Mawazo PhD Scholars Programme 2020 for African Women

Application Deadline: 22nd November 2019 at 11.59 pm EAT

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Citizens from any African country

To be taken at (country): Kenya

Field of Study: Any field of study, at the PhD level

About the Award: The PhD Scholars Programme is a one-year, non-residential fellowship where PhD Scholars receive a research grant worth up to $5000 to support their research, a travel grant worth up to $2000 for conference travel, and a training grant worth up to $500 for ongoing training. Scholars also benefit from professional and leadership skills trainings provided by Mawazo and our partners, research and editorial support, as well as mentorship and networking opportunities. This programme is designed to amplify our Scholars’ research and position them as the next generation of leading experts, thinkers, and innovators who are finding homegrown solutions to local development challenges.
The call for applications for the 2020 cohort of Mawazo PhD Scholars will be open from October 14th 2019 to November 22nd 2019. Eligible applicants are invited to apply following the instructions below.

Type: PhD

Selection/Eligibility Criteria: In order to be eligible for the PhD Scholars Programme, applicants must:

• be women below the age of 40 as at 1st January 2020
• be citizens of an African country
• be enrolled for their PhD at an accredited university in Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania or Uganda
• have completed their course work if applicable and passed their departmental proposal defence (i.e. in the dissertation phase of their PhD)
• demonstrate that their research project is related to African development and is relevant to a global, regional, national or sub-national policy priority
• demonstrate potential for leadership both within and outside academia, and a strong passion to leverage their expertise for impact in society
• be available to fully participate in the programme in 2020-2021

Selection: All applications will be reviewed by the Mawazo Institute staff and a panel of external expert reviewers. Successful applicants will demonstrate that they can do the following:

• Meet all eligibility requirements
• Identify a problem which has important implications for African development and is linked to a global, regional, national or sub-national policy priority
• Demonstrate that their research is academically rigorous and addresses a unique and important gap in the field
• Propose a research project which has clear objectives, is appropriately designed for the question being asked, and can be feasibly executed with the financial resources available and within a one- to two-year timeline.
  
• Write a summary of their project which is clear, concrete, and accessible to scholars outside their own field

The Mawazo Institute is committed to non-discrimination in the application review process.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: Mawazo PhD Scholars will receive the following benefits:

• A research grant of up to $5000
• A travel grant worth up to $2000 for participation in regional or international conferences
• A training grant worth up to $500 for field specific training not offered by Mawazo
• A stipend worth $500 for discretionary use
• Participation in Mawazo’s in-house professional development and leadership training programme, comprised of a mix of in-person and virtual training modules
• Research and editorial support from the Mawazo staff and our partners
• Connections to mentors, as well as exposure to leaders from academia, industry, government and other sectors
• Visibility via Mawazo digital platforms and event.

Duration of Scholarship: One year

How to Apply: Interested candidates are required to fill in and submit their applications via our online application portal. Applications will not be accepted by email or in hard copy. Applications will be considered complete when the following are provided:

• A completed online application form
• A current 2-page CV
• A letter confirming current enrollment in an accredited PhD programme
• A letter confirming that you have completed your course work (if applicable) and passed your departmental defense
• A recommendation letter from your PhD supervisor
• A recommendation letter from a second referee
• A completed budget and timeline for the project (Please download the template here)
• A completed budget narrative of 500 words or less

For instructions on how to use our online platform, complete your application and meet all the requirements required for consideration please download the application guidelines here.

Visit Program Webpage for Details

Sciences Po Mastercard Foundation Scholars Programme 2020/2021 for Undergraduate and Graduate Africans to Study in France

Application Deadlines:

• Bachelor: 29th January, 2020
• Master: 5th December, 2019

Offered Annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Africans

To Be Taken At (Country): France

About the Award: Scholarships for the 2020/2021 academic year are awarded in collaboration with a network of partner institutions authorised to nominate candidates.

Sciences Po is the first university in continental Europe to join the Mastercard Foundation Scholars Program. Within this international network, 27 prestigious institutions in Africa, America and Europe are committed to ensuring that all young people, whatever their background, have the same opportunities to get a quality education and fulfil their potential.

Over six years (2017 – 2022), the Scholars Program will fund:

• 20 scholarships to complete the Sciences Po Bachelor of Arts programme, Africa specialisation
• 40 scholarships to complete a Master’s programme at one of our seven graduate schools
• 60 scholarships reserved for Mastercard Foundation Scholars studying at other partner universities and who would like to attend Sciences Po Summer School.

Type: Bachelors, Masters

Eligibility: The scholarships are awarded to students from sub-Saharan African countries with an outstanding academic record and strong leadership potential, but who face financial and other barriers to higher education.

Number of Awards: 120 for a period of 5 years.

Value of Award: Thee scholarships cover the full cost of tuition fees at Sciences Po and living costs in France during the study .
As well as funding their studies, Sciences Po will offer scholars a specific suite of resources to ensure they have appropriate academic support and to facilitate their transition from education to employment:

• An orientation programme and individualised academic advising throughout their studies at Sciences Po
• A mentor programme offered in collaboration with the Africa Division of Sciences Po Alumni
• Career guidance and support: an online job platform dedicated to professional opportunities in Africa (internships and first jobs), access to our business incubator and the network of employers and alumni working in Africa, and specific career workshops.

Duration of Program: The scholarships are awarded for a period of three years for the Bachelor’s degree, two years for the Master’s degree and one month for the Summer School.

How to Apply: More information on the application and selection process and dates:

• Undergraduate Candidates
• Graduate Candidates
• Summer School Candidates

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Google Women Techmakers Scholarship Program 2020/2021 for Women in Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA)

Application Deadline: 5th December 2019 11:59 pm GMT.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Women from Europe, the Middle East and Africa

To be taken at: Universities in Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Eligible Subject Areas: Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Informatics or a closely related technical field

About the Award: Dr. Anita Borg devoted her adult life to revolutionising the way we think about technology and dismantling barriers that keep women and minorities from entering computing and technology fields. She proposed the “50/50 by 2020” initiative, so that women earning computing degrees would be 50% of the graduates by year 2020. However, the percentage of Computer Science degrees earned by women is still far from 50% throughout the world.
As part of Google’s ongoing commitment to furthering Anita’s vision, Google is proud to honor Anita’s memory and support women in technology with the Women Techmakers Scholars Program (formerly the Anita Borg Memorial Scholarship).
Through the scholarship, Google aim to encourage women to excel in computing and technology, and become active role models and leaders.

Type: Bachelors, Masters, PhD 

Selection Criteria: Multiple scholarships will be awarded based on the strength of candidates’ academic performance, leadership experience and demonstrated passion for computer science.

Who is qualified to apply? To be eligible to apply, applicants must:

• Currently be enrolled at an accredited university for the 2019-2020 academic year
• Intend to be enrolled in or accepted as a full-time or part-time student in a Bachelor’s, Master’s or PhD program at a university in Europe, Middle East or Africa for the 2020-2021 academic year
• Be studying computer science, computer engineering, informatics or a closely related technical field
• Demonstrate a strong academic record
• Exemplify leadership and demonstrate passion for increasing the involvement of women in Computer Science

Number of Scholarships:  Not specified

Value of Scholarship:

• The scholarship recipients will each receive a €7,000 (or equivalent) scholarship.
• A retreat opportunity to connect with fellow scholars and Google mentors, while participating in professional and personal development trainings and workshops.
• An online network with fellow scholars program participants designed to share resources, support the global community of women in tech and collaborate on projects to make continued impact.

How to Apply: The Women Techmakers Scholarship is a one-time scholarship. While past applicants and finalists are encouraged to reapply, unfortunately, past recipients of any Google scholarship, including the Women Techmakers Scholarship and Google Anita Borg Memorial Scholarship, are not eligible to apply.
Complete the online application and submit all requested documents by 5th December 2019. The following application documents must be in English.

• General background information (includes contact information and information about your current and intended institutions)
• Current resume
• Academic transcripts from your current and prior institutions (if you have earned a prior degree)
• One letter of reference from a professor, instructor, adviser or supervisor
• Responses to five essay questions

Visit Scholarship Webpage for Details

Sponsors: Google

Government of Germany DAAD Scholarships 2020/2021 for Artists and Filmmakers in Developing Countries (Fully-funded)

Application Deadline: 31st October 2019

Offered Annually? Yes

To Be Taken At (Country): Germany 

Type: Short courses/Training, Masters

Eligibility: Foreign applicants who have gained a first university degree in the field of the Performing Arts at the latest by the time they commence their scholarship-supported study programme.
What can be funded?
In this study programme, you can complete

• a Master’s degree/postgraduate degree leading to a final qualification, or
• a complementary course that does not lead to a final qualification (not an undergraduate course)

at a state or state-recognised German university of your choice.
This programme only funds projects in the artistic field of the Performing Arts (Drama, Theatre Directing/Theatre Dramaturgy, Musicals, Performance Studies, Dance, Choreography). Other DAAD scholarship programmes are available for applicants from the fields of Theatre and Dance Studies or for artists with a scientific project.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:

• A monthly payment of 850 euros
• Travel allowance, unless these expenses are covered by the home country or another source of funding
• One-off study allowance
• Payments towards health, accident and personal liability insurance cover

Under certain circumstances, scholarship holders may receive the following additional benefits:

• Monthly rent subsidy
• Monthly allowance for accompanying members of family

To enable scholarship holders to learn German in preparation for their stay in the country, DAAD offers the following services:

• Payment of course fees for the online language course “Deutsch-Uni Online (DUO)” (deutsch-uni.com) for six months after receipt of the Scholarship Award Letter
• if necessary: Language course (2, 4 or 6 months) before the start of the study visit; the DAAD decides whether to fund participation and for how long depending on German language skills and project. Participation in a language course is compulsory if the language of instruction or working language is German at the German host institution.
• Allowance for a personally chosen German language course during the scholarship period
• Reimbursement of the fees for the TestDaF test which has either been taken in the home country after receipt of the Scholarship Award Letter or in Germany before the end of the funding period
• As an alternative to the TestDaF for scholarship holders who have taken a language course beforehand: the fee for a DSH examination taken during the scholarship period may be reimbursed.

Duration of Program: 

• Masters/Postgraduate study programmes: Between 10 and 24 months depending on the length of the chosen study programme or project
• Complementary studies not leading to a final qualification: One academic year

How to Apply: The application procedure occurs online through the DAAD portal. You are also required to send additional documents by post to the specified application address. 


Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

ArtsEverywhere Fellowship for Artistic Journalism (Fully-funded to Ontario, Canada) 2020

Application Deadline: 1st November 2019

Eligible Countries: International

To be Taken at (Country): Guelph, Ontario, Canada

About the Award: The fellowship will be a continuation of a line of inquiry and body of work ArtsEverywhere has been developing for the past two years — The Curse of Geography. While we do not expect the work of the fellow to replicate the stories in the series, the proposed project should conform to the approaches of reportage and long-form narrative storytelling that have been developed in collaboration with independent artists, journalists, and producers as well as cultural and academic institutions, media outlets, and international NGOs. Accepted fellows will receive support from professional artists, journalists and producers, including our editorial staff, contributors, and commissioned mentors.

Type: Career Fellowship

Eligibility: Projects focused on locations in Africa, Asia, Australia, the South Pacific, South America and the Caribbean, or in under-reported parts of North America and Europe will be given preference, though the final decision will be based on the following: the merit of the overall proposal; quality background research and proof of concept; feasibility of timeline and final project; demonstrated experience creating compelling non-fiction narrative, in tandem or through quality artistic production; and measured usability of final product to lend towards positive social change in relation to sources and focus communities. Proposal submissions and final projects should be written in English. All translations will be covered by the fellow. Please contact fellowship@artseverywhere.ca with any inquiries regarding your project proposal’s suitability.

Selection: Shortlisted applicants will be notified by November 15^th and interviews and final decisions will be made by December 15^th. The fellow will be expected to attend 2-3 introductory calls in January and to attend the ArtsEverywhere Festival, January 23-26, 2020, in Guelph, Ontario, Canada (unless country visa requirements don’t allow it). A schedule of bi-weekly calls will be set up during the introductory sessions.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The fellow will receive $15,000 CAD as a fee and $5,000 CAD for travel, equipment and other project costs. Fellows will be required to present a mid-project progress report and participate in the 2021 ArtsEverywhere Festival in a programmatic capacity TBD (funds to attend the festival will be provided separately by ArtsEverywhere).

Duration of Award: 1 year

How to Apply: 

1. Cover letter (1 page) single spaced, resume/cv, short bio
2. Story Pitch (500 words, can be accompanied by appendixes that clarify concept)
3. Diagram (a drawing/sketch/visual treatment) of your story idea that illustrates the narrative structure, arc, and connectivity with sources and potential partner outlets)
4. Work samples (2 previous projects that can be evaluated within the parameters of the fellowship objectives and requirements)
5. A letter of reference (additional letters will be accepted, but are not required)
6. Website, digital portfolio, any links to previous or related work

Proposals must be submitted to fellowship@artseverywhere.ca. You will receive a confirmation receipt within 24 hours. Only short-listed applicants will be notified after the deadline passes on November 1, 2019.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

The Oil Despots

Basav Sen

The world’s burgeoning far-right movements are far-flung and diverse, but in government they share a few core tendencies: They attack minority populations. They criminalize dissent. And they’re horrible for the planet.

The slide into extractivist authoritarianism in the U.S. is part of a worldwide trend, exemplified by the parallels between the U.S. and Brazil, where far-right president Jair Bolsonaro is presiding over an accelerated destruction of the Amazon, attacks on Indigenous Brazilians, and brazen profiteering by aligned corporate interests.

Another striking international parallel was on display recently in Houston, Texas, where Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi shared the stage with Trump at an event that felt like a fascist rally.

I’m not using the term “fascist” lightly. Here’s a brief explanation for readers unfamiliar with Indian history.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Modi’s political party, is rooted in a much older organization called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a connection the BJP doesn’t deny — Modi himself is a long-time RSS member.

Early RSS ideologues were inspired by European fascism. B.S. Moonje, a mentor of RSS founder K.B. Hegdewar, visited Italy, met with Mussolini, toured fascist youth indoctrination camps, and was inspired to popularize an Indian version of these camps through the RSS.

M.S. Golwalkar, another early RSS leader, openly praised Nazism in his writings. He wanted to create a Hindu nationalist India based on the ethnonationalist, militaristic vision of fascism. Golwalkar never apologized for or retracted these views during his lifetime, and the RSS waited 67 years to publicly repudiate them, making the repudiation not particularly credible.

But this isn’t just an ancient skeleton in the BJP’s closet. The violent ethnonationalism that RSS leadership admired and espoused in the 1930s is very much alive in the agenda of today’s BJP. This ideology views Muslims as the enemy of India’s national identity, and Muslims have been the main target of the Modi government’s politics of violence and repression.

The best-known example is the BJP government’s escalation of the decades-long conflict in Muslim-majority Kashmir.

Article 370 of the Indian Constitution provided for a certain measure of autonomy for the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Article 35A, a provision of Article 370, restricted acquisition of land in the state by persons from outside it.

In August, the Modi government unilaterally scrapped Article 370 using questionable means. This was a prelude to the further militarization of an already heavily militarized territory, a communications blockade that eliminated all internet, mobile phone, and landline service, and worsening violence against Kashmiris, with reports of deaths, torture, and detention (including detention of children).

Eliminating Article 35A opens the door to changing the demographics of Muslim-majority Kashmir through settlement, much like Israel’s practice in occupied Palestine. Doing so would be completely consistent with the BJP’s ethnonationalism.

A lesser known example of the Modi government’s Islamophobia is its campaign to strip Muslims of alleged Bangladeshi descent in the state of Assam of their Indian citizenship unless they can prove their citizenship — in a country where most people, especially the rural poor, don’t have birth certificates.

Also excluded from the “citizens’ list” created by the Modi government are transgender people.

The Indian government is now building camps to detain people who are stripped of their citizenship. Mass detention of a civilian population, usually based on their ethnic, religious, or other identity, fits the definition of concentration camps.

There are obvious parallels with the U.S. here. The Trump administration’s horrific border policies include detaining children and families in concentration camps, as experts who’ve studied the history of concentration camps agree, regardless of what right-wing apologists say. And The Trump administration is engaged in a legal assault of its own against the basic rights of transgender people and LGBTQ people more broadly.

Then, there’s the Modi and Trump regimes’ deep-seated hatred of Muslims. The U.S. government has gone to the extent of banning people from specific Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. altogether. While courts have upheld this policy on the grounds that its stated intent is to keep out nationals from countries with ties to “terrorism,” Trump’s own statements point to the intent to exclude Muslims from the U.S.

Other parallels between the far-right political projects in India and the U.S. include their ties to extractive industries and their shared objective of criminalizing opposition to extractivism, particularly by Indigenous peoples.

In the United States, a recent investigative news report revealed that oil and gas companies have been lobbying Congress to insert provisions criminalizing protests against fossil fuel infrastructure into a pipeline safety bill. Similar laws are already on the books in states such as Louisiana and North Dakota. Besides being an attack on the right to protest, these laws are outright assaults against Indigenous peoples who have been in the forefront of struggles against fossil fuel infrastructure in the U.S.

These laws are being pushed by the fossil fuel industry — along with regulatory changes rolling back automobile fuel efficiency standards, making it easier for coal power plants to pollute, and more. The U.S. government increasingly acts like a tool of fossil fuel companies and oligarchs.

Similarly, Modi has direct ties with Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, who has benefited from public subsidies and deregulation for his fossil fuel, mining, and other business interests. Adani has also been a vocal supporter of Modi, including when the latter faced scrutiny for his role in covering up an anti-Muslim pogrom when he led the state of Gujarat. Adani’s company has a sordid record of destroying ecosystems and violating Indigenous rights, from Gujarat to Australia.

And like the U.S. government, the Modi government is also criminalizing Indigenous resistance to extractivism by equating it with “terrorism.”

Exploring these parallels isn’t an academic exercise. For cross-border movements for justice to successfully dismantle far-right ethnonationalism backed by fossil fuel and other corporate interests, in the U.S., India, Brazil, and elsewhere, we must start with a shared understanding of the common material and ideological foundations of the global far right. Sharper understanding can make our resistance more effective.

Landing in Riyadh: Geopolitics work in Putin’s favour

James M. Dorsey 

When Russian President Vladimir Putin lands in Riyadh this week for the second time in 12 years, his call for endorsement of his proposal to replace the US defense umbrella in the Gulf with a multilateral security architecture is likely to rank high on his agenda.

So is Mr. Putin’s push for Saudi Arabia to finalize the acquisition of Russia’s S-400 anti-missile defense system in the wake of the failure of US weaponry to intercept drones and missiles that last month struck key Saudi oil installations.

“We are ready to help Saudi Arabia protect their people. They need to make clever decisions…by deciding to buy the most advanced S-400 air-defence systems. These kinds of systems are capable of defending any kind of infrastructure in Saudi Arabia from any kind of attack,” Mr. Putin said immediately after the attacks.

Mr Putin’s push for a multilateral security approach is helped by changing realities in the Gulf as a result of President Donald J. Trump’s repeated recent demonstrations of his unreliability as an ally.

Doubts about Mr. Trump have been fuelled by his reluctance to respond more forcefully to perceived Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone in June and the September attacks on the Saudi facilities as well as his distancing himself from Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu following last month’s elections, and most recently, the president’s leaving the Kurds to their own devices as they confront a Turkish invasion in Syria.

Framed in transactional terms in which Saudi Arabia pays for a service, Mr.Trump’s decision this week to send up to 3,000 troops and additional air defences to the kingdom is likely to do little to enhance confidence in his reliability.

By comparison, Mr. Putin, with the backing of Chinese president Xi Jinping, seems a much more reliable partner even if Riyadh differs with Moscow and Beijing on key issues, including Iran, Syria and Turkey.

“While Russia is a reliable ally, the US is not. Many in the Middle East may not approve of Moscow supporting Bashar al-Assad’s regime, but they respect Vladimir Putin for sticking by Russia’s beleaguered ally in Syria,” said Middle East scholar and commentator Mark N. Katz.

In a twist of irony, Mr. Trump’s unreliability coupled with an Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation in response to the president’s imposition of harsh economic sanctions in a bid to force the Islamic republic to the negotiating table appear to have moderated what was perceived as a largely disastrous assertive and robust go-it alone Saudi foreign and defense policy posture in recent years.

While everyone would benefit from a dialling down of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Mr. Trump’s overall performance as the guarantor of security in the Gulf could in the longer term pave the way for a more multilateral approach to the region’s security architecture.

In the latest sign of Saudi willingness to step back from the brink, Saudi Arabia is holding back channel talks for the first time in two years with Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. The talks began after both sides declared partial ceasefires in the more than four year-long Yemeni war.

The talks potentially open the door to a broader Russian-sponsored deal in the context of some understanding about non-aggression between the kingdom and Iran, in which Saudi Arabia would re-establish diplomatic relations with Syria in exchange for the Islamic republic dropping its support for the Houthis.

Restoring diplomatic relations and reversing the Arab League’s suspension of Syrian membership because of the civil war would constitute a victory for Mr. Al-Assad’s main backers, Russia and Iran. It would grant greater legitimacy to a leader viewed by significant segments of the international community as a pariah.

A Saudi-Iranian swap of Syria for Yemen could also facilitate Saudi financial contributions to the reconstruction of war-ravaged Syria. Saudi Arabia was conspicuously absent at last month’s Rebuild Syria Expo in Damascus.

Mr. Putin is likely to further leverage his enhanced credibility as well as Saudi-Russian cooperation in curtailing oil production to boost prices to persuade Saudi Arabia to follow through on promises to invest in Russia.

Saudi Arabia had agreed to take a stake in Russia’s Novatek Arctic-2 liquefied natural gas complex, acquire Sibur, Russia’s largest petrochemical facility, and invest an additional US$6 billion in future projects.

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak predicted that “about 30 agreements and contracts will be signed during President Putin’s visit to Saudi Arabia. We are working on it. These are investment projects, and the sum in question is billions of dollars.”

In anticipation of Mr. Putin’s visit, Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), said it was opening its first overseas office in Riyadh.

RDIF and the kingdom’s counterpart, the Public Investment Fund (PIF), are believed to be looking at some US$2.5 billion in investment in technology, medicine, infrastructure, transport and industrial production.

The Russian fund is also discussing with Aramco, the Saudi state-owned oil company, US$3 billion in investments in oil services and oil and gas conversion projects.

Saudi interest in economic cooperation with Russia goes beyond economics. Ensuring that world powers have an increasing stake in the kingdom’s security is one pillar of a more multilateral regional approach

Said Russian Middle East expert Alexey Khlebnikov: “Clearly, the recent attacks on Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities have changed many security calculations throughout the region.”

Ethiopia’s Abiy Ahmed Wins Nobel Peace Prize; It Takes Two to Make Peace

Thomas C. Mountain

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has been awarded the 2019 Nobel Prize for Peace which begs the question, if it takes two sides to fight a war doesn’t it take two sides to make peace? Just as it takes two hands to clap it takes two to make peace and P.M. Abiy has taken pains to give credit where credit is due, that Eritrea President Issias Aferwerki, his partner in the peace process was the leader in this process. Abiy said it unequivocally on July 8, 2018 at the end of
his speech welcoming Issias for the first time to Addis Ababa, stating that “Issias is leading us”.

Abiy is 43 years old, leading Ethiopia only since April of last year, 2018. Issias is well into his 70’s and a gray haired battle hardened veteran with almost 60 years of revolutionary leadership under his belt. Who do you think was the primary party responsible for peace between Ethiopia and Eritrea, Abiy or “Issias is leading us”?

Abiy has been unstinting is his praise for Eritrea and our leadership, saying how, during his first visit here in June 2018, that he would like to be an unofficial foreign minister for Eritrea so he could let the truth be known and help fight the lies being told about our country.

Not a word of this is being mentioned in any of the international media other than in pages such as these and we here in Eritrea have learned to expect nothing else. For how can so called “democracy’s” allow praise for a leader who came to power through the armed struggle, by “the barrel of a gun”?

Revolutionary and socialist, Eritrean President Issias Aferwerki is an anathema to those perpetrating neo-colonialism to maintain control of the wealth of the richest continent on the planet, Africa. They do it through elections and the IMF, who supposedly saw their recent offer of $1.6 billion to “modernize” Eritrea’s economy ignored. Issias is not about to sell the future to pay for non essentials today and fall into the trap of economic debt bondage that inflicts the rest of Africa.

In other words, Eritrea will “never kneel down” as the national motto goes and the western powers will not recognize anything positive about us, to the point of ignoring reality when it comes to making peace.

It takes two hands to clap and it takes two parties to make peace. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee showed it’s real agenda in this case. Then again, this award was given to Barack “The Libya War Criminal” Obama so it’s not like Abiy is joining any sort of honorable inner circle, far from it.

We will wait and see what P.M. Abiy has to say when he accepts his award in Stockholm, though somehow his words will be twisted away from their real meaning and only one party will be praised for the impossible task of making peace all by themselves.

United States Abandon Kurds and How will this Move Impact Middle East

Hossein Bouazar

Syrian Kurds are a distinct group and they have lived and owned their lands close to the Turkish and an Iraqi border for decades. They have been subjected to systematic discrimination.  The People’s Protection Units is a mainly-Kurdish militia in northern Syria and the primary component of the Syrian Democratic Forces. The YPG mostly consists of ethnic Kurds, and also Arabs. They secured the north region of Syria and their control was concentrated in three predominately Kurdish regions, Afrin, Kobane, and Qamishli.

The YPG fighters joined US lead coalitions against Islamic state group becoming spare head of Syrian Democratic Forces also known as SDF. SDF Influence widened Manbij and Raqqa. Sometime in the year 2017 ISIS were defeated in both cities. Turkish we are always concerned about the Syrian Kurds.

After US announcement that they withdrawal their forces from Northern Syria Erdogan orders Turkish offensive against northern Syria “to fight ISIS” and “and to bring peace to the area”. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the beginning of the operation to create a “safe zone” cleared of US-backed Kurdish militias, which Ankara labels ‘terrorists’.

The dictator Bashar Al-Asad and the Iranian terrorist regime are very pleased about US’s decision. Hassan Rouhani, Iranian president said “Turkey has concerns about its southern borders, and it is their right that these concerns be alleviated, but the right path should be chosen. The solution for security in the northern borders of Syria and southern borders of Turkey is possible with the presence of Syria’s army.”

Syrian regime with help of their allies will attack the Kurds from South and Turkish government will attack the Kurds from North. The Syrian government crushing of the rebellion in Syria with help of their allies will also continue. This will strengthen Iran and Iranian allies’ forces throughout the Middle East, which get Iran closer to the regime’s primary goal, to project power throughout the Middle East to counter Israeli, and Saudi influence in the region.

By now everyone should know Bashar Al-Asad well enough, a dictator who is killing civilians in Syria. Some estimate he murdered more than half million Syria who were protesting for their own rights, and six million refugees fled Syria. United States abandoning the Kurds is like giving permission to Bashar to mass murder more people and this time is the Syrian Kurds. Will this be another humanitarian crisis this time in northern Syria? Could or better say will Untied States stop this humanitarian crisis?

Even though the Trump administration designated the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization in April, Yemen’s Houthi rebels with help of Iran have launched a few drone attacks on a civilian airport and a strike on Saudi Arabian oil facilities.

US withdrawal also means America’s Syrian Kurdish allies are at risk of losing control of the vast camp. the head of the Syrian Democratic Forces, Gen. Mazloum Kobane said “There is a serious risk in al-Hol. Right now, our people are able to guard it. But because we lack resources, Daesh are regrouping and reorganizing in the camp,” he said, using the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State. “We can’t control them 100 percent, and the situation is grave.”

While US trying to defeat ISIS, withdrawal from North Syria isn’t going to help them to reach their goal, in fact ISIS may regrow in the region.United States will be handing Middle East to Iran and their allies if they don’t help the Syrian Kurds.

A shocking move by the United States and a great example of United States handing a country to Iran, is Iraq. since United States 2003 invasion of Iraq, this might be the worst week for United States foreign policy.

Iranian regime is keeping MiddleEast unsafe by deploying IRGC to interfere with other countries, meanwhile creating such event “Iranian regime’s military parade terrorist attack” is just to give themselves an excuse to arrest Ahwazi activists in Ahwaz.

While Iranian regime’s economy continue to suffer, and the damage is so great that the regime is doing everything to stop Trump from getting re-elected. A hacking group linked to Iran government attempted to break into US President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign.

Iran has mastered conquering a country without replacing its flag and Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and Syria are few examples. Meanwhile IRGC continuous their terrorist attacks, assassinations and kidnappings, and it’s sponsor attacks against Coalition Forces in Iraq, and drone attacks in Saudi soil.

Turkey and the Kurds: What goes around comes around

James M. Dorsey

Turkey, like much of the Middle East, is discovering that what goes around comes around.

Not only because President Recep Tayyip Erdogan appears to have miscalculated the fallout of what may prove to be a foolhardy intervention in Syria and neglected alternative options that could have strengthened Turkey’s position without sparking the ire of much of the international community.

But also because what could prove to be a strategic error is rooted in a policy of decades of denial of Kurdish identity and suppression of Kurdish cultural and political rights that was more likely than not to fuel conflict rather than encourage societal cohesion.

The policy midwifed the birth in the 1970s to militant groups like the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), which only dropped its demand for Kurdish independence in recent years.

The group that has waged a low intensity insurgency that has cost tens of thousands of lives has been declared a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union.

Turkish refusal to acknowledge the rights of the Kurds, who are believed to account for up to 20 percent of the country’s population traces its roots to the carving of modern Turkey out of the ruins of the Ottoman empire by its visionary founder, Mustafa Kemal, widely known as Ataturk, Father of the Turks.

It is entrenched in Mr. Kemal’s declaration in a speech in 1923 to celebrate Turkish independence of “how happy is the one who calls himself a Turk,” an effort to forge a national identity for country that was an ethnic mosaic.

The phrase was incorporated half a century later in Turkey’s student oath and ultimately removed from it in 2013 at a time of peace talks between Turkey and the PKK by then prime minister, now president Erdogan.

It took the influx of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Kurds in the late 1980s and early 1990s as well as the 1991 declaration by the United States, Britain and France of a no-fly zone in northern Iraq that enabled the emergence of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdish region to spark debate in Turkey about the Kurdish question and prompt the government to refer to Kurds as Kurds rather than mountain Turks.

Ironically, Turkey’s enduring refusal to acknowledge Kurdish rights and its long neglect of development of the pre-dominantly Kurdish southeast of the country fuelled demands for greater rights rather than majority support for Kurdish secession largely despite the emergence of the PKK

Most Turkish Kurds, who could rise to the highest offices in the land s long as they identified as Turks rather than Kurds, resembled Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, whose options were more limited even if they endorsed the notion of a Jewish state.

Nonetheless, both minorities favoured an independent state for their brethren on the other side of the border but did not want to surrender the opportunities that either Turkey or Israel offered them.

The existence for close to three decades of a Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq and a 2017 referendum in which an overwhelming majority voted for Iraqi Kurdish independence, bitterly rejected and ultimately nullified by Iraqi, Turkish and Iranian opposition, did little to fundamentally change Turkish Kurdish attitudes.

If the referendum briefly soured Turkish-Iraqi Kurdish relations, it failed to undermine the basic understanding underlying a relationship that could have guided Turkey’s approach towards the Kurds in Syria even if dealing with Iraqi Kurds may have been easier because, unlike Turkish Kurds, they had not engaged in political violence against Turkey.

The notion that there was no alternative to the Turkish intervention in Syria is further countered by the fact that Turkish PKK negotiations that started in 2012 led a year later to a ceasefire and a boosting of efforts to secure a peaceful resolution.

The talks prompted imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan to publish a letter endorsing the ceasefire, the disarmament and withdrawal from Turkey of PKK fighters, and a call for an end to the insurgency. Mr. Ocalan predicted that 2013 would be the year in which the Turkish Kurdish issues would be resolved peacefully.

The PKK’s military leader, Cemil Bayik, told the BBC three years later that “we don’t want to separate from Turkey and set up a state. We want to live within the borders of Turkey on our own land freely.”

The talks broke down in 2015 against the backdrop of the Syrian war and the rise as a US ally of the United States in the fight against the Islamic State of the PKK’s Syrian affiliate, the People’s Protection Units (YPG).

Bitterly opposed to the US-YPG alliance, Turkey demanded that the PKK halt its resumption of attacks on Turkish targets and disarm prior to further negotiations.

Turkey responded to the breakdown and resumption of violence with a brutal crackdown in the southeast of the country and on the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP).

Nonetheless, in a statement issued from prison earlier this year that envisioned an understanding between Turkey and Syrian Kurdish forces believed to be aligned with the PKK, Mr. Ocalan declared that “we believe, with regard to the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the problems in Syria should be resolved within the framework of the unity of Syria, based on constitutional guarantees and local democratic perspectives. In this regard, it should be sensitive to Turkey’s concerns.”

Turkey’s emergence as one of Iraqi Kurdistan’s foremost investors and trading partners in exchange for Iraqi Kurdish acquiescence in Turkish countering the PKK’s presence in the region could have provided inspiration for a US-sponsored safe zone in northern Syria that Washington and Ankara had contemplated.

The Turkish-Iraqi Kurdish understanding enabled Turkey  to allow an armed Iraqi Kurdish force to transit Turkish territory in 2014 to help prevent the Islamic State from conquering the Syrian city of Kobani.

A safe zone would have helped “realign the relationship between Turkey’s Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and its Syrian offshoot… The safe-zone arrangements… envision(ed) drawing down the YPG presence along the border—a good starting point for reining in the PKK, improving U.S. ties with Ankara, and avoiding a potentially destructive Turkish intervention in Syria,” Turkey scholar Sonar Cagaptay suggested in August.

The opportunity that could have created the beginnings of a sustainable solution that would have benefitted Turkey as well as the Kurds fell by the wayside with Mr. Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops from northern Syria.

In many ways, Mr. Erdogan’s decision to opt for a military solution fits the mould of a critical mass of world leaders who look at the world through a civilizational prism and often view national borders in relative terms.

Russian leader Vladimir Putin pointed the way with his 2008 intervention in Georgia and the annexation in 2014 of Crimea as well as Russia’s stirring of pro-Russian insurgencies in two regions of Ukraine.

Mr. Erdogan appears to believe that if Mr. Putin can pull it off, so can he.