.C.  Since the end of 2001, there has been armed violence, a lack of economic development, and a  failure to find appropriate forms of governance.  There is a need to find appropriate forms of governance which are able to structure local traditions of social control, regional and ethnic-religious differences as well as having structures and services at the level of the State.
The Association of World Citizens has been involved since the early 1980s with discussions of appropriate forms of governance in Afghanistan.
The Ambassador Sayed Qassem Reshtia who had played a key role in the preparation of the 1964 Constitution which created a constitutional monarchy was living in exile in Geneva and was very helpful in giving background information. Dr Abdul Hakim Tabibi, the long-time Afghan Ambassador to the United Nations in New York until the Soviet intervention was also living in exile in Geneva and was most helpful with information and contacts. In addition, there were Afghan intellectuals and opposition leaders passing through Geneva on their way to or from Rome where the former King Zaher Shah was living in exile.
Thus in 1983 the Association proposed that “there be a broadly-based, highly decentralized Government of National Reconciliation. Afghanistan is a country of great cultural diversity and a wide range of local conditions. Therefore, political and social decision-making must be made at the most local level possible.  There should be policies of local self-reliance based on existing regional and ethnic structures.  Such local self-government will mitigate against a ‘winner-take-all’ mentality of centralized political systems.”
The Association of World Citizens continues the con-federalist, decentralization, trans-frontier cooperation proposals of the world citizens Denis de Rougemont (1906 -1985) and Alenandre Marc (1904-2000). Thus the Association of World Citizens remains concerned with the efforts to find appropriate forms of governance  in Afghanistan.  We are still far from a condition in which “all of the ethnic groups live side by side peacefully and happily”   It took six years of negotiations in Geneva led by the experienced and skillful U.N. mediator Diego Cordovez to help in the decision of the Soviets to withdraw. It is to be seen if the Russian Government will appoint as skillful a diplomat to facilitate the Moscow Format.  We as non-governmental organization representatives must work together with the aim of the resolution of the armed conflicts and the creation of appropriate forms of governance  in view.

11 Nov 2018

Australia: Alleged terror attacker “known to police and intelligence agencies”

Patrick O’Connor

After what the police, the media and governments in Australia quickly depicted as a crude terror-inspired attack in central Melbourne on Friday, in which one man was stabbed to death and others injured, police and intelligence spokesmen admitted that the perpetrator, 30-year-old Hassan Khalif Shire Ali, was well known to them.
Police fatally shot Shire Ali in Melbourne’s popular Bourke Street shopping mall, after he set alight his vehicle that was filled with several liquid gas canisters and attacked random passers-by with a knife. 77-year-old restaurant owner Sisto Malaspina died at the scene from head wounds, while two other men were hospitalised for head and neck injuries. Shire Ali died in hospital later that day.
After the incident, Victorian Police Commissioner Graham Ashton acknowledged that the man was known to counter-terrorism authorities, both “at the national level” and to the state police.
Police reported that the attacker was the brother of 21-year-old Ali Khalif Shire Ali, who is awaiting trial after pleading not guilty to charges related to an alleged terror plot. Police claim that the younger brother was inspired by “Islamic State” and was preparing a mass shooting during 2017 New Year’s Eve celebrations in central Melbourne—though they admitted that he did not have access to a firearm.
In 2015, Ali Khalif Shire Ali had publicly accused the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) of harassing him when he was 18 years old, demanding that he become their paid informant.
In the same year, 2015, ASIO revoked the passport of the Bourke Street attacker, Hassan Khalif Shire Ali, supposedly to prevent him joining the Islamic fundamentalist insurgency in Syria that was being backed by US imperialism and its allies. Whether ASIO attempted to recruit the man as an agent, like they did his brother, is unknown.
It also is yet to be explained how such an individual was able to proceed with the knife attack on Friday without surveillance or interference from the intelligence agencies.
Australian Federal Police (AFP) Assistant Commissioner for Terrorism Ian McCartney stated that despite the passport revocation: “He [Shire Ali] was never a target of the JCTT [Joint Counter-Terrorism Team, comprising Victorian Police, AFP and ASIO] in terms of the investigations we undertake. The assessment was made that whilst he had radicalised views, he didn’t pose a threat to the national security environment. Obviously, the circumstances of how and when he moved from having these radicalised views to carrying out this attack yesterday will be a key focus of the investigation we undertake through the JCTT.”
McCartney did not explain how the allegedly “radicalised views,” i.e. apparent support for ISIS, were deemed not a threat, given that the reactionary Islamic fundamentalist group had, from 2014, called for knife and car attacks internationally.
Nearly every so-called terrorism case in Australia has involved harassment, provocation, infiltration or entrapment by police and or ASIO agents, and a similar pattern has been seen in such cases in the US and Europe.
According to media reports, ISIS claimed responsibility for the incident, but terrorism experts pointed out that the group frequently makes false claims of that character. Rather, the evidence indicated social problems closer to home, experienced by a man who had grown up in Australia since childhood.
Initial media reports on the life of Hassan Khalif Shire Ali suggest he was an isolated and disoriented young man, rather than the international jihadist operative portrayed by some of the lurid media headlines.
Born in 1988, he moved with his family from Somalia to Australia as a young child, either in the late 1980s or 1990s according to different reports. The family home is in Werribee, a working class suburb on Melbourne’s western outskirts, and his father is a taxi driver.
Details are still to emerge of Shire Ali’s early experiences; for numerous young people of African origin, however, life in Melbourne is one of significant hardship. Almost no resources are provided to refugees suffering from trauma, dislocation, and family breakdown. Instead they are expected to look to family networks and charities to survive and make a home in outer suburbs with minimal social infrastructure, including recreational facilities for young people.
Black youth are routinely harassed by police and face regular demonisation in the media—previously under the so-called “war on terror” (Shire Ali would have been 13-years-old when the 9/11 attacks occurred), and more recently with the protracted government-media “African gangs” provocation.
Police reported that Shire Ali had a criminal history for cannabis use, theft and driving offences. His family also told the media that he suffered from significant mental health issues and substance abuse. A sheikh from the Werribee mosque told the ABC that the man was “not mentally fit” and had thought “he was being chased by people with spears.”
The deranged actions of an individual in dire need of psychological treatment was immediately seized upon by both the federal Liberal-National and state Labor governments to try to whip up resentment and animosity against refugees and immigrants, particularly Muslims.
Despite the evidence emerging about Shire Ali’s troubled life and mental ill-health, Prime Minister Scott Morrison openly sought to scapegoat Muslim refugees and immigrants, yesterday declaring: “I’ve got to address the real issue here, I’ve got to call it out—radical, violent, extremist Islam.”
Morrison, whose recent installation as prime minister marked a lurch to the right by the political establishment, added: “The greatest threat of religious extremism, in this country, is the radical and dangerous ideology of extremist Islam.” He implicitly blamed Muslim community leaders, demanding that they do more to “ensure that these dangerous teachings and ideologies do not take root here.”
In a revealing display of bipartisan unity, Victoria’s Labor Premier Daniel Andrews said he telephoned Morrison after this diatribe, to “congratulate” him for the comments, saying Morrison had said all that was needed. Andrews, who suspended campaigning for the November 24 state election after the deaths, denounced what he called “pure evil.” The Labor leader combined this evasion of the social and medical issues with “law and order” boasts of his government’s record expansion of the police force (a 20 percent increase, funded with $2 billion).
Victorian Liberal leader Matthew Guy explicitly tied the issue to so-called “African gangs” crime. In an inflammatory statement, he declared: “Only ruthless determination to stamp out terrorism or crime of any sort can protect our community; be it the domestic terror of a home invasion or rioters and gangs roaming our streets.” He added that there was no place for “moral squeamishness” because “we need to eradicate this sort of behaviour.”
As with previously promoted terror “scares,” both federal and state governments will seek to exploit last Friday’s incident to go even further in demonising refugee and immigrant members of the working class, eroding democratic rights and enacting police-state measures, the ultimate target of which is the working class as a whole.

Fire at workers’ apartment in South Korea leaves seven dead

Ben McGrath

A fire Friday morning at a low-rent apartment building for workers in Seoul, South Korea, has left seven people dead and another eleven injured. The tragedy highlights the lack of safe housing for many in the working class.
The fire occurred at approximately 5 am in Seoul’s Jongno district in the north of the city. It reportedly began in a room near the stairwell on the third floor of the three-storey building, with the occupant, who survived, stating that his electric heater had caught fire and he was unable to put out the flames. The escape route for many on that level was therefore cut off. All of the casualities were people who lived on the third floor.
The style of the building where the fire occurred is known in Korean as a gosiwon, which rent inexpensive, cubicle-like rooms typically to single workers and students. Rent at the gosiwon where the fire broke out ranged from 270,000 won ($239) to 380,000 won ($336) per month, with more charged for rooms with windows and extra space. The residents were primarily day labourers, with most of the victims in their forties, fifties, and sixties. One of those who died was a Japanese national.
With the fire blocking the main stairwell, those who survived did so by climbing out windows or using an emergency descending line to get to the ground. Lee Chun-san, a resident on the third floor, stated, “I lived in a room with a window that cost 320,000 won a month. I climbed out the window and down the air conditioning pipes. The rooms without windows cost about 280,000 won. If you had a window, you lived and if you didn’t you died.”
According to Gwon Hyeok-min, the Jongno Fire Station Chief, the 35-year-old building where the gosiwon was located had deteriorated over the years and had no sprinkler system. The building, which has a restaurant on the first floor, was registered as a residence in 2007 and was apparently exempt from a revision of a law on multi-use public buildings that require all such establishments beginning in 2009 to install sprinklers.
Survivors also told the media that while the building was equipped with fire alarms and smoke detectors, they did not go off. A survivor surnamed Sim told the Joongang Ilbo, “I woke up to smoke a cigarette at around 4:45 am. On my way to the rooftop, I saw smoke coming from Room 301. The person in Room 301 was trying to put out a fire. I yelled that there was fire and went downstairs to hit the emergency alarm. But the alarm didn’t work.”
While accidents will occur, the consequences of this fire and that of disasters generally are compounded by a lack of concern for safety from building owners and the government. Over the last six years, there have been 310 gosiwon fires. In 2018, the number of fires in gosiwons has been 9.5 percent higher than in other multi-use public buildings, a common trend.
According to 2014 statistics from the Seoul government, there are 1,080 gosiwons around the city without sprinkler systems, or more than one in seven in the South Korean capital. There are about 12,000 gosiwons around the country in total.
In Seoul alone, a government inspection found in 2015 that one out of five gosiwons was susceptible to disasters like fire. In part, this is due to the fact that rooms are often illegally modified to fit more living spaces in addition to other cost-cutting measures attacking safety.
The proliferation of this style of housing points to both the lack of decent accommodation for workers as well as attacks on wages. Youth are also particularly affected by this housing crisis. A 2016 study conducted by Statistics Korea found that four in ten people under 35, in and around Seoul, were “house poor,” or that the cost of housing left them without enough money to afford other costs of living.
Owning a home in South Korea comes with serious barriers. On average, the cost of an apartment has soared to nearly 6 million won ($5,310) per square meter. Options for renting are also restrictive, with two types of renting systems in place, exacerbating the problem. The first, known as jeonse, requires a renter to put down anywhere from 50 to 80 percent of the value of the apartment as a deposit in lieu of monthly rent.
The second system, known as wolse requires monthly rent, but also comes with an upfront deposit that can cost thousands of dollars, prohibitive to a worker living from paycheck to paycheck. This leaves the unsafe gosiwons as the only option for many.
The lack of safety measures like sprinkler systems in public buildings is not limited to gosiwons however. A massive fire at the Sejong Hospital in Miryang in January killed 41 people came a month after a conflagration killed 29 people at a sports center in Jecheon. Both buildings lacked operating sprinkler systems. The two fires were the deadliest in South Korea in nearly a decade.
Since the April 2014 sinking of the Sewol ferry, leaving 304 people dead, mostly high school students on a class trip, public safety has been a major political issue in South Korea. It helped fuel mass anger towards not only ousted president Park Geun-hye, but the political establishment as a whole, which the working class rightly sees as being the source of the attacks on people’s living conditions.
President Moon Jae-in campaigned on promises to address these concerns. However, the fact that nothing has been done to improve safety for the working class in one of the world’s wealthier countries is indicative of the fact that the Democrats, no less than the conservatives, protect the interests of capitalism.