German army plans recruitment of EU foreigners

Johannes Stern

The German Ministry of Defence plans to recruit tens of thousands of foreigners from the EU into the Bundeswehr. The plans for this are “more concrete than have been known so far,” Der Spiegel reported last week on Thursday. According to a confidential ministry study submitted to the news magazine, Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) wants to recruit mainly young Poles, Italians and Romanians for the German army. According to the paper, there is “quantitative potential” for the Bundeswehr among young men coming from these countries.

According to Der Spiegel, the ministry has already “calculated this potential more precisely.” According to the study, about 255,000 Poles, 185,000 Italians and 155,000 Romanians between the ages of 18 and 40 live in Germany. Together, this group represents about half of all EU foreigners in Germany. If at least 10 percent of this targeted population showed interest in the German army, the Bundeswehr would come up with “more than 50,000 possible new applicants for the force.”

The inspector general of the Bundeswehr, the highest ranking German military figure, also confirmed the plans. The recruitment of EU citizens for special activities is “an option” that is being examined, Eberhard Zorn told the newspapers of the Funke Media Group. People talk about “doctors or IT specialists, for example,” he said. In times of a shortage of skilled workers, the Bundeswehr had to “look in all directions and strive to find the right young talent.”

The plans of the Ministry of Defence and the official debate about them show how aggressively German imperialism and militarism are re-emerging despite Germany’s historical crimes in two world wars. Having caused a social catastrophe in Southern and Eastern Europe in particular with its austerity measures, Berlin is now using the lack of prospects and sheer desperation of young people to recruit cannon fodder for the German war policy.

Since leading government representatives officially announced the return of German militarism at the Munich Security Conference in 2014, the government and the Ministry of Defence have been working to increase the Bundeswehr’s troop strength, however, with rather moderate success so far. Since Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen (Christian Democratic Union, CDU) announced the expansion of the army on May 10, 2016, the Bundeswehr has hardly been able to record any significant growth despite aggressive advertising campaigns. In November, the Bundeswehr officially comprised 180,997 active soldiers, just under 1,000 more than in 2015 (179,633).

The plans of the Ministry of Defence have been worked out behind the backs of the population for a long time. The 2016 White Paper on German security policy and the future of the Bundeswehr stated: “Last but not least, opening up the Bundeswehr to citizens of the EU would not only offer potential for wide-ranging integration and regeneration and thus strengthen the personnel base of the Bundeswehr, it would also send out a strong signal for a European approach.” According to Der Spiegel the state secretary responsible for Bundeswehr personnel, Gerd Hoofe, signed off on the concept in August.

The German initiative is aggravating tensions within the European Union. Poland’s Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz is “surprised by the advance,” writes Der Spiegel. For his government, he urged “rapid clarification in Brussels.” The opening of the Bundeswehr for foreigners without consultations in the EU, “would not be appropriate behaviour,” Der Spiegel quotes Czaputowicz. “If Germany were to introduce such a law without consulting Poland beforehand, that would not be good. Of course, Germany has more to offer to workers and probably also to soldiers.”

There are similar concerns in Bulgaria, Italy, Romania and Greece. In talks with German military attachés, for example, the Bulgarian government had made it clear that 20 percent of the positions in the Eastern European country’s armed forces could not be filled today due to staff shortages. If Germany now opened its army with significantly higher salaries, this would have “catastrophic consequences.”

Berlin’s efforts to increase its own armed forces with foreign mercenaries go hand in hand with the German government’s plans to create a “ real European army “ (chancellor Angela Merkel). With both projects German imperialism is pursuing the goal of expanding its dominance in Europe and asserting its geostrategic and economic interests in competition with the other great powers worldwide. In this process the ruling class is increasingly openly returning to the German-European power politics of the German Kaiser and of Hitler.

“Germany’s destiny: Leading Europe in order to lead the world” was the title of an essay published by an official website of the German Foreign Ministry four years ago. Since US President Donald Trump’s announcement that he would withdraw US troops from Syria and that “the United States cannot continue to be the policeman of the world,” leading German foreign policymakers have been stepping up their calls for more German leadership in Europe and internationally.

“We must now put our own house in order and be more prepared ourselves—in our own interests and for our own sake,” Norbert Röttgen (CDU), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Bundestag, stated in an interview . It was now necessary to “consolidate the progress we have made in this area, i.e., to increase the military budget every year so that the Bundeswehr becomes fully operational again and is able to make its contribution.” Germany is “being required” because “without Germany nothing works either, that is also part of our responsibility, at least in Europe.”

Social Democratic Foreign Minister Heiko Maas made similar comments in an interview with the news agency dpa. “Our responsibility is growing. The expectations of us are higher than ever before,” he explained. Germany is already “assuming massive responsibility ... but the more old partners withdraw from international cooperation, the more the eyes are on us.”

Maas indicated that the ruling class was preparing a massive escalation of its war and great power offensive in the coming year. With its membership of the Security Council beginning on January 1, Germany is “moving politically even closer to crises and conflicts. Our vote will gain even more weight in the Security Council. We will not be able to duck away from difficult decisions,” the foreign minister stated.

He was particularly concerned about “the situation in the Middle East—with the conflicts in Syria, Yemen and the struggle for a Middle East peace settlement.” Germany would have to “be even more committed there than before,” and would also have to “assume military responsibility.”

The return of German militarism is also supported by the Left Party and the Greens. Their current silence on the recruitment plans of the Bundeswehr can only be interpreted as a tacit approval. Only recently, Dietmar Bartsch, the leader of the Left parliamentary group in the Bundestag, called on the German government “not only to talk” about the proposals of French President Emmanuel Macron regarding the construction of a European army, but “rather take genuine action.” And Green leader Annalena Baerbock demanded in an interview: “In a dramatically changed situation, the EU must be able to make world politics.”

If there is criticism of the defence ministry’s advance, it comes from the right. The recruitment of EU foreigners is “no solution for our personnel problem,” CDU defence official Henning Otte told the Westfälische Rundschau. “If we have difficulties in winning Germans for service in our own troops, then the attractiveness of the Bundeswehr must be increased.”

Rüdiger Lucassen, the spokesman for defence policy of the AfD parliamentary group in the Bundestag, stated that “German citizenship” was the “basic prerequisite for service as a soldier” along with “identification with our German culture, values and norms.” He regretted that von der Leyen, despite various advertising programmes, “had not been able to fill the armed forces with the necessary personnel.”

Slowdown in China’s manufacturing growth sets tone for New Year

Nick Beams

Last year opened to claims that the world economy had entered a period of “synchronised” global growth, after experiencing its best year since the 2008 financial crisis. There was also talk of a “melt up” in US stock markets on the back of major corporate tax cuts at the end of 2017.

It is a very different picture at the start of 2019. Wall Street and global markets have just experienced their worst year in a decade amid growing signs that the world economy has begun a significant slowdown.

The New Year began with the news that a key manufacturing index in China had recorded its worst reading in 19 months—another sign that the Chinese economy is starting to slow. There are fears that it will be further adversely impacted if no trade agreement is reached with the US by the deadline of March 1 and Washington proceeds with its threat to lift tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from 10 percent to 25 percent.

The worsening outlook for the Chinese economy was highlighted by the Caixin purchasing managers index (PMI), mainly tracking privately-owned factories, which fell to 49.7 in December from 50.2 in November. It was the first time since May 2017 that the index fell below 50, which marks the line between expansion and contraction.

The data on the private sector were published two days after China’s official PMI, which mainly tracks state-owned corporations, came in at 49.4, the first time it has fallen below 50 since July 2016.

It was significant that in both indexes new orders fell from expansion to contraction between November and December. PMIs in the China-dependent economies of Taiwan, Malaysia and the Philippines have also recorded declines for the month of December.

Other Chinese data point in the same direction. In November profits of industrial companies fell for the first time in three years and the growth in retail sales was at its lowest level in 15 years, with the auto industry particularly hard hit. According to the global consulting firm PwC, as a result of large foreign investment by major car producers, including Ford, Peugeot, Hyundai and Volkswagen, China has the capacity to produce 43 million vehicles but will build fewer than 29 million.

Reporting on the latest news of the manufacturing downturn, the Wall Street Journal commented that it was a “sign that nine months of monetary easing by the central bank has failed to boost lending in the real economy, though it has succeeded in pushing government-bond prices into bubbly territory. This kink in China’s monetary-policy machinery bodes ill for 2019, and makes predictions that growth could bottom out in the first quarter look optimistic.”

The banks were continuing to lend, but to other financial institutions and not to “the cash-starved companies that really drive growth.”

Besides the slowdown in manufacturing, the whole economy is being threatened by an escalation of tariffs.

Seeking to provide a boost to the battered US stock market, Trump issued a tweet last weekend that he had talked with Chinese President Xi Jinping and “big progress” had been made in trade discussion. A deal, if made, he tweeted, would be “very comprehensive, covering all subjects, areas and points.”

However, the key issue remains how far China will agree to US demands that it cease alleged theft of intellectual property rights and wind back, if not entirely eliminate, subsidies to state industries which the US claims are “market distorting.” These issues will be at the centre of talks between leading trade representatives of both countries on January 7.

China has already agreed to boost its imports of US products in order to address the trade imbalance between the two countries. But this is regarded as insufficient by the anti-China hawks within the Trump administration who see its industrial development, especially in high-tech areas, as a threat to the global economic and military dominance of the US.

Trump attempted to provide a further boost to the markets in a tweet yesterday. He said that the US stock market had suffered a “little glitch” in December and would recover once he had negotiated trade deals with China and other countries. The market appeared to respond, adopting a wait-and-see approach when trading began for the New Year, with the Dow recovering to finish marginally up after falling by almost 400 points at the opening.

Trump’s description of the stock market turmoil recalled the comments of President Clinton when he remarked that the Asia financial crisis of 1997–98 was just a “glitch” on the road to globalisation. Clinton was confronted with a major fallout from the Asian turmoil when the US firm Long Term Capital management had to be bailed out in 1998 in order to prevent a meltdown of US financial markets.

The trade conflict with China and its worsening growth prospects are not the only factors impacting on the world economy. The latest indications are that growth in both Germany and France is slowing. There is continuing uncertainty over the terms of British withdrawal from the European Union amid warnings that a “no deal” Brexit will have major economic and financial consequences.

Trade is also a point of conflict between the US and the EU. Under a deal struck between Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in July the US agreed to put threatened auto tariffs of 25 percent on hold in return for negotiations on tariff reductions and other trade constrictions.

However, there has been little progress in the discussions, with a leading EU trade representative accusing the US of undermining the July agreement.

Writing in the Financial Times on December 18, Bernd Lange, the chairman of the International Trade Committee of the European Parliament and the standing rapporteur for EU-US trade relations, said that with “tariff threats, intimidations and divisive rhetoric” Trump’s negotiating tactics were as “clumsy as they are alienating.”

Noting that he was “highly sceptical” that the US would deliver on the temporary truce, Lange said American envoys were now questioning the terms of the July 25 statement and were displaying “utter disregard for standard EU procedures in preparing for formal trade negotiations.”

“Finally, having brought the EU, China and others to the negotiating table with tariff threats, the US now regularly turns to blackmail,” he wrote, adding he remained “unconvinced” that the EU should enter into formal discussions under such “troubling conditions.”

Any transatlantic partnership had to be based on “mutual respect,” Lange stated, warning that “as it stands, the current US rhetoric and disregard for our values and red lines have the potential to poison transatlantic relations for years to come.”

The year 2018 was marked by slowing growing global growth, increased financial turbulence, trade war and tariff measures. The New Year has opened with clear indications that all these conditions are set to intensify.

SEED Foundation Call for Projects 2019: Promoting Local Resources of the African Soils

Application Deadline: 6 February 2019

SEED Foundation has launched a call for projects 2019 “AFRICAN TERROIRS” that aims to promote the local resources of the African soils (products local agricultural practices, agricultural practices, know-how, etc.) and optimize their management to support their role in the development of family farming in Africa.

SEED Foundation wants to support projects to maintain diversity of resources terroirs while offering opportunities for transformation and innovation of the agricultural system. This theme meets the challenges of standardization and homogenisation of practices and the loss of diversity of agri-food chains. Applicant’s project will therefore aim to address the following issues:

• To what extent can local land resources respond to challenges of an agricultural system (job creation, better meeting the demand local, etc.)?
• How to maintain the diversity of agricultural practices, for the purpose of protection different forms of ecosystem production and resilience?
• How to develop efficient and less efficient agricultural production systems consumers of natural and financial resources?
• How to support the development and diversity of local sectors, production until the marketing of the finished product?

Priorities for action

• Project Staffing / Total Project Budget: Priority will be given to projects where the SEED Foundation endowment is balanced in the budget and the funding plan.
• Sector aspect: Priority will be given to projects acting on several stages of the sector.
• Feasibility: The capacities of the project leader and the local partner, the local anchoring and coherence with the context of the zone, the coherence of the budget and the financial arrangement.
• Relevance: The respect of the objectives of sustainable development, the expected impacts of the project and the existence of evaluation mechanisms.
• Sustainability: The prospects and long-term vision of the project, particularly through valuation and capitalization.

Funding Information

• Funding awarded per project: between € 7,000 and € 15,000
• Overall envelope: 45,000 €
• Share of the total project budget allocation: between 10% and 70%, ie a total budget of project between € 10,000 and € 150,000

Eligibility of the application

• Project duration between 24 and 36 months
• The pre-project stages must already have been completed: feasibility study, diagnosis, market study, project drafting
• Spread the allocation over a maximum of 3 years and ensure that it represents between 10% and 70% of the total project budget, ie a total project budget of between € 10,000 and € 150,000.
• If the project fits into a larger program, the SEED Foundation team will ensure that its dimensions remain at the scale of its grant.

Eligibility of the holders

• The French organization
  • Issue CERFA tax receipts
  • Have experience in the field of agricultural development in Africa
  • Submit only one project per call
  • Not to be a SEED Foundation partner (project currently underway)
  • Not to be a student association
• The African organization
  • Being a non-profit organization
  • Participate actively in the project
  • Be able to continue the process after the support

Eligibility of the project

• Being in an eligible African country (mentioned above)
• Be less than 3 hours drive from the country’s capital
• Present an innovative character
• The project must concern agricultural or livestock products intended for local food and not for export
• The project must concern at least 2 stages of the sector: production, processing, marketing
• The direct beneficiaries must be identified (number and kind)

For More Information:

Visit the Official Webpage of the SEED Foundation Call for Projects 2019

UONGOZI Institute Postgraduate Diploma in Leadership (Full Scholarships available) 2019

Application Deadline: 8^th February, 2019 at 5:00pm.

About the Award: The Programme, undertaken in collaboration with Aalto University Executive Education of Finland, aims to develop leadership competencies in three areas; Making Strategic Choices, Leading People and Other Resources and Excelling in Personal Leadership Qualities. This is the third cohort to undertake this programme.
Facilitated by world-class professors and experts in leadership from around the world, the Programme is designed to encourage participants to challenge their thinking as they broaden their competencies in visioning, planning and inspiring others through advanced strategic communication. It will motivate the participants to become better designers and innovators of effective structures and systems for better results.
Each module runs for between 2-3 days of in-class workshops and online individual or group assignments.

Type: Short course

Eligibility: Completion of the Programme requires attending all modules and completing several written pre- and post-assignments and four graded exams. On successful completion, candidates will earn 18 European credits; all of which are eligible to be transferred towards the Aalto Executive MBA or Aalto MBA Program.

Selection Criteria: The candidates need to meet with the following entry requirements:

• Minimum five years of work experience in a managerial or senior specialist position
• Bachelor’s degree or equivalent
• Good command of written and spoken English
• Recommendation from employer

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The tuition fees for the Postgraduate Diploma in Leadership are EUR 4,000. This covers:

1. All facilitation costs and learning and training materials, including stationery
2. All meals during training hours

The participants or their sponsors will also be responsible for:

1. Daily Subsistence Allowance (Per Diem) for each module
2. Transportation allowance to attend each module
3. On-transit expenses, incidentals and medical coverage

*A limited number of full scholarships will be available for Government employees.

Duration of Programme: 1 year

How to Apply: 

• It is important to go through all application requirements on the Programme Webpage see link below) before applying

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

TÜBİTAK International Fellowships for Graduate Research in Turkey 2019

Application Deadline: 15th February, 2019

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Recognized Universities in Turkey

Eligible Fields of Study: Natural Sciences, Engineering and Technological Sciences, Medical Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities

About the Award: The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) grants fellowships for international highly qualified PhD students and young post-doctoral researchers to pursue their research in Turkey in the fields above. The program aims to promote Turkey’s scientific and technological collaboration with countries of the prospective researchers. Preference will be given to candidates who demonstrate the potential to contribute significantly to Turkey’s goal of international cooperation in scientific and technological development.

Type: Fellowship, Research

Eligibility: 

1. Candidates should be non-Turkish citizens. Applicants who hold dual citizenship with Turkey are   not eligible to apply.
2. Candidates should have an invitation from the universities or research institutes in Turkey.
3. Candidates should certify that they have sufficient command of language to perform their research.
4. Candidates must be 35 years old or younger.
5. Candidates should be enrolled in a program in abroad for PhD students.
6. Candidates who hold a PhD degree in Turkey should have a GPA minimum of 3.50/4.00 in PhD program.

Selection Criteria: All successfully submitted applications are listed and prepared for scientific evaluation after the prior selection. The proposal will be evaluated according to the following 4 evaluation criteria:

1. Research potential of the fellow
2. Scientific and technological quality of the research proposal
3. Impact of the proposed fellowship to the applicant’s training and career development to  the hosting institution and to Turkey
4. Implementation of the proposed research

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Fellowship: The scholarship will consist of a monthly stipend, tuition fee, travel costs and health insurance.

Duration of Fellowship: Maximum duration for the fellowship is 12 months.

How to Apply: All applications must be submitted electronically via TÜBİTAK scholarship application portal by 15th February, 2019

• It is important to visit the Fellowship webpage (see link below) to access the online application form and for detailed information on how to apply for this scholarship.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details


Award Provider: Turkey Government

Nestle Nutrition Postgraduate Fellowships 2019 for Young Professionals in Developing Countries – Up to 40,000CHF in Grants

Application Deadline: 31st January 2019. 

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Developing countries

Type: Postgraduate

Eligibility: 

• Priority consideration for this prestigious fellowship will be given to candidates in junior positions from emerging countries.
• The candidates’ history of previous or alternate grants will be taken into consideration.
• Candidates will be notified of their eligibility by letter.
• The application form must be accompanied by the following:
  1. Curriculum Vitae,
  2. A plan of the proposed training/activity clearly indicating its specific outcomes and
  3. Two letters of recommendation (1 from the institution where the candidate is working and 1 from the host institution*).
  4. Letter stating intent to return to the home country upon completion of the training program
  5. Details of their current level of training

Selection Criteria:

• Fellowships are available for post graduate qualifications only
• Applicant has to be affiliated with an academic/clinical institution
• Successful candidates will be required to start their training within 1 year of being notified of the fellowship award
• Duration of the support for the research training lasts for a maximum of 12 months
• Upon certification, fellowship awardees must return to their home countries.

The Panel will not accept applications, which are submitted by:

• Candidates who have already spent more than 12 months outside their home country during the 3 years preceding the application. Exceptions could be made if the applicant can justify how this additional training will supplement the one(s) already obtained
• Candidates who have already left their country at the time of applying for the fellowship
• Candidates who have completed more than one half of any training programme they may already be enrolled in
• Candidates who, at the time of submitting their application, already have a grant from any other training program
• Applications will not be entertained if the applicant’s home country law prohibits the nature of this activity.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship:  The grant includes learning a specific laboratory technique, statistics, nutrition, etc. The NNI grant up to 40’000 CHF can be used to pay course registration fees, round trip travel to the host institution, lodging and living expenses and health insurance coverage for the duration of the course.The grant offer of 40’000 CHF is also given and can be used to pay course registration fees, round trip travel to the host institution, lodging and living expenses and health insurance coverage for the duration of the course.

Duration of Scholarship: Maximum of twelve (12) months

How to Apply: 

• Applications without all documentation, including a letter of acceptance by the faculty at the hosting institution will not be considered.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

The True Nature of US Interventions

John Perry

‘Make America Great Again’: Trump’s slogan seems both to yearn for a time when the United States had more influence, and to call for its pre-eminence to be restored. In its own way, it asserts that the US is – or should be – different.  In fact it was only Trump’s predecessor, Obama, who was the first president to talk regularly about American exceptionalism, yet to Trump it is something that is long lost and it is his job to recover it. Yet belief in the US’s exceptional nature has been a constant feature of the country’s history, whoever has been president, and continues right up to the present day.

Its starting point in the early nineteenth century was the ‘Monroe doctrine’, the assertion of the US’s pre-eminent power in the western hemisphere, replacing the old colonial powers such as Spain and Portugal. Its domestic counterpart was the US’s God-given ‘manifest destiny’, which justified settlement of the whole North American continent, regardless of the presence of the people to whom much of the land already belonged. Whereas the Monroe doctrine at first reflected a degree of respect for the then newly emerging Latin American nations, by the end of the century it only thinly disguised a new kind of imperialism which justified US intervention anywhere in the hemisphere.

Soon after the end of the second world war, the former ‘great powers’ began to give up those colonies that had not already been returned to their rightful owners. But, fuelled by the cold war, the US began a new phase of imperialism. Dan Kovalik, in his new book The Plot to Control the World, quotes a report, which he says is almost certainly an underestimate, that the US interfered in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000. And even that number omits more serious interventions such as US-provoked coups, assassinations and invasions. Yet, as Kovalik says, ‘American exceptionalism’ requires a belief that the US is a unique force for democracy and freedom in the world. This enables the New York Times to justify US interference in the affairs of other countries because the US is unique in using its power to challenge dictators or otherwise promote democracy, whereas Russia (say) more often intervenes to disrupt democracy or promote authoritarian rule.

Dan Kovalik is far from the first author to show US intervention in its true light. Chomsky, William Blum and many others have trodden this path with, it seems, little effect on the conscience of most of the US population or, for that matter, on that of much of Europe’s. Kovalik’s approach is to take ten examples, reduce the history of each to its essentials, recount it in very readable form and ensure that it is bang up to date. In response to the current obsession with Russian interference in the last US presidential election, he begins with an account of the much more drastic action taken by the US to ensure the right result in Russia’s 1996 election. The rest of his choices are also strategic: Iran (where the long history of US interference began when it halted an emerging democracy in its tracks), Guatemala (where it did the same and created the conditions for a war in which perhaps 300,000 people died), Congo (which was on the point of bringing to an end perhaps the world’s worst colonial nightmare), Brazil (to show that even a giant among developing powers was not allowed to shape its own future), Vietnam (for the genocide which the US unleashed), Chile (to aid the birth of neoliberalism), Honduras (showing that the supposedly liberal Obama-Clinton administration could also disregard democracy), Nicaragua (where the story comes up to 2018) and Ukraine (where the US aims to deny Russia the right to influence even what happens on its own doorstep).

In Latin America, Kovalik uses five examples, but in truth he could have cited almost every country that is a former Spanish or Portuguese colony: of those, only Costa Rica has not been the subject of US intervention and arguably the US is so dominant in its economy and the country has been so obedient in never electing rulers who have challenged US hegemony, that it has earned its immunity. While most of the former British, French and Dutch colonies have been exempt from direct interference, there have been notable exceptions. The most obvious and most recent are Grenada in 1983 and Haiti on multiple occasions. One wonders what President James Monroe would think now of the consequences of the doctrine that still carries his name.

Kovalik quotes Harold Pinter as saying that an important feature of US interventions is that they ‘never happen’. Even while they are happening they aren’t happening. Everyone should look away. So often the role of the supposedly liberal media is to turn a blind eye, especially when a US-provoked disaster is taking place, or to tell the story that favours the intervention, rather that of people who suffer from it or are resisting it. Nicaragua is a case that is very much in point.

Dan Kovalik is a much better writer than William Blum and more accessible than Noam Chomsky. His book should be required reading in US colleges and could be a useful reminder to many politicians, political commentators and journalists in Europe of the real nature of the US’s ‘exceptionalism’. As the title says, what it really amounts to is an often overlooked and not very subtle ‘plot to control the world’. Why isn’t this the message conveyed by the mainstream media, and when will they start to tell the truth?

Doing Business with Tyrants

Lawrence Davidson

On the front page of the New York Times (NYT) of 16 December 2018, above the fold, there is a long article entitled “Turning Tyranny Into a Client.” It tells how the management, and a good part of the staff, of McKinsey & Co., a worldwide management firm, goes about the business of burnishing the reputations and increasing the wealth of some of the nastiest tyrants on the planet. Simultaneously, the company publicly claims to be creating “tens of thousands of jobs, improving lives, providing education” and generally “making a positive difference to the businesses and communities” which engage their services. How much of these claims are simply a cover for making huge profits by facilitating corruption is one of the things the article explores.

This scenario is not an unusual one. Most large corporate structures dealing internationally find themselves assisting tyrannical governments and their corrupt leaders—it is just a matter of degree. McKinsey & Co., for their part, may be into it big time.

Indeed, there is further aspect to this story, and it is introduced through the article’s description of this McKinsey & Co.’s 2018 retreat. Here it is: “hundreds of the company’s consultants frolicked in the desert, riding camels over sand dunes and mingling in tents linked by red carpets.” And where was this occurring? In “Kashgar, the ancient Silk Road city in China’s far west.” Kashgar is also a place that is “experiencing a major humanitarian crisis. About four miles from where the McKinsey consultants discussed their work, which includes advising some of China’s most important state-owned companies, a sprawling internment camp had sprung up to hold thousands of ethnic Uighurs—part of a vast archipelago of indoctrination camps where the Chinese government has locked up as many as one million people.”

As far as the NYT’s reporters could tell, the “frolicking” company consultants were not bothered by this “political backdrop” to their otherwise “Disney-like adventure.” Obviously this speaks to a collective mindset wherein ethical awareness has been rationalized away. I think this situation deserves a closer analysis.

Deriving Ethics from Rationalizations

Why would “hundreds of the company’s consultants” apparently be immune to the horrors within, if you will, an easy camel’s ride from their retreat? More generally, why apparently would they be indifferent to the corruption their employer, and themselves, may well be facilitating?

Here are some possible parts to the answer:

— The capitalist economic culture. Consider that the pervasive economic environment in the West, from which most of the consultants come from or were educated, is one of increasingly unregulated capitalism. Their educations equated success with the procuring of “a good job.” That is certainly what college nowadays is all about—to get the highest-paying starting job one’s career choice can offer. We acquire this definition of success from the cultural agents all around us: from our parents, our peers, our business, political and social leaders, and from the media. Thus almost all of us are set up from birth to be potential McKinsey employees.

— Our linguistic environment. Given our economic culture, no one should be surprised that the language the consultants, and the rest of us, presently speak is “a late-capitalist language.” This language “narrows our conceptual horizons” and thereby “makes it more difficult to conceive alternative ways of organizing our economy and society.” If you would like to learn how this works, I recommend a new book by John Patrick Leary, Keywords: The New Language of Capitalism.

One recent example of this language problem arose when General Motors announced in November 2018 the imminent laying off of more than 14,000 workers. The CEO of General Motors, Mary Barra, explained the move in the following words: “The actions we are taking today continues our transformation to be highly agile, resilient, and profitable, while giving us the flexibility to invest in the future.” The ruination of 14,000 lives becomes a prerequisite for an “investment in the future” and testimony of growing agility and resilience. Her language paints reprobate behavior as economic virtue. Actually, there is an echo of the Ford Pinto scandal here. In that case, the ability to prevent deaths caused by a recognizably dangerous auto gas tank design was ignored. Later, the decision was justified in the language of cost-benefit analysis.

—A lack of education in ethics. This sort of reasoning is not unexpected. Thus, there is nothing in present Western education to contest the language that rationalizes this sort of thinking. In other words, there is a lack of ethical standards that, in practice, call into question the capitalist worldview of someone like Mary Barra. So, you can find business courses galore in higher education, but ethics courses are rare—and even when you can find them they do not necessarily address themselves to market practices. In the lower grades and high school the subject of ethics, like sex, is thought to be an inappropriate one for the classroom. We are supposed to pick up our ethics from our parents and/or religion. That means acquiring ethical standards is catch-as-catch-can. But learning to think in terms of, and navigate in, a capitalist world is the sine qua non of success.

— The issue of group pressure. We are communal animals, and most of us assimilate into a series of groups as we age. Our workplace community is one of these. The process of assimilation to such groups, especially when there is no countervailing influence (such as a union) creates the box outside of which we rarely look. Thus, “normal” cultural behavior is group behavior.

This is probably what is going on with the many of the McKinsey consultants. The longer they stay with the company, the more they assimilate into its culture, which, as we have seen, takes a strong rationalizing stand that its employees are helping their clients to develop along progressive lines. The NYT article quotes Calvert W. Jones, a University of Maryland professor, who “crisscrossed the Gulf monarchies in the Middle East as part of her research evaluating the work of management consultants.” She explains the McKinsey consultants’ behavior this way: “In the beginning, the best of them want to help, want to do real research, provide data and expert opinions. But after initially speaking their minds [about questionable behavior] … they gradually stop. They engage in the art of not speaking truth to power. They self-censor, exaggerate successes and downplay their own misgivings due to the incentive structures they face.” For those who buy into McKinsey’s cultural box, ethical standards are ultimately derived from company’s rationalizations.

Conclusion

The McKinsey consultants remind me of professional soldiers or diplomats, or any of us who serve an authority on which our livelihood depends. You must often learn the proper rationalizations to explain away, to yourself and others, the consequences of your behavior. Too much independent thinking, too much questioning of orders and you’re out.

However, once you have merged your standards with those of the institution, once its image is your image, you are safe—safe in your faith in the rationalizations that now guide your working life. At that point you can frolic almost anywhere with a “good conscience.”

Tony Elumelu Entrepreneurship Programme 2019 – $100 million to create 10,000 African Entrepreneurs in 10 Years

Application Period: Interested entrepreneurs will be able to submit their applications to join the programme as from 1^st January 2019 until Midnight WAT on 1st March, 2019.

Offered annually? Yes. For a period of 10 years

Opportunity is open to: All citizens (18 and above) and legal residents of all African countries with businesses that operate in Africa.

About Entrepreneurship Programme: Nigerian billionaire investor and philanthropist Tony Elumelu has committed $100 million to create 10,000 entrepreneurs across Africa over the next 10 years. Elumelu made the commitment on Monday during a press conference in Lagos to announce the launch of The Tony Elumelu Foundation Entrepreneurship Programme (TEEP).
TEEP, a Pan-African entrepreneurship initiative of the Tony Elumelu Foundation, is a multi-year programme of training, funding, and mentoring, designed to empower the next generation of African entrepreneurs.

Starting From: 2015

Programme Type: Funding for African Entrepreneurs

Number of Entrepreneurs: There are 1,000 positions available annually for 10 years

Value of Programme: The 1,000 start-ups selected from a pool of applicants across Africa will participate in a comprehensive programme which will include;

• A customized 12-week business skills training course
• Start-Up Enterprise Toolkit
• Mentoring
• Resource Library
• 2-Day Boot Camp
• Seed Capital Funding
• Elumelu Forum
• Alumni Network

Duration of Programme: The programme will identify and help grow 10,000 start-ups and young businesses from across Africa over the next 10 years. These businesses will in turn create 1,000,000 new jobs and contribute $10 billion in annual revenues to Africa’s economy.

How to Apply: All applications must be submitted online through the TEEP Portal. Answer a series of mandatory questions and upload additional documents and identification materials. You will receive a confirmation email within 1 working day of submission.
More details about the program, including eligibility and the application and selection processes are available on the Tony Elumelu Foundation website at: www.tonyelumelufoundation.org/TEEP.

Sponsors: Tony Elumelu Foundation

Higher Education Scholarships in Taiwan 2019/2020 for Undergraduate, Masters and PhD International Students

Application Deadline: 15th March, 2019

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: The students of eligible countries of the region of Asia Pacific, West Asia, Africa (Burkina Faso, Republic of Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, South Africa, Swaziland), Caribbean, Central America, South America, Europe can apply for this scholarship.

To be taken at (country): Universities in Taiwan

Accepted Subject Areas: For undergraduate, masters and PhD courses offered at any of the participating University in Taiwan

About Scholarship: International education and training has long been one of the TaiwanICDF’s core operations, among many others. Human resources development programs play a vital role in assisting partner countries achieve sustainable development, and education is a crucial mechanism for training workforces in developing countries.
The TaiwanICDF provides scholarships for higher education and has developed undergraduate, graduate and Ph.D. programs in cooperation with renowned partner universities in Taiwan.

The scholarship recipients gets a full scholarship, including return airfare, housing, tuition and credit fees, insurance, textbook costs and a monthly allowance.

Type: Undergraduate, Masters and PhD Scholarship

Who is eligible to apply? An applicant must:

• -Be a citizen of List of Countries Eligible (including select African countries) for TaiwanICDF Scholarship, and satisfy any specific criteria established by his or her country and/or government of citizenship.
• -Neither be a national of the Republic of China (Taiwan) nor an overseas compatriot student.
• -Satisfy the admission requirements of the partner university to which he or she has applied to study under a TaiwanICDF scholarship.
• -Be able to satisfy all requirements for a Resident Visa (Code: FS) set by the Bureau of Consular Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and an Alien Resident Certificate (ARC) set by the Ministry of the Interior, of the ROC (Taiwan) government (this means that the TaiwanICDF has the right to revoke a scholarship offered if an applicant cannot satisfy the visa requirements).
• -Upon accepting a TaiwanICDF scholarship, not hold any other ROC(Taiwan) government-sponsored scholarship (such as the Taiwan Scholarship) in the same academic year in which the TaiwanICDF scholarship would be due to commence.
• -Not be applying for a further TaiwanICDF scholarship in unbroken succession — applicants who have already held a TaiwanICDF scholarship must have returned to their home country for more than one year before re-applying (note: to apply for a 2014 scholarship, an applicant must have graduated and returned to his or her home country before July 31, 2013).
• -Have never had any scholarship revoked by any ROC (Taiwan)government agency or related institution, nor been expelled from any Taiwanese university.

Number of Scholarships: Not Specified

Scholarship Benefits and Duration: The TaiwanICDF provides each scholarship recipient with a full scholarship, including return airfare, housing, tuition and credit fees, insurance, textbook costs and a monthly allowance.

• Undergraduate Program (maximum four years): Each student receives NT$12,000 per month (NT$144,000 per year) as an allowance for food and miscellaneous living expenses.
• Master’s Program (maximum two years): Each student receives NT$15,000 per month (NT$180,000 per year) as an allowance for food and miscellaneous living expenses.
• PhD Program (maximum four years; four-year PhD programs start from 2012): Each students receives NT$17,000 per month (NT$204,000 per year) as an allowance for food and miscellaneous living expenses.

How to Apply: 

• Applicants must complete an online application (found in Program Webpage link below). Then submit a signed, printed copy along with all other application documents to the ROC (Taiwan) Embassy/ Consulate (General)/ Representative Office/ Taiwan Technical Mission or project representative in their country.
• Please note that each applicant can only apply for one program at a time. The applicant also needs to submit a separate program application to his/her chosen universities.

Visit Program Webpage for the Online Application System and more details about this scholarship.

Understanding Eritrea

John Graversgaard

The Horn of Africa has been plagued by conflicts and war for decades, and finally it seems that peace has come to the region. Political changes in Ethiopia have opened for a rapid peace agreement with Eritrea signed on 8 July 2018 by president Isaias Afwerki of Eritrea and prime minister Ahmed Abiy of Ethiopia. As a dream that finally comes true, the unjust sanctions against Eritrea on Nov. 14, 2018 was unanimously lifted by the members of the UN Security Council.

If you want to understand the Eritrean freedom struggle then you must learn from history. It is a story of a region that has been dominated by the great powers and where Eritrea did not get its freedom as other African colonies. Eritrea first got his freedom in 1991 after 30 years of military and political struggle and has rightly been called the African Vietnamese war. Eritrea was the subject of maneuvers from the superpower US, and Foreign Minister John Foster Dulles stated in 1952 the following: “From the point of fairness, the point of view of the Eritrean people should be taken into account. But the United States’ strategic interests in the Red Sea and world peace make it necessary for the country to be associated with our allied Ethiopia”.

The cold war and US interests of imperialism meant denying the Eritrean self-determination as other colonies in Africa, and this policy has led the western powers ever since. Thousands of lives could have been saved if the Eritrean people had been able to develop their country in peace. This is crucial to understanding Eritrea’s determined opposition to any attempt to subvert the country and dictate a particular policy.

Ethiopia has for decades refused to acknowledge the reality that Eritrea does not accept submitting to any great power or regional power. Ethiopia’s changing governments have created divisions and divisions in Ethiopia with many large ethnic minorities. During the Empire period and Mengistu regime, the Amhara group dominated. With the liberation of Eritrea in 1991, Mengistu crashed, but unfortunately, the Tigray group continued the destructive policy. With the suppression of the other ethnic minorities and a nationalist policy where Eritrea was made a problem rather than a partner.

The Tigray Group and their organization TPLF chose to support Washington’s and Bush’s government’s “war on terror” and became a tool for continued external interference in the region. Through a targeted and cynical propaganda, Eritrea was made into the rotten apple and accused of supporting terror in Somalia. The US strategy with “regime change” and demonization was followed. Eritrea was made into the problem even though Eritrea had the most forward-looking peace policy for the region. The problem was, in essence, that it did not include the great powers, but was based on the region itself having to solve its problems without external interference. Ethiopia was actually under control by the Tigray minority and held the whole region hostage for 27 years. Not to mention the harsh repression of the other ethnic minorities in Ethiopia, here especially the Oromos and Somalis.

But now game is over and a new government in Addis Ababa has broken with the past. The border has been opened and cooperation agreements have been made between the two countries. It has sparked joy and expectations of peace and development in a hard-troubled region.

Your waste: someone’s taste

Zeeshan Rasool Khan

While we every other day listen to boastful claims that the country India is developing fast. It has become very difficult for most of us to accept the brute reality that our people die because of hunger. Yes, death due to starvation is the unthinkable, reality of India. According to sources, about 14.9% of the Indian population is undernourished. Half of the world’s hungry live in India. Thousands are those who do not know if the next meal would be availed or not. Reports say, everyday 20 crore people have to hit the sack with an empty tummy. In the year 2018, many cases of hunger-death were reported in India. This bitter truth is being cloaked with bragging. Global Hunger Index 2018, which has placed India at a 103rd place out of 119 qualifying countries, is a testimony to this fact that India is not what media shows. All is not well within the nation with respect to common masses. Howbeit, it is not any matter of berating the nation. There is no question of cutting anyone to size in connection with this issue. Instead, it demands serious contemplation from everyone irrespective of our positions in society.

One of the root causes of hunger is poverty that has been challenging to every developing country and India is no exception. Despite the reports of GHI, which says, the poverty level has reduced by 0.9 % since 2011 we must accept that our efforts have been too meager to achieve any feat in this direction. Let us accept we have failed in defeating poverty. But, that does not mean we will rest on our laurels and let poverty-stricken die. If we cannot eradicate the gigantic issue of poverty but we have immense potential to secure poor. If we cannot build palaces for indigents, however, we can provide them shelter to hide at least. If we cannot raise their standard of living but there is no doubt that, we can mitigate their problems. Likewise, if we cannot provide them with sumptuous food, at least we can make sure that they will not sleep hungry, die due to hunger and starvation.

There is no dearth of food. Credible reports suggest that India produces sufficient food to feed its population. However, access to the available food is lacking. And this inaccessibility is partly due to low income of people and mostly due to our behavior of wasting food. It has been estimated that nearly one-third of the food produced in the world for human consumption is wasted every year. This wastage starts from processing continues up to packing, supply management, and consumption. Due to imperfect packaging methods and inefficient supplying system, a considerable amount of food is lost. According to one estimate, about 40 percent of fruits and vegetables and 30 percent of cereals are wasted and do not reach the consumers because of improper packaging and supplying techniques. Prevalent ways of processing and subsequent supplying of paddy and other grains result into wastage of a part of it. Common Fruit growers know it better, while packaging, what quantity of fruits is wasted. Fully ripened fruit is often discarded as ‘rotten’ because of apprehensions about its transportation. Same is the case with vegetables and other foodstuffs. These squandered grains, discarded fruit and vegetables make a large part of wasted food. Imagine if these grains, ripe fruit, and vegetable reach any poor, how great it would be. At the consumption stage, significant levels of food wastage occur. The gluttony, most people are indulged in is itself a form of wastage. Some people eat like a horse without thinking about health risks that overeating leads to. They keep on inviting ailments rather than getting any benefit but never cogitate, how by exercising moderation in eating we can help others. The excessive food that we take can easily become a morsel for a destitute.

Our weddings, events, restaurants, hostels, and houses are a major source of food wastage. At weddings, a huge amount of food is wasted. A large amount of food including multiple dishes are served, which results in leftovers that finally finds a place in trash bins. It would have been far better to have control mechanism at our weddings for prevention of food-wastage. However, even in absence of a mechanism, we can play a significant role in reducing wastage of food by best use of leftovers. Leftovers from weddings and even from our homes, restaurants, hostels, and hotels are often thrown away. But there is an option for us to make better use of it. We can recycle leftovers. We can make many other dishes from it, which can be used for the next meal. Massimo Botturra of Italy – the world’s best chef has come up with this innovative idea. He has founded the association namely ‘Food for Soul’ with the motive to fight food waste. He uses surplus food /leftovers productively to tackle food wastage and nourish poorest people of the city. Hoteliers and restaurateur, across the world particularly India, have followed suit that is a good sign. In fact, using leftovers to feed the poor living in our vicinity would be one of the finest uses of leftovers. By this way the uneaten edibles from our homes, restaurants, etc can fill the bellies of many and eliminate their hunger.

Efforts are on throughout India and fortunately, in our state too, to reach out the hunger struck population. No doubt, some NGO’s are working to utilize extra cooked food and give it to needier. But, the challenge is big and efforts are small. Broad-gauge efforts are required that must be started from the individual level. While processing, packaging, supplying, and consuming, utmost care needs to be taken to check the frittering. Through this mindfulness, we can preserve lot of food and can make it available to the poor. In addition, if everyone would refrain from wasting food and take care of penurious people of respective communities, we can ensure food availability for a maximum number of deprived people.

It is worth to mention, feeding hungry cannot obliterate hunger as it is related to several problems. However, we cannot deny the fact that hunger itself is the root of various other troubles. Hunger deprives a person from growth. It increases the vulnerability of a person to a myriad of complications, which can have an adverse impact on social, behavioral, emotional, and physical health of a person. Satisfying one’s hunger can make him eligible to earn livelihood otherwise his destiny is elimination. So, we must think logically to gain the best of both worlds.