23 Oct 2021

COVID-19 surge spreads across Europe

Johannes Stern & Alex Lantier


Official propaganda of the end of the pandemic notwithstanding, the spread of COVID-19 in Europe is taking on ever more dramatic forms. Every day, about 220,000 people become infected with the virus and almost 3,000 die.

Last week, the World Health Organisation (WHO) reported a 7 percent increase in the number of COVID-19 cases in Europe. The WHO pointed to uneven vaccination rates across the continent and stressed that the development poses a significant threat. Significantly, according to the WHO, Europe was the only region of the world where the number of daily reported cases is rising.

The situation is particularly acute in Eastern Europe. Yesterday, 1,064 people died of COVID-19 and 37,141 new cases were recorded in Russia. Experts assume that the number of unreported cases is far higher. In Ukraine (614 dead yesterday, 23,785 cases) and Romania (356 dead, 15,410 new cases), more people are dying now of COVID-19 than ever before in the pandemic.

Yesterday, with overflowing emergency wards threatening to swamp the hospital system, Ukraine announced a two-week shutdown of schools in high-infection areas, including in the capital, Kiev. Only 6.8 million of Ukraine’s 41 million population, and less than one in four of Bulgaria’s population, are fully vaccinated.

The situation in the Baltic States is also out of control. The cabinet in Latvia was forced to impose a night curfew and a month-long lockdown on Wednesday. Earlier, according to the health authority in Riga, there had been 1,400 new infections per 100,000 inhabitants in 14 days—a record since the beginning of the pandemic. In many hospitals, intensive care units are already fully occupied, said Health Minister Daniels Pavluts.

In the rest of Europe, the trend is moving in a similar direction. In Poland, the number of new infections is currently doubling from week to week. “If this situation continues, it will break through all the forecasts we have had so far,” warned Poland’s Health Minister Adam Niedzielski in Warsaw on Wednesday.

Great Britain currently has the highest number of recorded COVID-19 cases, with about 50,000 new infections daily and around 200 deaths each day. In France, Italy and Spain, where cases had remained comparatively low after a surge in cases and deaths in the late summer, the number of daily new infections has again begun to rise after hitting a low October 10-15 of 4,203, 2,456 and 1,464, respectively.

Germany has also recorded another drastic increase. For several days now, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) has been reporting an increasing number of new daily infections; on Friday, there were almost 20,000. The seven-day incidence was 95.1 per 100,000 inhabitants, the highest level since mid-May. In its current weekly report, the RKI warns that the increase in the number of cases will accelerate as autumn and winter progress.

Across much of Europe, the situation is worse than it was at the same time last year, when hundreds of thousands died of COVID-19 during the winter. Now a similar scenario is looming.

The WHO warned in early September of 236,000 additional COVID-19 deaths by December 1. Nevertheless, the European governments did nothing to halt the spread of the virus and avert mass deaths. On the contrary: they opened schools and businesses and almost completely dismantled remaining protection measures such as mask mandates and school mitigation procedures. The current mass infections and deaths are a direct result of these policies.

Governments of all stripes—conservative, social democratic and pseudo-left—are pursuing a deliberate policy of herd immunity, putting profits over lives. In order not to jeopardise the orgy of enrichment on the stock exchanges, they insist that parents send their children to school completely defenceless against the virus and that there must be no more closures and that one must “live with the virus.”

Whether or not they claim to be following procedures to “mitigate” the spread of COVID-19, the results of the policies the European powers pursue are largely indistinguishable from the far-right’s calls to develop “herd immunity” via mass infection of the population with coronavirus. Indeed, the far right has long called for an end to all social restriction measures linked to the pandemic.

In Germany, Health Minister Jens Spahn’s plan to end the “epidemic situation” and de facto eliminate all remaining protective measures by November 25 is supported by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) as well as by the Left Party. The Left Party in Saarland, led by party founder Oskar Lafontaine, even wants a “Freedom Day” on October 30, following the British example, demanding that COVID-19 measures be ignored. It is “high time for a ‘Freedom Day’ instead of ‘German Angst’,” the party declared in an official statement.

Hard experience has shown it is impossible to obtain a more rational, scientific policy against the pandemic by voting establishment parties labelled as “left” into office. In France, allies of the Left Party in Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s Unsubmissive France party, together with the Révolution permanente web site and the Workers Struggle (LO) party, all endorsed participation in anti-vaccine demonstrations despite overwhelming popular support for vaccination. More than 75 percent of the French population is vaccinated.

In Spain, the “left populist” Podemos party is in power together with the social-democratic Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE). Yet there have been over 100,000 excess deaths in Spain during the pandemic, and the courts are now ruling that even the limited lockdowns imposed last year to halt the initial wave of the pandemic—in response to mass strikes in Italy, Spain and across much of Europe—were illegal and unconstitutional.

The ruling elite’s contempt for the massive deaths and suffering caused by the pandemic was on full display at the two-day European Council summit that ended yesterday in Brussels. The discussion centred largely on how to deny Afghan refugees passing through former Soviet republics entry into the European Union (EU), and the Polish government’s attempts to disregard European legal rulings. COVID-19 was barely mentioned in news reports on the summit, though the summit web site briefly called for “efforts to overcome vaccine hesitancy to be stepped up.”

At the same time, the EU countries are pouring hundreds of billions of euros into military budgets, which continue to increase even despite the fall in economic activity due to the pandemic.

Mass death, now unfolding on a scale usually only seen in times of war, must be stopped. Already, over 1.27 million people have died of COVID-19 across Europe. Worldwide, almost 5 million have officially succumbed to the virus. Recent studies suggest that the actual death toll is much higher, with the COVID-19 pandemic leading to approximately 15 million deaths worldwide, including approximately 1.8 million in Europe.

Supreme Court refuses to block Texas abortion ban for second time

Alex Findijs


The Supreme Court refused to block the unconstitutional Texas abortion ban for the second time on Friday. The court has decided to defer a request from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to place the law on hold. Arguments are set to be heard on November 1 on whether the DOJ has the right to challenge the Texas law in court.

The 6-3 conservative majority of the Supreme Court has evaded the constitutional violations of the Texas abortion ban since it was signed into law two months ago. This has been conducted on the flimsy ground that the Supreme Court should not rule on a case while lower courts are still debating its legality, and because the Texas law has an unprecedented form of legal enforcement for its abortion ban.

The Texas law bans all abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, at around just six weeks into pregnancy. Six weeks is well before an embryo may be scientifically considered a fetus, and is considerably before most women even know that they are pregnant. Reports from women’s health providers show that abortions in the state have dropped by 80 percent since the law went into effect.

Republican-led states have attempted to pass similar laws in the past, all struck down by the Supreme Court for violating the 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade.

However, this new law does not have direct government enforcement. Rather, it bars state employees from enforcing the law as a crime and instead passes enforcement on to private citizens, who are encouraged to take vigilante action and sue women and women’s health care providers for receiving or providing an abortion.

Because the state government has shifted enforcement into civil courts, anti-abortion advocates and far-right judges have argued that the Department of Justice cannot sue to obtain a court order preventing enforcement of the law.

If the Supreme Court rejects the arguments of the DOJ and allows the Texas law to remain in effect it will effectively be a soft overturn of Roe v. Wade. While still in effect, Roe will be circumvented by additional laws in states across the country employing similar tactics, using civil law to enforce a criminal ban on abortion rights.

Federal District Judge Robert Pitman—who temporarily blocked the law for two days before the higher ruling of the Fifth Circuit Court reimposed it—warned that Texas had “deliberately circumvented the traditional process” and had “drafted the law with the intent to preclude review by federal courts that have the obligation to safeguard the very rights the statute likely violates.”

This form of constitutional loophole would not only have dire consequences for women’s reproductive rights, but for democratic rights in general. If the law is allowed to remain in effect then “no decision of this Court is safe,” warned the DOJ in a statement released Friday. “States need not comply with, or even challenge, precedents with which they disagree. They may simply outlaw the exercise of whatever rights they disfavor; disclaim state enforcement; and delegate to the general public the authority to bring harassing actions threatening ruinous liability. … Texas should not obtain a different result simply by pairing its unconstitutional law with an unprecedented enforcement scheme designed to evade the traditional mechanisms for judicial review.”

Issuing similar warnings, the DOJ released a statement Friday urging the Supreme Court not to entertain arguments from anti-abortion proponents arguing for the overturn of Roe v. Wade and the 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld the right of women to an abortion up to 26 weeks into pregnancy.

Despite the risk to abortion rights nationwide, the Biden administration has done nothing but offer empty words of concern. Just as the Democrats have abandoned any defense of voting rights as Republican state legislatures restrict voting access across the country, they have offered no solution beyond the mercy of the courts in the defense of abortion rights.

Nearly 50 years since Roe v. Wade, the Democratic Party has made no concerted effort to codify abortion rights in law. In fact, abortion rights have been consistently put under attack by reactionary politicians who have imposed more federal restrictions on abortion than there have been protections.

The mass protests that took place on October 2 against the attacks on abortion rights demonstrate the overwhelming support among the population for the defense of the right to an abortion. Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets determined to demonstrate their commitment to defending democratic rights.

The same cannot be said about the Democratic Party-aligned leadership of these protests. They have consistently worked to channel mass outrage over attacks on abortion behind the electoral campaigns of the Democrats, who have cynically used abortion as an electoral crutch for decades.

A genuine defense of abortion rights cannot take place through the Democratic Party or the courts.

In the Supreme Court’s decision to defer a ruling on the Texas abortion ban, only Associate Justice Sonya Sotomayor expressed any dissent. In her dissension she wrote: “For the second time, the court is presented with an application to enjoin a statute enacted in open disregard of the constitutional rights of women seeking abortion care in Texas. For the second time, the court declines to act immediately to protect these women from grave and irreparable harm.”

Other justices appointed by Democratic presidents held their tongues, potentially swayed by the promise to hear arguments on November 1. Until then the working-class women of Texas will be forced to live under a draconian law in blatant violation of the Constitution.

Looming in the near distance is another scheduled hearing on Mississippi’s anti-abortion law, which attempts to ban abortion after 15 weeks, on December 1. In this case, the state of Mississippi is asking for the Supreme Court to repeal Roe directly.

There is a real potential that the conservative majority may use either law as a justification to overturn Roe v. Wade, in one of the greatest rollbacks of democratic rights in the United States in the 21st century.

Police across US refuse COVID-19 vaccines

Trévon Austin


Across the US, police are refusing to comply with COVID-19 vaccine mandates, with many quitting their jobs or filing lawsuits rather than receive a vaccine.

In August, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot mandated that all city employees not fully vaccinated by October 15 had to undergo COVID-19 testing twice a week. Each unvaccinated employee is required to submit a test every three to four days, on their own time and at their own expense. The testing option is available only until the end of this year. After December 31, city employees must be fully vaccinated, unless they have received an approved medical or religious exemption.

The mayoral mandate sparked opposition among Chicago’s police. Nearly one-third of Chicago’s 13,000-member police department has so far refused to register their vaccination status, putting them on track for dismissal. City officials report that 21 police have been officially removed from active duty so far.

John Cantanzara, head of Chicago’s largest police union, called for the union’s approximately 11,000 members to defy the city’s requirement to report vaccination status. After the city announced the vaccine mandate in August, Cantanzara compared it to Nazi Germany, telling the Sun-Times, “This ain’t Nazi Germany. … ‘Step into the ... showers, the pills won’t hurt you.’”

He said up to half of Chicago’s police force would take unpaid leave rather than report their vaccine status.

“It is the city’s clear attempt to force officers to ‘Chicken Little, the sky is falling’ into compliance,” he said last week. “Do not fall for it. Hold the line.”

A judge granted the city’s request for a temporary order barring Cantanzara from making any public comments encouraging union members to resist the mandate. However, he has continued to post videos on the union’s YouTube channel in defiance of the order. In a video posted online Tuesday, Cantanzara threatened to sue the Lightfoot administration if it tried to enforce the mandate.

Senator Mike Braun, a Republican from Indiana, announced that officers in Illinois who lose their jobs due to vaccine mandates can look to Indiana for new positions, saying that the officers “deserve respect.”

In a statement to Fox News, Braun said, “Our police do the hardest job in the world, and they deserve respect—not losing their pay or being fired for refusing to comply with a ridiculous vaccine mandate.”

The conflict in Chicago reflects a broader trend across America. Police departments have faced resistance in their efforts to get police officers to comply with vaccine mandates, despite reports indicating that COVID-19 is now the leading cause of death of police in the country, according to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. According to the organization, 133 police officers died of COVID-related causes in 2021, higher than firearm and traffic-related deaths combined.

Some cities have released figures showing that police department employees tend to be vaccinated at lower rates than most other government workers, and at lower rates than the general public. In Los Angeles, where vaccines are required for city workers, more than 2,600 police department employees said they intended to seek a religious exemption.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva said he would not enforce the county’s new vaccine mandate within his agency. He oversees the largest sheriff’s department in the country, with approximately 18,000 employees. LA County set a deadline for county employees to be vaccinated by October 1. Villanueva said his employees are willing to be terminated rather than get vaccinated.

“I don’t want to be in a position to lose 5, 10 percent of my workforce overnight on a vaccine mandate,” the sheriff said.

Los Angeles County has recorded more than 26,000 COVID-related deaths, and health officials report an average of 14 deaths a day, despite slowing hospitalization rates.

The union representing New York City police officers vowed to sue the city government Wednesday, hours after Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all New York City municipal employees.

Sheriff John Mina of Orange County Florida said he brought in a doctor to answer deputies’ questions about vaccination and offered three days leave to those who got shots. However, the latest figures show about 45 percent of employees, who submitted their vaccination status, were still not vaccinated. The sheriff said he opposed mandates and said that his officers deal with “violent criminals all the time carrying guns, and I think they think that may be more of a threat.”

In Milwaukee, city officials were pressured into an agreement with the city’s police union earlier this month that requires union members to be vaccinated or wear masks while on duty, except when eating or drinking at a safe distance from others.

Firefighters and police officers from across New Jersey gathered in protest against vaccine mandates last week in Newark, the state’s largest city. Multiple unions representing officers and firefighters have filed legal challenges to Newark Mayor Ras Baraka’s vaccine requirement for city workers.

In Seattle, dozens of police officers and firefighters were fired Monday for refusing to comply with a vaccine mandate. On Tuesday, dozens of former cops and firefighters left their boots on the steps of Seattle’s City Hall and posted videos on social media of them feeding the homeless. The Washington State Patrol also lost 127 employees following the mandate, including 67 troopers, six sergeants and one captain.

British government prepares fascistic “push back” of migrants and asylum seekers in English Channel

Simon Whelan


British Border Force staff imposing Home Secretary Priti Patel’s plans to “push back” boats carrying migrants in the English Channel will be granted legal immunity from conviction if refugees drown as a result.

A provision in the Nationality and Borders Bill states that officials would 'not be liable to any criminal or civil proceedings for anything done' when they forcibly “push back” dinghies into a busy commercial waterway carrying refugees seeking asylum in the UK. In September, the Home Office announced it was training Border Force guards to bully and reverse the course of small boats carrying migrants in the English Channel.

Kim Bryan, from the charity Channel Rescue, which observes migrants arriving in small vessels across the Channel, told the BBC Breakfast on Sunday show that from the Dover cliffs her group had recently witnessed local Border Force officials practising “push back” using jet-skis. Bryan warned Patel the consequences of using these controversial tactics would be “horrific”.

The UN Convention on the law of the sea says that all nations are required to give assistance to 'any person found at sea in danger of being lost” and “proceed with all possible speed to the rescue of persons in distress”.

Under existing laws, officers would be in danger of being prosecuted if a migrant is endangered or drowns because of their actions or lack of actions. Schedule 4A, part A1, paragraph J1 of the Conservative government’s new bill is an attempt to give officers immunity from conviction. It reads: “A relevant officer is not liable in any criminal or civil proceedings for anything done in the purported performance of functions under this part of this schedule if the court is satisfied that (a) the act was done in good faith, and (b) there were reasonable grounds for doing it.”

The Guardian described the provision as being “tucked away in an obscure corner of the bill” and questioned whether, by blatantly breaking National Maritime Laws, the Bill will ever become law. But Prime Minister Boris Johnson government is serious in its intention to make deliberate acts of murder official government policy at their maritime borders.

According to the Bill anyone arriving in the UK via what the government calls an “illegal route”, such as by a small boat across the Channel, will automatically have their claim ruled inadmissible, receive a jail sentence of up to four years, have zero recourse to public funds, and have family members barred from joining them. But the only means for migrants and asylum seekers fleeing the wars and devastation created by the actions of British, US and European imperialism across Central Asia, the Persian Gulf, the Levant and North Africa are deemed “illegal routes” by the British government.

A two-tier asylum system is being created whereby the government plans to treat those arriving by “irregular means” and “illegal routes” —such as in small dinghies and boats, shipping containers and other dangerous methods—as having even fewer rights than those who reach British shores by means the government deem legitimate. Such moves are in gross violation of the UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention of Human Rights.

Patel’s Bill breaches international and domestic law in at least 10 different ways, a report from a team of leading immigration lawyers has concluded. It described the Bill as the “biggest legal assault on international refugee law ever seen in the UK”. The 95-page joint legal opinion piece written by four barristers; Raza Husain QC, Eleanor Mitchell, Jason Pobjoy and Sarah Dobbie, on behalf of the campaign group Freedom from Torture, illustrates the unlawfulness of multiple aspects of the Bill.

The Bill is also potentially in breach of the UN Refugee Convention articles 31 and 33. Article 31 states that countries cannot expel a refugee for arriving by irregular means if they are coming from 'a territory where their life or freedom was threatened', provided these people present themselves to authorities and show good cause for entering via illegal means. It also states that nations will not apply restrictions to the movements of refugees other than 'those which are necessary' until their status is confirmed or they gain admission into another country.

Article 33 concerns returning refugees to the area from which they are fleeing and states that this should not happen where the person's life would be threatened on account of their “race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion”. These articles can be contravened only where there are “reasonable grounds” that the refugee is a “danger to the security of the country” or has been convicted of a serious crime which would constitute a threat to the community of the country.

The lawyers conclude, “This bill represents the biggest legal assault on international refugee law ever seen in the UK. The principle at the heart of the bill is the penalisation, both criminally and administratively, of those who arrive by irregular means in the UK to claim asylum and the bill seeks to reverse a number of important decisions of the UK courts, including at the House of Lords and court of appeal level, given over the last 20 years.”

A fascistic media campaign is underway to provide high profile support for the Johnson government’s murderous immigration policies, which dovetail with its “herd immunity” response to the pandemic. Nana Akua, a host on the new right-wing channel GB News, has vocally supported the idea that border patrol staff shouldn’t be prosecuted for the “push back” policy.

Akua, British born with Ghanian parents, appeared alongside author Jemma Forte on the Channel Five Jeremy Vine chat show where she said that it was “fair enough” to know that migrants won’t be rescued if their boat sinks. Akua was allowed to spew her bile at length, declaring, “I personally think… look, as long as you know that if you come across you won’t be rescued if your boat sinks, I think that’s fair enough, and that’s why they’re saying if they come across with jet skis, then they can’t rescue them, it will actually hopefully stop the people trafficking, because if you are supporting that they should be rescued, you’re actually supporting people trafficking which means that more people will come across because they think they’ll be ok.’

Forte replied to Akua’s odious opinions, “I think it’s one of the most disgusting things I’ve ever heard in my life”. She pointed out that the Bill’s provision was a breach of international law and called it “state sponsored manslaughter”. Forte continued, “To dehumanise these human beings who are coming over… why do they do it? Because they’re desperate, they’ve come from war-torn countries, they are fleeing places like Syria…”

A coalition of hundreds of groups, Together With Refugees, has been formed to oppose the Bill. One of several protests and campaigns was a letter to Johnson calling for a “kinder, fairer and more effective asylum system,” signed by 40 prominent individuals, including actors Olivia Colman, Joanna Lumley, Stephen Fry, Fiona Shaw, Simon Callow, Imelda Staunton, Zoe Wanamaker and Thandiwe Newton, the band Kaiser Chiefs, TV personalities Robert Rinder and Gok Wan, as well as comedians Romesh Ranganathan, Frankie Boyle and Shaparak “Shappi” Khorsandi.

A global tragedy: Up to 180,000 health care workers have died from COVID-19

Andre Damon


In the latest in a series of statistics showing the disastrous social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) has reported that as many as 180,000 health care workers have died from the ongoing pandemic worldwide.

Nurses and other health workers protest at Kandy hospital in Sri Lanka (WSWS Media)

“Between 80,000 to 180,000 health and care workers could have died from Covid-19 in the period between January 2020 to May 2021,” the WHO stated. These workers are among the approximately 15 million people worldwide who have died from the pandemic, according to “excess death” statistics published by the Economist.

Health care workers, who have been battling the pandemic for close to two years, are approaching exhaustion.

Speaking to the Guardian, Annette Kennedy, president of the International Council of Nurses, said that of the tens of thousands who lost their lives, many did so “many needlessly, many we could have saved.”

“It’s a shocking indictment of governments,” she said. “It’s a shocking indictment of their lack of duty of care to protect healthcare workers who have paid the ultimate sacrifice with their lives.” She added, “They are now burnt out, they are devastated, they are physically and mentally exhausted. And there is a prediction that 10% of them will leave within a very short time.”

With health care workers near the breaking point, COVID-19 cases are once again surging around the world, driven by massive outbreaks in Eastern Europe and the United Kingdom.

The UK recorded 51,000 daily new cases Thursday, the highest level since January, and cases are rapidly approaching the all-time record of 67,775. Despite widespread vaccination, the daily death toll has risen, hitting an average of 130 deaths per day.

One in 55 people tested positive for COVID-19 in England in the week beginning October 6, according to the Office for National Statistics, up from one in 60 the prior week.

Among children ages 5-14, the number of daily new cases has surged to the highest level ever recorded. Young people between the ages of 11 and 16 had the highest test positivity rates, followed by children between the ages of 2 and 10.

But the country worst affected on the entire Eurasian landmass is Russia, which registered 36,000 cases Thursday, the highest level ever, while the daily death toll has reached over 1,000.

In the United States, the long-time global epicenter of the pandemic, another 1,626 people died Thursday, bringing the official US death toll to 755,497. But the real death toll, including unreported deaths, is more than 1.1 million, according to figures from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.

The immense dangers posed by COVID-19 even to those who were not hospitalized is becoming apparent. As many as one in three COVID-19 patients developed lingering neurological problems, including executive functioning, cognitive processing speed, and memory recall.

While the beginning of the fall and winter seasons in the northern hemisphere was expected to bring an upsurge in cases, scientists are increasingly worried that the current surge is driven by new mutations of Sars-CoV-2 that are even more dangerous and transmissible than the Delta variant.

Up to 10 percent of cases in the UK have been attributed to Delta subtype AY.4.2, which media outlets have referred to as “Delta Plus.”

Jeffrey Barrett, director of the Covid-19 Genomics Initiative at the Wellcome Sanger Institute in Cambridge, and Francois Balloux, director of the University College London Genetics Institute, told the Financial Times that AY.4.2 seemed to be 10 to 15 percent more transmissible than the original Delta variant.

“If the preliminary evidence is confirmed, AY.4.2 may be the most infectious coronavirus strain since the pandemic started,” the FT wrote, citing Balloux.

Scientists warned that COVID-19 still has substantial capabilities to evolve and become more infectious. “I see nothing that suggests this virus is quieting down,” Kristian Andersen, an immunologist at Scripps Research Institute, told the Washington Post this week. “I don’t think this virus is as transmissible as it can be.”

But even as cases surge throughout the world, governments are abandoning all restrictions on the spread of the disease.

This month, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam all announced that they would transition away from “zero Covid” strategies intended to eliminate disease transmission. In Singapore, this has resulted in a massive increase in cases, from single digits in July to over 3,000 per day now.

For months, the US and global media have asserted that the COVID-19 pandemic would simply go away on its own, becoming “manageable” like the seasonal flu. Once again, these claims, motivated entirely by efforts to boost stock markets, have been shown to be a fraud. The latest upsurge makes clear that unless COVID-19 is brought under control through aggressive emergency measures, it will continue to kill on a vast scale.

The resurgence of the pandemic, despite the widespread availability of vaccinations, has vindicated the warnings of scientists and public health officials who have asserted that society cannot “live with” the COVID-19 pandemic and must instead eliminate, and possibly eradicate, the disease around the world.

22 Oct 2021

Echoing Green Fellowship 2022

Application Deadline: 2nd November 2021

Eligible Countries: All

About the Fellowship: The Global Fellowship is the twenty-eight-year-old program for smart leaders who are deeply connected to the needs and potential solutions that may work best for their communities. Any emerging social entrepreneur from any part of the world working to disrupt the status quo may apply.

Type: Social Entrepreneurship

Selection Criteria: Successful applicants not only present an innovative way of addressing social issues, but also explain why they as individuals have what it takes to succeed. Echoing Green is not a grant-making organization. We are a fellowship program because we believe in the importance of the individual social entrepreneur as well as his/her project.  As such, we look at both the applicant and the applicant’s idea.

Applicant Criteria

  • Purpose / Passion
  • Resilience
  • Leadership
  • Ability to Attract Resources

Organization Criteria

  • Innovation
  • Importance
  • Potential for Big, Bold Impact
  • A Good Business Model

Eligibility: In order to be eligible for an Echoing Green Fellowship, the applicant must be:

  • Over 18 years old
  • Fluent in English
  • Able to commit a full 35 hour work week to their organization.

In order to be eligible for an Echoing Green Fellowship, the organization must be:

  • The original idea of the applicant(s)
  • In its start-up phase, usually within the first two years of operation
  • Independent and autonomous

There are often some misconceptions about what types of organizations are eligible for the Echoing Green Fellowship. Here is some clarification about organizations that are eligible:

  • An organization can be either a non-profit, a for-profit, or hybrid.
  • An organization does not only have to be run by one individual. Partnerships can apply for a Fellowship
  • Organizations still in the idea phase are eligible

The following types of organizations are not eligible to apply:

  • Students, scholarships, or research projects (Students may apply for the Echoing Green Fellowship while they are full time students in a degree program. However, they must have completed their studies by July at the beginning of their fellowship period.)
  • Lobbying or faith-based organizations
  • Existing organizations which have grown past their start-up phase

Number of Fellowships: Several

Value of Fellowship:

  • A dedicated Echoing Green portfolio manager to assist in the development of an Individualized Fellow Plan, access to technical expertise and pro bono partnerships to help grow their organization, and support from Echoing Green chaplains
  • Leadership development, peer mentorship, and targeted networking opportunities
  • A community of like-minded social entrepreneurs, public service leaders, and industry leaders including the Echoing Green network of over 700 Fellows working in sixty countries all over the world.
  • A stipend of $80,000 for individuals (or $90,000 for two-person partnerships) paid in four equal installments over two years
  • A health insurance stipend and yearly professional development stipend

Duration of Fellowship: two years plus ongoing support

How to Apply: Apply Here

Visit fellowship webpage for details

Wells Mountain Education Scholarship Program 2021

Application Deadline: 1st March, 2022

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries; Developing Countries

Accepted Subject Areas? All fields are eligible although WMF intend to favor helping professions such as health care, social work, education, social justice, as well as, professions that help the economy and progress of the country such as computers, engineering, agriculture and business.

About the Award:

Wells Mountain Foundation offers undergraduate scholarship to students from developing countries to study in their home country or any other developing country. The foundation’s hope is that by providing the opportunity to further one’s education, the scholarship participants will not only be able to improve their own future, but also that of their own communities. The foundation believes in the power and importance of community service and, as a result, all scholarship participants are required to volunteer for a minimum of one month a year.

Applicants are only allowed to select a university in a developing country. Applications to study in UK, USA, Europe and Australia will not be accepted

Offered Since: 2005

Type: undergraduate

Who is qualified to apply? To be eligible to apply for this scholarship, applicant must be a student, male or female, from a country in the developing world, who:

  • successfully completed a secondary education, with good to excellent grades
  • will be studying in their country or another country in the developing world*
  • plans to live and work in their own country after they graduate
  • has volunteered prior to applying for this scholarship and/or is willing to volunteer while receiving the WMF scholarship
  • may have some other funds available for their education, but will not be able to go to school without a scholarship

*Scholars planning to study in the United States, Canada, Australia, UK or Western Europe will not qualify for a WMI Scholarship

Number of Awards10 to 30 per year

What are the benefits? Maximum scholarship is $3,000 USD.

  • tuition and fees
  • books and materials
  • room rent and meals

How to Apply: 

  • Applicants are required to submit two letters of recommendation written by someone who knows you, but is not a family member, who can tell why you deserve to receive a WMF scholarship. What qualities do you possess that will make you an excellent student, a successful graduate and a responsible citizen who will give back to his or her country? These letters of recommendation may come from a teacher, a religious leader, volunteer supervisor, or an employer.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

DAAD In-Country/In-Region Masters & PhD Scholarships 2022

Application Deadline: 17th February 2022

Eligible Countries: Sub-Saharan African Countries

To be Taken at (Country): Sub-Saharan African Countries

About the DAAD In-Country/In-Region Masters & PhD Scholarships: The programme is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and aims at university staff in the first line, without neglecting the public sector demand of academically trained personnel.

The DAAD In-Country/In-Region programme aims at fostering strong, internationally oriented higher education systems in Sub-Saharan Africa with the capacity to contribute to sustainable development. To this end, scholarships are granted for development-related Master or doctoral studies for individuals who plan to pursue a career in teaching and / or research at a higher education institution in Sub-Saharan Africa.
By training future academic and professional leaders, the programme contributes to the following long-term impacts:

  • Qualified professionals’ involvement in the solution of development-related problems in Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Graduates strengthening education and research in Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Structural strengthening and regional networking of partner institutions and partner universities

To achieve these long-term impacts, the following outcomes have been formulated as programme objectives:
Programme objective 1: Graduates have qualified to take over responsible positions in their, or for their, region of origin
Programme objective 2: The participation of women and underprivileged groups is reinforced
Programme objective 3: Organizational, financial and personal capacities of partner institutions are strengthened

DAAD In-Country/In-Region Masters & PhD Scholarships Field(s) of Study:

West and Central Africa

Benin

Burkina Faso

Ghana

Nigeria

Network

  • Centre d ‘Etudes Régional pour l’Amélioration de l’Adaptation à la Sécheresse (CERAAS), Subject field: Agricultural Sciences (Master, PhD)

Eastern Africa

Ethiopia

Kenya

Sudan

Tanzania

Uganda

  • Makerere University, Subject fields: Environment and Natural Ressource (Master), Plant Breeding (PhD)

Networks

Southern Africa

Malawi

Namibia

  • University of Namibia (UNAM), Subject fields: Biodiversity Management (Master)

South Africa (In-Region scholarships only; DAAD In-Country scholarships for South Africa are addressed in a separate call for applications -

  • Stellenbosch University (SUN), Subject fields: Molecular Biology and Human Genetics (Master, PhD) as well as Mathematics (Master, PhD)
  • University of Witwatersrand, African Centre for Migration and Displacement (ACMS), Subject field: Migration and Displacement Studies (Master, PhD)

Others
See also: In-Country/In-Region Scholarship Programme “Strengthening Capacities for Land Governance in Africa” (SLGA), further information: https://www2.daad.de/deutschland/stipendium/datenbank/de/21148-stipendiendatenbank/?detail=57314592

Type: Masters, PhD

Eligibility:

  • The target group for DAAD In-Country/In-Region scholarships are graduates and postgraduates from Sub-Saharan Africa with a first academic degree if applying for a Master’s programme, or with a Master’s degree if applying for a doctoral programme who want to pursue Master’s or PhD courses in their home country (so called In-Country scholarships) or in another Sub-Saharan African country (In-Region scholarships).
  • Female applicants and candidates from less privileged regions or groups are especially encouraged to participate in the programme.

Number of Awards: Numerous

Value of Award: Generally:

  • Monthly allowance
  • Study and research allowance
  • Printing allowance
  • Tuition fees

Only applicable for In-Region scholarship holders:

  • Travel allowance
  • Health insurance

For further information, please see the call for applications of the degree programme you wish to apply for.

Duration of Award: DAAD In-Country/In-Region Funding is provided for the usual duration of a course – generally, up to two years for Masters and up to three years for the PhD degree programmes

How to Apply for DAAD In-Country/In-Region Scholarships:

  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details