15 Nov 2022

German federal states abolish quarantine requirement for those infected with COVID

Tamino Dreisam


Despite the continuing high numbers succumbing to COVID and a mounting flu wave, and with experts warning of a “twindemic,” governments at federal and state level are working to abolish the few remaining protective measures. This is shown by the decision of four federal states to eliminate the requirement for infected persons to go into quarantine.

An intubated COVID-19 patient gets treatment at the intensive care unit at the Westerstede Clinical Center, a military-civilian hospital in Westerstede, northwest Germany [AP Photo/Martin Meissner]

At the end of last week, the state governments of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hesse and Schleswig-Holstein announced they would abolish the quarantine obligation. There was a need for “a new phase in dealing with the pandemic,” which was “in transition to being endemic,” the four states said in a joint statement on Friday.

Other states could soon follow suit. There were “good arguments that infected people without symptoms do not necessarily have to go into quarantine,” Berlin Health Senator (state minister) Ulrike Gote (Greens) said. Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate and Thuringia, led by the Left Party, also hinted they were thinking along similar lines.

The decision can only be described as criminal. It removes the last block on the permanent infection of the population, with catastrophic consequences for the health and lives of millions.

The requirement for infected persons to observe a five-day quarantine period is currently one of the few remaining protective measures against the unhindered spread of the virus. Lifting it means that the infected can carry the virus into schools, workplaces, buses and trains, where it is then further spread. The date for the abolition of the quarantine requirement in Bavaria is set for November 16.

Bavarian state Prime Minister and Christian Social Union Chairman Markus Söder had already announced the abolition of the quarantine rules at the beginning of November in the Augsburger Allgemeine: “We are firmly convinced that the quarantine rules must be adapted. I believe that we are now in an endemic phase due to the high level of vaccinations.”

Going further, Söder told the editors of the Thüringische Landeszeitung that he called for an end to mandatory mask wearing on trains, saying, “It is hard to understand why there is a requirement to wear masks on trains but not on planes. The obligation should [also] fall there.” Again, he justified this by claiming that Germany was on its way from the virus being a pandemic to endemic: “Right now, coronavirus is developing more like the flu.”

The claim that coronavirus is no worse than the flu has long been championed primarily by the far right. Now, representatives of all parties, the media and many so-called experts are spreading it.

A hearing on November 3 in the Schleswig-Holstein state parliament made this clear. The panel consisted of “scientific” proponents of a herd immunity policy who used their statements to downplay the virus and its consequences.

For example, virologist Jan Rupp told the hearing, “With children, we can’t really worry if they become positive or not,” and “It’s just a respiratory virus.” And paediatrician Ralf van Heek said, “Children don’t need protection from the infection. They need the infection. The problem is the protective measures.”

However, the virus has not become harmless, and the pandemic is by no means over. Just one look at the current numbers makes that clear.

Although the autumn school vacations have just ended in most of Germany’s states—meaning fewer contacts took place and there was even less testing than usual—the official infection figures remain at a high level. The 7-day incidence rate on Friday was 243.3 per 100,000 inhabitants, according to the Robert Koch Institute (RKI). Currently, between 400,000 and 1 million people in Germany are displaying symptoms of infection.

However, the official figures have long since ceased to be representative, as the testing infrastructure has been dismantled across the board and only positive PCR tests are included in the RKI statistics. The proportion of positive cases is currently over 40 percent, which indicates an extremely high number of unreported cases.

The situation also remains drastic in hospitals and nursing homes. Numerous new outbreaks occur every day. Last week, according to the RKI, there were 98 outbreaks in medical treatment facilities and 28 people died from previous outbreaks. In nursing homes, there were 312 outbreaks and 124 deaths.

The severity of the current situation is particularly evident in the continuing high number of those experiencing severe illness following infection. The adjusted hospitalization incidence rate is just under 12, which is equivalent to 10,000 hospitalizations per week; 1,219 people currently require intensive care. The 7-day average of daily coronavirus deaths was reported at 150 on Saturday. That means at least another 950 people succumbed to the virus in the past week alone.

An increase in the infection numbers, and thus also of those suffering more severe outcomes, is to be expected in the immediate future. Currently, the Omicron subvariants BQ.1 and BQ.1.1 are spreading. The two are characterized primarily by their high immune escape, i.e., the antibodies produced by vaccinations, previous infections, but also the effectiveness of drugs against a severe course of infection, have a weak to no effect.

Due to their high infectivity—they have a transmission advantage of more than 10 percent compared to previous variants—they have been nicknamed “Cerberus” (the twin-headed hellhound of Greek mythology). It is widely believed by experts that these variants will be responsible for the next major coronavirus wave in Europe before the end of November.

In France and the US, these variants are already dominating the pandemic. In Germany, the RKI states that both variants account for 4 percent each of infection incidences. However, as these values are always communicated to the RKI with a delay of several weeks, and the proportion of both variants doubles approximately every week, it can be assumed they already account for a significantly higher proportion of infections in Germany.

Currently, there is not enough data available to make reliable statements about the severity of the course of illness with the new variants. However, the French newspaper L’Indépendant has reported that severe headaches and cardiac arrhythmias can occur after infection with these two variants.

In addition to the coronavirus wave, there is also the threat of a particularly aggressive flu wave in Germany this year. In recent years, it was largely absent due to the existing coronavirus protective measures. This year, however, with these measures largely abolished, the flu wave is starting earlier than usual and is having a more severe impact. For example, in its latest weekly report, the RKI warns, “In particular, the positive rate and the number of illnesses due to influenza show an increasing trend; in addition, RSV infections are leading to increased illness and hospitalization, especially in young children.”

Numerous scientists warn of a “twindemic” of COVID-19 and influenza. Dangerous double infections are also possible. Professor Dr. Stephan Ludwig, director at the Institute for Molecular Virology at the Westphalian Wilhelms University in Münster, warns, “Since coronaviruses and influenza viruses spread independently of each other, double infections can also occur, which are particularly dangerous.”

Terrorist attack in Istanbul leads to stepped-up police-state measures, militarism

Ulaş Ateşçi


Sunday’s terrorist attack on Istiklal Avenue, one of Istanbul’s most crowded streets, killed six people, including two children. Two of the wounded remain in serious condition in intensive care.

As after countless terrorist attacks in Turkey and internationally in recent decades, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government has responded by suspending basic democratic rights and drastically restricting the public’s access to information and the Internet. This has been accompanied by an anti-refugee campaign launched by far-right forces on social media after the alleged perpetrator was officially identified as Syrian.

The World Socialist Web Site calls on all workers to oppose the efforts by the ruling elite to use this dirty attack to suppress the working class and eliminate basic democratic rights by promoting nationalism and militarism.

Forensic experts collect a dead body after an explosion on Istanbul's popular pedestrian Istiklal Avenue, Sunday, Nov. 13, 2022. [AP Photo/Ismail Coskun]

Authorities have announced that 48 people have been detained so far, including the suspect who allegedly planted the bomb that exploded on Istiklal Avenue. According to a statement of the Istanbul Security Directorate yesterday, the female suspect who allegedly planted the bomb was “trained as a special intelligence officer by the [Kurdish nationalist] PKK/PYD/YPG terrorist organization” and entered Turkey “illegally to carry out attacks in Turkey via Afrin-Idlib [in Syria]” about four months ago.

In footage of the early Monday morning raid on the alleged attacker, Syrian national Ahlam Albashir, and in her photographs taken in police custody, she appears to have been terrified.

An unnamed senior Turkish official told Reuters that they had not ruled out that she could be linked to Islamic State (ISIS), casting further doubts on the credibility of official statements. In recent months, tensions between Ankara and its Islamist proxies in Syria have been growing. It was recently announced that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) had entered Afrin, which is under the control of the Turkish army and its proxies, exploiting disagreements within the Turkish-backed “Syrian National Army” (SMO).

The Istanbul Security Directorate statement claims that Albashır “stated that she received instructions to carry out an attack in Istanbul from the PKK/PYD/YPG terrorist organization’s headquarters in Kobani, Syria, and that she carried out the bombing on Sunday, 13.11.2022 at 16:20 and then fled.”

Neither Albashır’s lawyers nor the lawyers of the more than 40 detainees have issued any statement, however, or claimed responsibility.

Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu’s statements, however, signal further escalation of tensions between Turkey and its US-led NATO allies. Soylu publicly accused Washington, which backs the YPG in Syria, and declared that they rejected the condolences of the US Embassy in Turkey: “We have received the message given to us. We know what the message given to us is. We reject the condolence message of the US Embassy.”

Soylu declared that Turkey’s alliance with Washington is questionable, adding: “The alliance of a state that sends money to Kobani from its own Senate should be discussed. We are not treacherous to anyone, but we have no more power to tolerate these treacherous acts. We will give a very strong response to the message we received.” Soylu’s vow for a “strong response” might signal a new Turkish military operation against YPG militias in Syria.

After the NATO-backed coup attempt in Turkey on July 15, 2016, the Erdoğan government and its Islamist proxies launched multiple invasions into Syria to prevent an YPG-led enclave. This May, Erdoğan announced that the Turkish army was preparing a new offensive against Syrian Kurdish forces. However, he backed down in the face of opposition from both the United States, which occupies northeastern Syria, and Russia and Iran, which back Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

After the 2016 coup attempt, Soylu was one of the most outspoken voices accusing the US of being behind the coup. Islamic preacher Fethullah Gulen, who Ankara claims led the putschist officers, still resides in the United States. In a statement in Uzbekistan on Saturday, Erdoğan again accused the US and its European allies of protecting the coup plotters.

Erdoğan said, “Who is protecting them [pro-Gülen elements] right now? First and foremost Greece. They flee to Greece, they flee to Europe. They have always fled here; they live in Germany, France, Holland, Denmark, Denmark, England, America.” Then he attacked Biden, stating: “And America is hiding this man [Gülen]. Who is hiding him? Biden is hiding him ... If you ask me where the center of terrorism is, I will tell you this right now [the US].” Erdoğan had previously said that the US was the “source of terrorism” in Syria.

According to T24, the US Embassy in Ankara said: “The United States unequivocally condemns terrorism in all its forms and stands in solidarity with our valued NATO ally Turkey,” in response to Soylu. In reality, Washington and Ankara are at odds, not only on the Kurdish question, but even more importantly on the war against Russia.

Yesterday, the PKK, the YPG and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), of which the YPG is the backbone, issued separate statements denying all ties with the terrorist attack in Istanbul. On the other hand, the PKK has claimed for some time that the Turkish army uses chemical weapons in its ongoing operations against it in Iraq.

According to ANF News, the PKK declared: “We have nothing to do with this incident, and it is well-known to the public that we would not target civilians directly or approve of actions directed at civilians,” adding: “Turkish officials pointing Kobanê as a target in connection with this incident reveals the aspect of their plan.”

“Our forces have nothing to do with the Istanbul attack,” SDF commander Mazlum Abdi wrote on Twitter, while the YPG called the allegations “a planned theater play prepared by AKP and Erdoğan.”

However, Duran Kalkan, a leader of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), the umbrella organization including the PKK and the PYD, said in an interview in April that they would target cities.

In a TV interview after the Turkish army launched an offensive targeting PKK forces in Iraq, Kalkan declared: “The guerrillas are not playing defense, they are attacking. They will attack where [the Turkish government] least expects it. This will be not only on the fronts, military targets and positions, but all over Northern Kurdistan, all over Turkey, wherever the AKP-MHP attack us. It will be in the cities. Everywhere is a battlefield.”

The truth is that no statement of the US government, Ankara or of the Kurdish nationalists can be trusted. After the Stalinist bureaucracy dissolved the Soviet Union in 1991, US imperialism turned the region into a war zone from Iraq to Afghanistan, Libya to Syria, killing millions of people and creating millions more refugees. And now the US-led NATO powers have escalated war with Russia in Ukraine, raising the specter of global nuclear war.

Both the Turkish ruling elite and the Kurdish nationalist leaderships have been largely complicit in this 30-year imperialist war and the catastrophes that have ensued. Ankara, for all its conflicts with Washington, remains a critical NATO ally in the Middle East, while the PKK-YPG has become the main US proxy force in Syria. All these forces are enemies of the democratic aspirations of the oppressed peoples, including the Kurds.

The terrorist attack in Istanbul has paved the way for Ankara to escalate both militarism abroad and police-state measures at home to suppress social opposition as well as basic democratic rights. With official annual inflation reaching 85 percent and 90 percent of the population living below the poverty line, Turkey is heading for presidential and parliamentary elections in June 2023, if not sooner. Faced with growing social unrest, Erdoğan risks losing the election.

Hundreds of thousands march in Madrid against health cuts

Alejandro López


Hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated in Spain’s capital Madrid Sunday, in defence of public health care and to oppose its dismantling and privatization under the right-wing Popular Party (PP) regional government of Isabel Ayuso.

Organizers say 670,000 people took to the streets, while the government gave estimates of around 200,000. It was by all accounts one of the largest protests in Spain’s capital over the past decade.

Trains, subways and buses were packed, as tens of thousands moved to join the different columns of protests going from points across the capital to the main demonstration in the centre. Under the slogan, “Madrid rises up to defend public health,” nurses, doctors and health workers were joined by whole working class families, with children and grandparents, from across Madrid. Well-known film director Pedro Almodovar attended, telling El País “the question of public health care is absolutely transversal and affects everyone.'

Aerial photos showed major roads like El Prado, Castellana, and Alcalá entirely jammed with masses of people. Protesters chanted “Quality public health,” “Cutting back on health is a criminal act,” “Not one euro more for the private health sector” and “Ayuso resign!”

The protest also included a minute of silence for the thousands of people who lost their lives in Madrid senior care homes during the pandemic.

The protest is part of rising global opposition to the capitalist offensive against public health care, as the ruling class privatises, dismantles and sacks thousands of health workers, while providing trillions of euros in bank bailouts since the COVID-19 pandemic and NATO’s war on Russia in Ukraine began.

This is discrediting governments across Europe and provoking explosive struggles. In the UK, 300,000 UK nurses voted to strike for a pay deal of inflation plus five percent, the largest ballot by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) in the union’s 106-year history. In the US, 33 medical groups wrote a letter to the Biden Administration to carry out urgent collective action to address the evolving crisis, in which “Emergency departments (EDs) have been brought to a breaking point.”

The region of Madrid is Spain’s most densely-populated region, with 6.6 million people. While it is the richest, it has the lowest health expenditure per capita in Spain, at €1,171/inhabitant, compared to the average of €1,478. It is normal to wait 4 to 8 months to see a specialist doctor and an entire month to get an appointment with a general practitioner.

The combination of a ‘let it rip’ strategy against COVID-19 along with the privatisation and dismantling of services has provoked a catastrophe. According to Eurostat, the region has seen its life expectancy drop more dramatically than anywhere else in Europe—from 85.8 to 82.3 years.

Anger among health workers has been building for years. Ayuso ran last year on the slogan “Communism or Liberty,” opposing public health measures against COVID-19 as “communist” and calling for the defence of “liberty” by ending social distancing and allowing mass infections.

Close to the neo-fascist Vox party, with whom she made a parliamentary alliance, Ayuso is notorious for pursuing a health policy of “social murder.” She provoked protests in the autumn of 2020 by demanding a back-to-school policy despite heavy circulation of the virus, saying: “It is likely that practically all children, one way or another, will be infected with coronavirus.”

She issued protocols with criteria to exclude nursing home residents from being transferred to hospitals at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to tens of thousands of deaths. She even gave contracts to bring masks from China to a friend’s company, for which she ended up paying a commission of about €300,000 to her own brother.

The health crisis has only intensified over the past months. Emergency wards have been overwhelmed as primary care and local emergency services were rapidly dismantled. This April, Ayuso sacked 6,000 health workers who signed a COVID contract in March 2020. Most of them were doctors, nurses, assistants and laboratory technicians.

Over the summer, under mounting anger, Ayuso was forced to announce the reopening of primary care emergency services that had been closed during the pandemic. Then, in early October, she suddenly announced the reopening of 78 continuing care points—41 old SAR (Rural Care Service) and the 37 old SUAP (emergencies located in health centres)—with half the personnel. Doctors were therefore forced to work for 50 percent more hours a year.

This sparked mass anger among health workers, who launched mass sickouts, partial strikes and protests. Walkouts had started in the region the week before, with a strike called for next Monday for nearly 5,000 Madrid doctors. Ayuso reacted by denouncing health workers as “privileged and self-interested” and imposing 100 percent minimum services, aiming to break the strike.

Responsibility for Ayuso remaining in power and implementing her murderous agenda lies squarely with Podemos and the Spanish union bureaucracy. Just weeks ago, on October 22, a demonstration of more than 35,000 people marched in Madrid against Ayuso’s plans. This was ahead of the strike in primary care emergency rooms.

Terrified of rising opposition, the main health unions—the Spanish Trade Union of Nursing Professionals (SATSE), the Podemos-linked Workers’ Commissions (CCOO) and the social-democratic General Union of Workers (UGT)—signed an agreement with Ayuso, calling off the strike. This betrayed the health workers’ main demands.

Workers reacted with a mass sick-out. The same unions that had previously agreed with Ayuso suddenly shifted and, working with neighbourhood associations and medical social movements under their control, launched Sunday’s protest.

Over the years Podemos has played a key role in demobilising opposition to Ayuso. Indeed, the Socialist Party (PSOE)-Podemos government worked hand in hand with Ayuso and Vox in Madrid to implement the EU’s “herd immunity” policy, which has cost over 160,000 lives in Spain. Now, amid a new wave of COVID-19, the government is dismantling testing and data reporting as part of its new strategy of simply ignoring the pandemic.

In autumn 2020, the government threatened to deploy 7,500 soldiers against protests targeting the “restricted mobility” order imposed by Ayuso in the working class districts of Madrid amid the resurgence of COVID-19. The order, worked out between the Madrid regional and the PSOE-Podemos national government, required workers and youth to continue reporting to work and school. It imposed lockdowns only in working class areas.

Amid this devastating exposure of Podemos and the unions, the pseudo-left is intervening to prop them up. Revolutionary Left, formerly affiliated to the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI), is calling on “the leaders of the CCOO and UGT, and of the parliamentary left, of Más Madrid and UP [Podemos]” to “abandon their completely failed strategy of demobilization to guarantee social peace.” Instead they should lead “mass mobilization in the streets and militant and combative strikes.”

In a similar fashion, the Spanish affiliate of the International Marxist Tendency calls on the “trade unions, neighborhood associations, social movements, as well as the left-wing parties and their activists, to join forces to broaden their demands beyond the health issue: in social care, education, urban planning, housing, etc. and launch a first day of general strike in the Community of Madrid for 24 hours, with massive mobilizations in all neighborhoods and cities.”

FTX collapse: A damning exposure of the criminality of capitalism

Nick Beams


One of the most significant aspects of the collapse of the crypto currency trader FTX, which filed for bankruptcy last Friday, was that its essentially fraudulent operations were largely conducted in plain sight.

The FTX Arena, of the collapsed crypto currency trading firm, and venue of the Miami Heat basketball team, Friday, Nov. 11. [AP Photo/Marta Lavandier]

Last April, in an interview with Bloomberg, FTX’s owner-founder Sam Bankman-Fried acknowledged his company was in essence a Ponzi scheme, that is, a system in which money can be made so long as more money keeps flowing in.

Describing the operation, he said, “you start with a company that builds a box” and then “dress it up to look like a life-changing, you know, world-altering protocol that’s gonna replace all the big banks in 38 days or whatever.”

After listening to the spiel, the interviewer responded that what had been described was a Ponzi scheme, to which Bankman-Fried replied that it was a “pretty reasonable response” with a “depressing amount of validity.”

This immediately raises the question: how was this fraud able to be carried out? The answer is clear.

It would not have even made it to first base had it not been for the promotion it received from top levels of the media, political, financial, and even sporting establishment.

Last August, for example, Bankman-Fried was on the front cover of Fortune magazine where he was hailed as potentially the next Warren Buffet, the multi-billionaire of Berkshire Hathaway and the sixth richest man in the world.

Two months ago, the venture capital firm Sequoia, in a nearly 14,000-word article on Bankman-Fried, said he had the “status of legend” with a “vision about the future of money itself.”

Bankman-Fried had connections with the top levels of the Democratic Party as a major donor. He conducted television interviews with former US President Bill Clinton and former British Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair.

He was promoted in the sporting world with the famous NFL quarterback Tom Brady providing an endorsement last year and he acquired the naming rights for the stadium of the basketball team the Miami Heat.

And sections of the middle classes chimed in, promoting the illusion that the crypto market was the way in which the “small guy” could challenge and even up-end the power of the financial giants.

The shameless promotion of FTX fraud by the “great and the good” on the heights of society was because its modus operandi was deeply rooted. It was a microcosm of the operations of the financial system as a whole.

The FTX Ponzi scheme depended on the continuous inflow of money into its coffers. But this process has formed a central foundation of the stock market and the financial system for the past three decades and more, starting with the decision of the US Federal Reserve to provide Wall Street with money in response to the stock market crash of October 1987.

Every crisis which followed resulted in the provision of still more essentially free money to finance the next round of speculation. After the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed initiated quantitative easing (QE), sending interest rates to record lows as it bought up financial assets. And as money poured in so the stock market boomed.

After the crisis of March 2020, when markets froze at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, QE went on steroids as the Fed doubled its asset holdings to nearly $9 trillion virtually overnight. Another stock market surge resulted.

FTX was one of the beneficiaries of the further orgy of speculation. Towards the end of 2021 the market value of Bitcoin, the major crypto currency, had reached almost $70,000.

As millions died and tens and hundreds of millions were infected, many of whom will be afflicted by the life-time effects of Long COVID, FTX, along with a host of others, were being lifted into the stratosphere, quite literally in the case of Amazon Jeff Bezos who used the money derived from the super exploitation of his workforce and the rise of his stock holdings to launch himself into space.

The FTX episode raises another decisive question: Where were the regulators?

After the 2008 crisis had revealed that the financial system, in the words of a Senate 2011 report, was a “snake pit,” riven by conflicts of interest and in some cases outright criminal activity, a pledge was issued “never again.”

Regulations would be introduced to prevent a recurrence of such a crisis, whose effects in the form of job losses and financial hardship imposed on millions of people are still being felt.

So, after the open admission by Bankman-Fried that he was essentially operating a Ponzi scheme, where was Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren, the supposed champion of ordinary people against the depredations of the banks and finance capital? Why was she not at the rostrum, pounding the table, and sounding the alarm?

This self-confessed “capitalist to the bone” remained silent, no doubt recognising, at some level, that his operations were deeply entrenched in the financial markets and should not be touched and furthermore it would not be politic to take down a major financial donor to her party.

Likewise, the Securities and Exchange Commission, under the chairmanship of Gary Gensler, took no action.

There could be no clearer demonstration of the fact that so-called regulation is as much of a fraud as the schemes devised by Bankman-Fried and others. The reality is that vast swathes of the financial system operate essentially no differently from FTX, having become completely divorced from any value in the real economy.

In the news article on FTX which set off the crisis two weeks ago, it was noted that a considerable portion of its assets were crypto tokens created out of “thin air.” But this is not fundamentally different from the valuations ascribed to the hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of assets traded in financial markets every day.

When these assets are bought and sold, and vast profits made on the deal, not a single atom of real value has been created. And this world of fictitious capital, where money and wealth are created out of “thin air,” is protected and defended by the so-called regulators who promote the fiction that it can somehow be controlled.

The collapse of FTX, along with growing concerns that the entire financial house of cards may disintegrate, signifies that a turning point is now being reached.

The chief factor is the change in the financial landscape resulting from the tightening of monetary policy by the Fed. This has not been undertaken to “fight inflation” but to batter down the wage demands and struggles of the working class in the face of the largest rises on four decades.

The response of the ruling classes to what is clearly an ever-deepening financial crisis will not be more regulation. Rather, they will use every means available, including state repression and force to increase the exploitation of the working class—the producers of all real wealth—to put value into their financial assets.

14 Nov 2022

Yale Greenberg World Fellows Programme 2023

Application Deadline: 7th December 2022, 1:00 PM EST

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International (Any country other than the United States)

To be taken at (country): Yale University, USA

About the Yale Greenberg World Fellows Programme: Applications to the Maurice R. Greenberg World Fellows Program are accepted from across sectors and around the world.  Each class of Fellows is a unique group: geographically balanced, and representative of a wide range of professions, talents, and perspectives.  The program runs annually from mid-August to mid-December.  Fellows are expected to be in residence at Yale for the duration of the program.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: 

  • Be in the Mid-career stage: Fellows are at least five, and typically not more than 20, years into their careers, with demonstrated work accomplishments, and a clear indication of future contributions and excellence.  The average age of a Greenberg World Fellow is 39, though there is no minimum or maximum age limit.
  • Be fluent in English: An excellent command of the English language is essential.
  • Be a citizen of a country other than the United States: While dual citizens are eligible, preference is given to candidates whose work is focused outside the US.

Selection Criteria: 

  • An established record of extraordinary achievement and integrity;
  • Commitment to engagement in crucial issues and to making a difference at the national or international level;
  • Promise of a future career of leadership and notable impact;
  • Special capacity for critical, creative, entrepreneurial, and strategic thinking;
  • Likelihood to benefit from participation in the Program and to contribute to global understanding at Yale;
  • Commitment to a rigorous program of activities, to full-time residence at Yale for the entire duration of the program, and to mentoring students and speaking frequently on campus

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Yale Greenberg World Fellowship: 

  • A taxable stipend to cover the costs of living in New Haven
  • A modest, furnished one- or two-bedroom apartment for the duration of the program
  • Medical insurance
  • Round-trip travel from home country

Duration of Fellowship: mid-August to mid-December.

How to Apply: 

  • Please note that application for admission to the Yale Greenberg World Fellows Programme is completely an online process. There are no paper forms to complete or mail.
  • Prior to the deadline, you may work on your application at any time and submit it when you are ready. After creating an account and accessing the online application, you can upload materials and request your letters of recommendation.
  • Most questions about the program and the application process can be answered by reviewing this website and the common questions.  If your question is unanswered, you may contact staff at applicant.worldfellows@yale.edu. Please do not send multiple emails regarding one issue, and please do not email staff individually. We thank you for your patience in allowing staff adequate time to thoughtfully process your inquiries.

Apply now for the 2023 World Fellows program.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Google Research Scholar Program 2023

Application Deadline: 1st December 2022 by 11:59:59pm PT .

About the Award: The Research Scholar Program provides unrestricted gifts to support research at institutions around the world, and is focused on funding world-class research conducted by early-career professors.

We encourage submissions from professors globally who are teaching at universities and meet the eligibility requirements. It is our hope that this program will help develop collaborations with new professors and encourage the formation of long-term relationships.

Awards are disbursed as unrestricted gifts to the university and are not intended for overhead or indirect costs. They are intended for use during the academic year in which the award is provided to support the professor’s research efforts.

Type: Grants

Eligibility:

  • Open to professors (assistant, associate, etc) at a university or degree-granting research institution.
  • Applicants must have received their PhD within seven years of submission (e.g. applicant in 2021 must have received PhD in 2014 or later). Exceptions will be made for applicants who have been teaching seven years or fewer and had delays, such as working in industry, leave of absence, etc.
  • Applicants can submit one application per round, and apply a maximum of three times.

Eligible Countries: Any

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The funds granted will be up to $60,000 USD and are intended to support the advancement of the professor’s research.

How to Apply: Submit application

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

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Mitacs Elevate Fellowship Program 2022

Application Deadline: 

  • Intent to apply deadline: 11th January 2023
  • Final application deadline: 8th February 2023

Eligible Countries: All

To Be Taken At (Country): Canada

About the Award: Mitacs Elevate is the only postdoctoral fellowship in Canada with professional skills training component. Mitacs Elevate is a postdoctoral fellowship with a customized research management training component. Fellows address complex challenges through:

  • An exclusive research management curriculum for postdoctoral fellows in any discipline
  • A minimum one-year research project (normally two years in duration) with a partner organization in need of high-level expertise
  • A Partner Organization Business Case, developed to outline project objectives, risks, and stakeholder success criteria, and ensure project value

Elevate fellows progress through the program in a cohort, giving them cross-disciplinary networking and peer-learning opportunities they might not have otherwise in their careers.

Over the two-year fellowship, Elevate fellows divide their time between their partner organization project and university-based research with their faculty supervisor.

Type: Postdoctoral

Eligibility: 

  • Elevate supervisors must hold a faculty position at a Canadian university and must be eligible to administer Tri-Council funds and be in a position that allows them to supervise graduate students.
  • Mitacs Elevate is open to Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and international applicants. The fellow must be based at a university located in Canada for the duration of the fellowship.
  • Fellows must be committed to the two-year fellowship, including the training and development, when applying to Elevate. Replacement and/or substitute fellows are not allowed.
  • Postdoctoral fellows may apply for Mitacs Elevate fellowship if their date of graduation from a PhD program is no more than 5 years before the proposed start date the research project.  Fellows who have had a break in their career due to military service, illness, or family leave may be considered as exceptions and must be approved in advance of proposal submission. If this situation applies to you and/or you have any questions, please contact Mitacs at elevate(at)mitacs.ca.
  • Successful candidates must have fulfilled all degree requirements (e.g., successful defense, final deposit, and signoff of dissertation) for their PhD at the project start date.
  • All fellows who successfully enter into the Elevate program are responsible for ensuring that they meet the PDF eligibility criteria at their host institution and that they will hold a PDF status by the start date of their fellowship and for the two-year duration of the Elevate program.
  • Fellows must not have been employed for more than six months in an R&D position outside the university after receipt of their doctoral degree; and
  • Fellows must not have received an offer of employment from the partner organization except an offer of this fellowship or short-term employment of up to six months while awaiting a decision on the fellowship.
    • Suppose the application is not recommended for an award. In that case, the candidate may not be eligible to apply again once he or she has accumulated more than six months of industrial or partner organization work. It is therefore recommended that candidates accept a temporary contract only if necessary and that the contract period be kept as short as possible.
  • Fellows who have held a Mitacs Accelerate award as a Masters, or PhD student are eligible to apply. Applicants may also apply if they have been approved for no more than 3 internship units of Accelerate funding (1 year equivalent) support at the postdoctoral level to be completed before the start of the Elevate fellowship.  Postdoctoral fellows who have already held a Mitacs Elevate award are not eligible to apply again to Elevate or to apply afterward to Accelerate.
  • Fellows cannot apply to multiple Mitacs programs for the same period.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Mitacs Elevate Fellowship Program: 

  • $55,000 minimum annual stipend/salary (for fellowships awarded after April 1, 2019)
  • Training curriculum valued at $7,500 per year
  • Submission assistance, including application feedback, from Mitacs representatives
  • Certificate of completion after receipt of their exit survey and final report submission

Duration of Program: 2 years

How to Apply: 

  • Find how to apply here
  • It is important to follow application instructions

Iso Lomso Fully-funded Fellowships 2023

Application Deadline: 15th February 2023

Eligible Countries: African countries

About the Award: Iso Lomso aims to address the gap that exists between completion of the Ph.D. and becoming an established scholar in Africa. While there is increasing support for doctoral study and for post-doctoral fellowships, it is during the extended post-doctoral period that the greatest loss of talent occurs.

Fellows are expected to be present at STIAS for the duration of their STIAS residency, with no academic obligations other than pursuing the proposed research project. The only other duties are to share in the discussion over lunch which is served daily, and to participate in the Thursday STIAS fellows’ seminar where fellows in turn present their work to other fellows and invited academics from the local community. 

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: The programme is aimed at African scholars who have obtained a doctoral degree within the preceding seven years and who hold an academic position at a university or research institution anywhere in Africa.

Candidates should have established a research programme and have completed a post-doctoral fellowship or equivalent post-PhD programme. All disciplines are considered.

To be eligible applicants must:

  • be a national of any African country;
  • be born after the 1st of January 1979;
  • have an affiliation at a research or higher education institution in an African country, and continue to do so for the foreseeable future;
  • have obtained a doctoral degree from any recognised higher education institution (worldwide) after the 1st of January 2014;
  • have completed a post-doctoral fellowship or equivalent post-PhD research programme;
  • be in a position to commence a first period of residency at STIAS during 2022.

Selection Criteria: Applications will be evaluated and selected on the basis of the following criteria:

  • Level: the applicant’s academic excellence and the originality and scholarly strength of the proposed research project;
  • Innovation: the project’s promise of new insights and the potential to produce new knowledge;
  • Interdisciplinarity: whether the project methodology allows for drawing from different disciplines and its potential to facilitate an interdisciplinary discourse;
  • Relevance: the project’s relevance for scholarship and knowledge production in Africa;
  • Feasibility: whether the research design and the research plan are convincing and realistic.

During final selection, additional consideration will be given to:

  • gender representation;
  • diversity of nationalities;
  • diversity of disciplines;
  • participation in previous or current research projects;
  • previous international experience.

Number of Awards: 20

Value of Award: The main means of support is STIAS residencies. Residential periods will be agreed mutually between the fellow, his or her home institution and STIAS, and may vary between six weeks and five months per residency. A first period of residency will typically be of longer duration to be taken up during 2022, followed by two further residencies through 2024. While in residence fellows receive regular STIAS fellow support which includes:

  • an economy return flight;
  • comfortable accommodation within walking distance from the institute;
  • individual offices equipped with a PC, telephone and printer;
  • a monthly stipend for daily living costs;
  • access to the Stellenbosch University library (including electronic resources) and a high-speed internet connection;
  • participation in the regular STIAS fellows programme, including daily lunch, weekly fellows’ seminars, STIAS public lectures and social events;
  • a child care subsidy for fellows accompanied by young children while in residence.

Iso Lomso fellows’ home institution will be eligible to apply for a lecturer replacement subsidy during residency periods. This will be negotiated on a case-by-case basis with the home institution after the fellowships have been awarded. It will be the fellow and the home institution’s responsibility to recruit replacement lecturers.

While not in residence at STIAS Iso Lomso fellows will continue their regular academic duties at their home institution. During these periods fellows may apply for a range of research sponsorship interventions. These elements will be considered in a flexible manner to ensure that each fit optimally into the research programme. They may include:

  • a subsequent residency at a sister Institute for Advanced Study or relevant research institution in North America, Europe or elsewhere (this will form part of the ten months’ residency allocation; the fellow’s preferences for potential host institutions will be considered);
  • funding to attend up to two relevant academic conferences or research training events (covering travel, accommodation and
    participation fees);
  • limited project funding for key interventions in the research programme;
  • the possibility of hosting a workshop at STIAS or their at their home institution as a means of strengthening the fellow’s scholarly network and research impact.

Applicants are encouraged to consider which of these elements they would like to include in the pre-proposal timeline. These elements will be planned and finalised with Iso Lomso fellows during their initial period of residency.

Duration of Program: 3 years

How to Apply: Apply now

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

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Israel’s Religious Terrorists

Mel Gurtov & Larry Kirsch


The Threat to Human Rights

No one should be surprised to find Benjamin Netanyahu back as prime minister of Israel, with decisive support from far-right religious extremists. With the recent election, the religious bloc called Religious Zionism put Netanyahu’s Likud party comfortably over the top in the Knesset and now, as a leading member of the governing coalition, it is strongly positioned to pursue its volatile agenda aimed at reclaiming Israel as a Jewish state.

Among things that might follow, based on their leaders’ public statements, are the deportation of “disloyal” Palestinian citizens, legal challenges to Palestinian-owned buildings in the West Bank, restrictions on access to Al-Aqsa–the Temple Mount in Jerusalem sacred to both Jews and Palestinians–and massive changes in Israel’s legal system pertaining to the selection of judges and the authority of the Supreme Court to overrule laws on constitutional grounds.

This is obviously a very troubling development for US policymakers and more generally, for human rights advocates everywhere. Regrettably, the initial US response, which came from the State Department’s spokesman, avoided direct comment on the extremists’ takeover:

“We hope that all Israeli government officials will continue to share the values of an open, democratic society including tolerance and respect for all in civil society, particularly for minority groups. You’ve heard us speak to the commitment we have to a future two-state solution and to equal measures of security, freedom, justice and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

Two years ago, Lehava, the virulent Israeli citizen’s group at the epicenter of armed attacks, race-mongering, and incitement of terror against Palestinians, was inextricably bound-up and politically enabled by Otzma Yehudit (translated as “Jewish Power”), an extremist right-wing political party that became a key player within Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition. Otzma represents one of the factional players Netanyahu needed most to assure his political survival and as important, to support a vote in the Knesset that would effectively eliminate pending legal charges against him in his trial on charges of breach of public trust and corruption.

US Policy Options

The voters of Israel have now spoken and the Netanyahu government and Knesset will predictably veer to the extreme right at least for the immediate future.

Senator Robert Menendez, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and one of Israel’s most ardent and important political supporters, had reportedly warned Netanyahu about the adverse consequences for congressional support of bringing the extremist Religious Zionism bloc into the government. His candid pre-election cautions apparently evoked the ire of Netanyahu (“pissed him off”) but they doubtless hit the mark.

Menendez’s comments also resonated with Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at Washington’s Middle East Institute, who wrote in Foreign Policy magazine:

“The most important thing Washington could do would be to stop giving Israeli leaders a pass. Washington’s reluctance to hold Israel accountable for any excesses—whether in terms of human rights abuses against Palestinians, continued settlement expansion, home demolitions, evictions, or other violations—while continuing to shield Israel from the costs and consequences of its own actions in the international arena has fueled the sense of impunity and triumphalism of Israeli leaders and the far-right extremists they have empowered.”

When these far-right groups first appeared in Netanyahu’s governing coalition, the newly formed Biden administration was besieged with increasing fervor by voices on all sides of the unfolding tragedy.

At that time we argued that the President could take an executive action to undermine Israeli extremism without the risk of fracturing his base or reputation at home or around the world. He could ask the State Department to consider whether Lehava and Otzma Yehudit should be added to the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) list. It had been widely reported, both in Israel and the United States, that these organizations and their leaders had received support from US donors through a cryptic network of religious and service organizations designed to provide cover as charitable institutions.

T’ruah, a leading American human rights organization representing two thousand rabbis and cantors, filed a series of official complaints with the IRS documenting the abuse of the US tax laws for so-called “charitable contributions” that ultimately went to support Lehava and Otzma.

Although Biden knows far better than to be seen meddling directly in another government’s internal politics, putting an Israeli political organization on a US-sponsored list geared to eliminating a tax exemption for the support of terrorist activity could be highly influential and well within the bounds of propriety. There is historic precedent for doing so. The legislation authorizing that move in 1996 was drafted by Ron Klain, then a lawyer serving in the Department of Justice, with support from then-Senator Biden. The President should consider taking this action now.

While it is far from clear precisely how US policymakers will express their opposition to Israeli extremism—whether indirectly, through the FTO list as we have suggested, or more directly through diplomatic or legislative means—most important is that the US government deter terrorism sponsored by entities close to the heart of the incoming Israeli government.

Those who rightly decry Palestinian terrorism need to take a hard look at what Israelis have just voted in—a coalition that has prominent advocates of violence against innocent Arab citizens. Doing so would give substance to US support of human rights, not only in Israel but in the Middle East generally.