The Hidden Script of Capitalism

Thomas Klikauer

Despite the hegemonic ideology of neoliberalism – featuring the hallucination of a deregulated market – in reality, capitalism still depends on the state and rafts of legal statutes regulating capitalism. Without state, there is no capitalism. For example, it is the state that issues money – the ultimate exchange object.

Worse for the ideologues of the free market, the state also regulates commercial transactions by providing a legal framework. There are, at least, two further commercial statutes that are imperative for capitalism: property and copyright laws.

The first enables property and wealth to exit while the second protects good and services from being copied. Both are inextricably linked to capitalism and without a legally secured property, there would be no capitalism.

Similarly, if anyone can copy any product and sell it, capitalism would end very shortly. In other words, without legal statutes – the invisible scripts that run in the background of capitalism – there would be no capitalism.

In a way, law almost creates capitalism and wealth. Yet, legal statutes also create – and ideologically justify – one of the inextricable consequences of capitalism: inequality. Yet, the growing levels of inequality do threaten the social fabric of democratic-parliamentarian systems – and inevitably, of capitalism’s.

Interestingly, even the most astute observers of capitalism tend to treat the legal statutes that have underpinned capitalism ever since its inception, as a minor or even as an irrelevant ornament. In sharp contrast to that, legal statutes are the obligatory codes of capitalism.

For example, all computers need a code. Computer programs need, for example, Kathleen Booth’s alphabet code that runs in the background – unseen by the user. In the same way, the legal statute runs in the background of capitalism. In short, without a code, a computer is useless. Without a legal code, capitalism is useless.

Of course, the ideologues of neoliberalism love to assert that it is an individual’s special skills, hard work, and – naturally – it is the personal sacrifices that the rich have that justify their ever-increasing wealth. This justification also extends to their parents, grandparents and so on. And it is for this reason that they have the wealth they hold today.

In the belief system of neoliberalism, it is the individuals’ factors that have contributed to their fortunes. In reality however, without legal statutes, nearly all of their wealth would have been short-lived or never existed at all. Accumulating financial riches over a long period demands regulated means of fortification to safeguard their booty.

In capitalism, only legal statutes backed by the state’s coercive powers – police, criminal law, courts, prisons, the army, etc. – can offer this. Despite the deregulation ideology of neoliberalism, capitalism and the wealthy depend on the state and legal statutes.

Of course, under capitalism’s legal statutes, some are more equal than others. Perhaps, this is the raison d’être of legal statutes in capitalism. This has a long history.

Today’s understanding and use of the common law of property, for example, was originally invented and enforced for and by the ruling classes. It came at a time when the bulk of their capital was still locked in land. Just as French philosopher Rousseau once said,

The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying, “This is mine”, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society … how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes … came from that.

It is imperative to realize that it is NOT the property itself – but capitalism’s legal statutes that protects the owner of wealth. It also protects the rich and corporations from the uncertain headwinds of capitalism’s business cycles.

It assures the rich, corporations, and capitalism that there is wealth longevity – that their wealth is safe, particularly in the long run. Simultaneously, legal statutes set up, solidify sustained inequality, and ideologically justify inequality.

As for the ideological justification of capitalism and inequality, legality issues a powerful vindication against anyone challenging wealth, inequality, and capitalism. For the catch-cry: but it’s legal remains a powerful calling card.

Meanwhile, the extraordinary rise of global trade, commerce, and finance would have never been feasible without legal statutes. In a way, it certifies capitalism.

Of course, realizing the imperative of the power of legal statutes to enable, certify, and ideologically legitimize capitalism has very important repercussions on our understanding of not just the history of capitalism but its political economy. Capitalism and its code should not be seen as separated or independent of each other.

For a long time, wealthy elites have also liked to claim freedom of contract as an essential freedom. What they like to – rather conveniently – neglect is the fact that these freedoms are guaranteed by the state’s legal statutes.

While the basics of the legal statutes that make capitalism function are – more or less – the same in every country, there are, nevertheless, different local jurisdictions offering slight variations of a theme, as German philosopher Adorno would say.

This somewhat decentralized characteristic of legal statutes that is, nevertheless, used to code global capitalism offers two key advantages for the global corporate elite:

1) For one, global finance, globalization, and earth-spanning capitalism can blossom without the need for one single global state and one single global law.

2) This arrangement allows regime-picking, i.e. the corporate elite and the rich can pick and choose those countries with local rules that best suit their or their clients’ interests. This creates a particular neat form of global corruption – otherwise known as tax havens.

All too often, the entire setup has also been ideologically framed via Adam Smith’s invisible hand. This rather doctrinaire framing of the delights of capitalism has a long history. It is not just a feature of 19^th century capitalism but has continued deep into the age of present day financial-global capitalism – previously known as imperialism. Even before imperialism, the wonders of the legal statutes of exploitation already worked its magic.

For example, at the time when slavery was legal – it was legal but it was always immoral, inhuman, and dehumanizing – slaves were not just owned. The legal statutes offered provisions that slaves could be used as collaterals to secure loans, for example.

With 50 million slaves globally in existence today, we should never be tempted to think that slavery is a thing of the past.

Whether with or without slaves, capitalism owes its wealth-creating capacity to “its” legal statutes. Even better, the ability of the legal statute of corporate capitalism can buffer corporate assets from its direct creditors and even secure it against workers. It secures it even against a corporation’s own shareholders – the actual owners of a corporation.

This handy setup has allowed corporations to become the most enduring swindles (the corporation as a natural person) of corporate capitalism with all its pathological consequences.

In other words, all modern economies are constructed around a complex legal network of legal statutes that are – always! – backed by coercive state powers. The fruitful interface between capitalism and the state is absolutely essential for the global ascent of capitalism.

Even today, the state and its legal and policing powers remain indispensable to capitalism. Worse, the more diverse corporate assets and wealth become and the more uneven their distribution shifts, the greater the demand for powerful law enforcement that protects capitalism and the rich.

This hidden motive is the reason why the state and capitalism are inextricably linked. This mutual dependency in times of monopoly capitalism is used to be known as state monopoly capitalism.

This inevitable mutual capitalism-state dependency shows that – despite the ideology of deregulation – the state is not (in fact cannot be) neutral. Worse, those with an interest in wealth, assets, corporations, and the wealthy as such will nearly always be given priority by legal statutes.

Camouflaged by today’s ideology – as broadcasted by corporate media – many remain unaware that property rights are not given facts. They are not even God-given. Instead, they are acquired rights often granted by the state to secure wealth, corporations, and capitalism. Meanwhile, economists like to think of the corporate organization – the corporation – as a legal fiction.

We have been made to accept treating corporations as legal persons that can buy and sell things even though corporations are anything but a legal person. Yet, the legal statute of capitalism makes this possible. It is even made to sound plausible, and, once ideologically legitimized, appears to be normal.

It is the normality of a pathology. Madness becomes normalized. The madness of capitalism prevails as enshrined in its legal codes and statutes.

The Pentagon Proclaims Failure in its War on Terror in Africa

Nick Turse

Photograph Source: Petty Officer 2nd Class Cameron Edy – Public Domain

America’s Global War on Terror has seen its share of stalemates, disasters, and outright defeats. During 20-plus years of armed interventions, the United States has watched its efforts implode in spectacular fashion, from Iraq in 2014 to Afghanistan in 2021. The greatest failure of its “Forever Wars,” however, may not be in the Middle East, but in Africa.

“Our war on terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated,” President George W. Bush told the American people in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks, noting specifically that such militants had designs on “vast regions” of Africa.

To shore up that front, the U.S. began a decades-long effort to provide copious amounts of security assistance, train many thousands of African military officers, set up dozens of outposts, dispatch its own commandos on all manner of missions, create proxy forces, launch drone strikes, and even engage in direct ground combat with militants in Africa. Most Americans, including members of Congress, are unaware of the extent of these operations. As a result, few realize how dramatically America’s shadow war there has failed.

The raw numbers alone speak to the depths of the disaster. As the United States was beginning its Forever Wars in 2002 and 2003, the State Department counted a total of just nine terrorist attacks in Africa. This year, militant Islamist groups on that continent have, according to the Pentagon, already conducted 6,756 attacks. In other words, since the United States ramped up its counterterrorism operations in Africa, terrorism has spiked 75,000%.

Let that sink in for a moment.

75,000%.

A Conflict that Will Live in Infamy

The U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq opened to military successes in 2001 and 2003that quickly devolved into sputtering occupations. In both countries, Washington’s plans hinged on its ability to create national armies that could assist and eventually take over the fight against enemy forces. Both U.S.-created militaries would, in the end, crumble. In Afghanistan, a two-decade-long war ended in 2021 with the rout of an American-built, -funded, -trained, and -armed military as the Taliban recaptured the country. In Iraq, the Islamic State nearly triumphed over a U.S.-created Iraqi army in 2014, forcing Washington to reenter the conflict. U.S. troops remain embattled in Iraq and neighboring Syria to this very day.

In Africa, the U.S. launched a parallel campaign in the early 2000s, supporting and training African troops from Mali in the west to Somalia in the east and creating proxy forces that would fight alongside American commandos. To carry out its missions, the U.S. military set up a network of outposts across the northern tier of the continent, including significant drone bases – from Camp Lemonnier and its satellite outpost Chabelley Airfield in the sun-bleached nation of Djibouti to Air Base 201 in Agadez, Niger — and tiny facilities with small contingents of American special operations troops in nations ranging from Libya and Niger to the Central African Republic and South Sudan.

For almost a decade, Washington’s war in Africa stayed largely under wraps. Then came a decision that sent Libya and the vast Sahel region into a tailspin from which they have never recovered.

“We came, we saw, he died,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joked after a U.S.-led NATO air campaign helped overthrow Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi, the longtime Libyan dictator, in 2011. President Barack Obama hailed the intervention as a success, but Libya slipped into near-failed-state status. Obama would later admit that “failing to plan for the day after” Qaddafi’s defeat was the “worst mistake” of his presidency.

As the Libyan leader fell, Tuareg fighters in his service looted his regime’s weapons caches, returned to their native Mali, and began to take over the northern part of that nation. Anger in Mali’s armed forces over the government’s ineffective response resulted in a 2012 military coup. It was led by Amadou Sanogo, an officer who learned English in Texas and underwent infantry-officer basic training in Georgia, military-intelligence instruction in Arizona, and was mentored by U.S. Marines in Virginia.

Having overthrown Mali’s democratic government, Sanogo and his junta proved hapless in battling terrorists. With the country in turmoil, those Tuareg fighters declared an independent state, only to be muscled aside by heavily armed Islamists who instituted a harsh brand of Shariah law, causing a humanitarian crisis. A joint Franco-American-African mission prevented Mali’s complete collapse but pushed the militants into areas near the borders of both Burkina Faso and Niger.

Since then, those nations of the West African Sahel have been plagued by terrorist groups that have evolved, splintered, and reconstituted themselves. Under the black banners of jihadist militancy, men on motorcycles — two to a bike, wearing sunglasses and turbans, and armed with Kalashnikovs — regularly roar into villages to impose zakat (an Islamic tax); steal animals; and terrorize, assault, and kill civilians. Such relentless attacks have destabilized Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger and are now affecting their southern neighbors along the Gulf of Guinea. Violence in Togo and Benin has, for example, jumped 633% and 718% over the last year, according to the Pentagon.

U.S.-trained militaries in the region have been unable to stop the onslaught and civilians have suffered horrifically. During 2002 and 2003, terrorists caused just 23 casualties in Africa. This year, according to the Pentagon, terrorist attacks in the Sahel region alone have resulted in 9,818 deaths — a 42,500% increase.

At the same time, during their counterterrorism campaigns, America’s military partners in the region have committed gross atrocities of their own, including extrajudicial killings. In 2020, for example, a top political leader in Burkina Faso admitted that his country’s security forces were carrying out targeted executions. “We’re doing this, but we’re not shouting it from the rooftops,” he told me, noting that such murders were good for military morale.

American-mentored military personnel in that region have had only one type of demonstrable “success”: overthrowing governments the United States trained them to protect. At least 15 officers who benefited from such assistance have been involved in 12 coups in West Africa and the greater Sahel during the war on terror. The list includes officers from Burkina Faso (2014, 2015, and twice in 2022); Chad (2021); Gambia (2014); Guinea (2021); Mali (2012, 2020, and 2021); Mauritania (2008); and Niger (2023). At least five leaders of a July coup in Niger, for example, received American assistance, according to a U.S. official. They, in turn, appointed five U.S.-trained members of the Nigerien security forces to serve as that country’s governors.

Military coups of that sort have even super-charged atrocities while undermining American aims, yet the United States continues to provide such regimes with counterterrorism support. Take Colonel Assimi Goïta, who worked with U.S. Special Operations forces, participated in U.S. training exercises, and attended the Joint Special Operations University in Florida before overthrowing Mali’s government in 2020. Goïta then took the job of vice president in a transitional government officially charged with returning the country to civilian rule, only to seize power again in 2021.

That same year, his junta reportedly authorized the deployment of the Russia-linked Wagner mercenary forces to fight Islamist militants after close to two decades of failed Western-backed counterterrorism efforts. Since then, Wagner — a paramilitary group founded by the late Yevgeny Prigozhin, a former hot-dog vendor turned warlord — has been implicated in hundreds of human rights abuses alongside the longtime U.S.-backed Malian military, including a 2022 massacre that killed 500 civilians.

Despite all of this, American military aid for Mali has never ended. While Goïta’s 2020 and 2021 coups triggered prohibitions on some forms of U.S. security assistance, American tax dollars have continued to fund his forces. According to the State Department, the U.S. provided more than $16 million in security aid to Mali in 2020 and almost $5 million in 2021. As of July, the department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism was waiting on congressional approval to transfer an additional $2 million to Mali. (The State Department did not reply to TomDispatch’s request for an update on the status of that funding.)

The Two-Decade Stalemate

On the opposite side of the continent, in Somalia, stagnation and stalemate have been the watchwords for U.S. military efforts.

“Terrorists associated with Al Qaeda and indigenous terrorist groups have been and continue to be a presence in this region,” a senior Pentagon official claimed in 2002. “These terrorists will, of course, threaten U.S. personnel and facilities.” But when pressed about an actual spreading threat, the official admitted that even the most extreme Islamists “really have not engaged in acts of terrorism outside Somalia.” Despite that, U.S. Special Operations forces were dispatched there in 2002, followed by military aid, advisers, trainers, and private contractors.

More than 20 years later, U.S. troops are still conducting counterterrorism operations in Somalia, primarily against the Islamist militant group al-Shabaab. To this end, Washington has provided billions of dollars in counterterrorism assistance, according to a recent report by the Costs of War Project. Americans have also conducted more than 280 air strikes and commando raids there, while the CIA and special operators built up local proxy forces to conduct low-profile military operations.

Since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, the U.S. has launched 31 declared airstrikes in Somalia, six times the number carried out during President Obama’s first term, though far fewer than the record high set by President Trump, whose administration launched 208 attacks from 2017 to 2021.

America’s long-running, undeclared war in Somalia has become a key driver of violence in that country, according to the Costs of War Project. “The U.S. is not simply contributing to conflict in Somalia, but has, rather, become integral to the inevitable continuation of conflict in Somalia,” reported Ẹniọlá Ànúolúwapọ Ṣóyẹmí, a lecturer in political philosophy and public policy at the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University. “U.S. counterterrorism policies are,” she wrote, “ensuring that the conflict continues in perpetuity.”

The Epicenter of International Terrorism

“Supporting the development of professional and capable militaries contributes to increasing security and stability in Africa,” said General William Ward, the first chief of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) — the umbrella organization overseeing U.S. military efforts on the continent — in 2010, before he was demoted for profligate travel and spending. His predictions of “increasing security and stability” have, of course, never come to pass.

While the 75,000% increase in terror attacks and 42,500% increase in fatalities over the last two decades are nothing less than astounding, the most recent increases are no less devastating. “A 50-percent spike in fatalities tied to militant Islamist groups in the Sahel and Somalia over the past year has eclipsed the previous high in 2015,” according to a July report by the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, a Defense Department research institution. “Africa has experienced a nearly four-fold increase in reported violent events linked to militant Islamist groups over the past decade… Almost half of that growth happened in the last 3 years.”

Twenty-two years ago, George W. Bush announced the beginning of a Global War on Terror. “The Taliban must act, and act immediately,” he insisted. “They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate.” Today, of course, the Taliban reigns supreme in Afghanistan, al-Qaeda was never “stopped and defeated,” and other terror groups have spread across Africa (and elsewhere). The only way “to defeat terrorism,” Bush asserted, was to “eliminate it and destroy it where it grows.” Yet it has grown, and spread, and a plethora of new militant groups have emerged.

Bush warned that terrorists had designs on “vast regions” of Africa but was “confident of the victories to come,” assuring Americans that “we will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.” In country after country on that continent, the U.S. has, indeed, faltered and its failures have been paid for by ordinary Africans killed, wounded, and displaced by the terror groups that Bush pledged to “defeat.” Earlier this year, General Michael Langley, the current AFRICOM commander, offered what may be the ultimate verdict on America’s Forever Wars on that continent. “Africa,” he declared, “is now the epicenter of international terrorism.”

German government plans to more than double military aid for Ukraine

Johannes Stern

Germany’s coalition government fully supports Israel’s genocide in Gaza and rejects any ceasefire. At the same time, it is aggressively pushing ahead with the war offensive against Russia.

German Leopard 2 main battle tanks on their way to Ukraine [Photo: Bundeswehr]

The German government—a coalition of the Social Democrats (SPD), Liberal Democrats (FDP) and Greens—is planning to increase military aid for Ukraine by six billion euros next year, more than doubling it. The original estimate was four billion euros. Now, four billion euros in additional cash funds and a further two billion euros in commitment appropriations are to be made available. This is according to a document from the Ministry of Finance obtained by newsweekly Der Spiegel.

The paper serves as the basis for the government’s final consultation with the parliamentary Budget Committee. This will finalize the budget for 2024 at the end of the week in the so-called adjustment session. The entire budget is a declaration of war on working people. It includes massive cuts in healthcare, education and social services and aims to launch the biggest rearmament offensive since the end of the Second World War.

The latest increase in war aid for Ukraine means that military spending will reach the 2 percent target set by the German government as early as next year. In relation to the gross domestic product (GDP) of €4,309.5 billion expected for 2024, the NATO quota would be 2.07 percent, writes news agency Reuters. In absolute figures, the government’s current planning puts the expenditure at around €89 billion—of which €51.8 billion comes from the regular defense budget, €19.2 billion from the “special fund” for the Bundeswehr (Armed Forces), around €14 billion from other departments and the remaining billions from the additional Ukraine aid.

And all this is just the beginning. In his speech at the Bundeswehr conference last Friday, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) assured the assembled military leadership that the rearmament offensive would be stepped up in the coming years. “The special fund” of €100 billion was “a reality.” And “my statement that we will continuously increase the defense budget to two percent of gross domestic product also applies! You can plan with that.”

The Chancellor then presented a list of “capability gaps” that needed to be closed “very quickly.” Priority would be given to fighter aircraft, heavy transport helicopters, Eurofighters, the successor to the Marder infantry fighting vehicle and warships such as the 130 corvettes and 126 frigates, but the inventory and the areas of ammunition, spare parts and maintenance would also be “quickly and effectively strengthened in order to finally put an end to a shortage economy.” The “billion-euro dimension of the challenge” was “extremely visible,” but things were “on the right track.”

Speaking to broadcaster ARD on Sunday, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius repeated his mantra of Germany needing to be “ready for war.” The government would now press ahead with rearmament at a “German pace,” he said. Regarding the procurement of new Leopard main battle tanks, “the time it would normally have taken to sign the contracts has been reduced from twelve to six months and from six to three months for the self-propelled howitzers.” We were procuring “much faster than we used to” and would continue to increase the pace.

Addressing the additional billions for Ukraine, Pistorius said, “The additional funds are the right signal, especially now that Ukraine has to continue its fight and at the same time some of the public attention worldwide is being directed more towards Israel. It is also a strong signal to Ukraine that we will not abandon them.”

In other words, after the debacle of the Ukrainian offensive, which did not result in any significant territorial gains despite tens of thousands of dead soldiers, Germany and the other leading NATO powers are increasing the war effort further and further in order to defeat Russia militarily.

The list of “military support services” for Ukraine published by the German government gives an impression of the massive arms deliveries planned for the immediate future. The following items can be found in the “Armored combat vehicles” section alone:

• 5 All Terrain Tracked Vehicles Warthog ambulance
• 105 LEOPARD 1 A5 main battle tanks
• 40 MARDER infantry fighting vehicles
• 4 tracked multi-purpose vehicles Bandvagn 206 (BV206)
• 50 Armored Personnel Carriers (APC)
• Ammunition for LEOPARD 1 main battle tank
• Ammunition for MARDER infantry fighting vehicle

Additionally, there will be further air defense systems such as Patriot and Iris-T, Gepard anti-aircraft tanks, recovery, bridge-laying and mine-clearing tanks, drones and tankers. And for “sustainability,” 8.3 million rounds of small arms ammunition, 18,000 anti-tank small arms and 264,501 rounds of 40mm grenade launcher ammunition, among other things.

Clearly, the “new era” invoked by politicians and the media—Scholz mentioned the term six times in his speech—is not only directed against Russia. The ruling class is using the Russian invasion of Ukraine provoked by NATO and now also Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza to arm Germany, militarize the whole of Europe under German leadership and re-establish itself as a central war power after two lost world wars.

“As the most populous nation with the greatest economic power and a country in the middle of the continent, our army must become the cornerstone of conventional defense in Europe, the best-equipped armed force in Europe,” demanded Scholz in Berlin.

The associated militarization plans are becoming more and more concrete. For example, the new defense policy guidelines declare “war-readiness” to be a “maxim for action” and call for a society and army that are “always ready to fight”—“with the aspiration to succeed in high-intensity combat.” Germany “not only wants to win a confrontation with an “at least equal opponent,” but “we must.”

The German ruling class has identified the enormous opposition among the population as the main problem for their megalomaniac—but therefore no less dangerous—war plans. For example, the ARD presenter confronted Pistorius with a survey showing that even in the event of an attack on Germany, only 5 percent would “volunteer for military service.” More than half of the population would want to “continue their normal lives” or “leave the country” in such a situation.

Puma Energy Africa Graduate Programme 2024

APPLICATION DEADLINE:

31st December 2023

Tell Me About Puma Energy Africa Graduate Programme:

Graduates, we’re hiring! If you’re looking for an exciting opportunity in a fast-paced environment, Puma Energy could be your calling.

Our Africa Graduate Programme is now open for applications. We’re on the hunt for fresh graduates with a Bachelors’ degree or more from top universities and business schools. In return, we’re offering a one-year programme where you’ll rotate around the business to fast-track your learning.

So, if you’re a high performing go-getter who enjoys working in a team and rising to a challenge, we’d love to hear from you. We’re looking for unique skills, talent and vibrant personalities to help us live our purpose of Energising Communities.

TYPE:

Internship

Who Can Apply For Puma Energy Africa Graduate Programme?

• We are looking to hire a motivated, enthusiastic and skilled Graduate to join our Graduate Program. 
• You must hold a STEM / Engineering Bachelor Degree or related field and be a citizen or a resident with the right to work for the country you are applying for. 

WHICH COUNTRIES ARE ELIGIBLE?

Our 2024 programme will run in Benin, Botswana, Congo, Ghana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Lesotho, Tanzania and Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi and the UK.

HOW MANY AWARDS?

Not specified

What Is The Benefit Of Puma Energy Africa Graduate Programme?

The Puma Energy Global Graduate Program is design for the top fresh graduate by providing a One year rotational program to accelerate their learning across the business with a series of developmental  rotation in Operation, Supply, Retail, Terminal, Construction, Finance and Procurement to build a comprehensive understanding of the fundamentals of our business. The program will open up a future and career growth opportunities to the graduates within Puma Energy.

Benefits of being with us

Join us in ‘energising communities’		Be part of our strong culture		Be valued and rewarded
We are united and driven by our purpose: ‘energising communities’. You can be, too. Join us and make a big difference creating innovative energy solutions that transform lives for the better.		We have a dynamic, diverse, global culture where we really care about people, put health and safety first, and strive for excellence in everything we do. You can help us take it further.		We believe in keeping our colleagues motivated and engaged. To this end, you will benefit from a robust rewards and recognition program acknowledging and rewarding outstanding contributions.
Excel and have fun		Learn new things and grow		Help shape the energy future
We will encourage and support you to perform at your best. You will work alongside passionate and inspiring leaders and colleagues. We want you to take pride in and enjoy excelling.		You will have many opportunities to learn, develop and grow with us. We encourage everyone to gain new competencies, skills and knowledge through various leadership and educational programs.		We are playing a vital role helping our customers and communities embrace new renewable technologies and future energies, in response to climate change. Join us on this exciting journey.

HOW LONG WILL AWARD LAST?

1 year

How To Apply:

Find out more and apply here today

Visit Award Webpage for Details

UK GREAT Scholarships 2024/2025

Application Deadline: 

The deadline to apply for a GREAT Scholarship varies according to each institution. For details on individual institutions’ deadlines, please see the institution page.

About the UK GREAT Scholarships: GREAT Scholarships offers numerous scholarships from UK universities, across a variety of subjects for students from the countries below. Each scholarship is worth a minimum of £10,000 towards tuition fees for a one-year postgraduate course. 

On each country’s dedicated page, you’ll find a comprehensive list of universities that provide scholarships to students from that specific nation, details of which courses are covered by these scholarships and how to apply.

Each scholarship is jointly funded by the UK government’s GREAT Britain Campaign and the British Council with participating UK higher education institutions. 

As part of the programme, all GREAT scholars will be invited to a welcome event in the first semester and a networking event in the second semester

Type: Postgraduate

Eligibility:

• Bangladesh
• China
• Egypt
• Ghana
• Kenya
• India
• Indonesia
• Malaysia
• Mexico
• Nigeria
• Pakistan
• Thailand
• Turkey
• Vietnam

Eligible Countries: Bangladesh, China, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Vietnam & Thailand

To be Taken at (Country): UK

Number of Awards: Numerous

Value of UK GREAT Scholarships: Each scholarship is worth a minimum of £10,000 towards tuition fees for a one-year postgraduate course. 

How to Apply for UK GREAT Scholarships: Filter by your country to find a GREAT Scholarship at a UK university.

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

Visit Award Webpage for Details