8 Jun 2016

Australia’s increasing suicide rate linked to social crisis

Michelle Stevens

Clear evidence of a connection between rising suicide levels, job losses and worsening living conditions emerged last month when mental health advocacy groups released details of suicide rates between 2009 and 2012 across 28 federal electorates.
In a media release, they called “for all major parties and candidates in the 2 July election to spell out what they will do in the next parliament to address the rising toll of suicide and self-harm across Australia.”
The results are part of a report, Suicide Prevention—An Action Agenda,prepared by consultancy ConNetica and the Brain and Mind Centre at the University of Sydney. The report draws a link between deteriorating economic conditions and the 22 percent increase in suicide between 2004 and 2014.
“Where countries have dramatically altered the social safety net for long-term unemployed and those with disabilities, suicide rates have risen sharply,” the report states.
“For example, in the Netherlands, rates rose over 30 percent between 2008 and 2012 with the combined impact of the GFC [global financial crisis] and harsh fiscal austerity measures. The evidence is clear—apply harsh fiscal austerity measures and a lot of people will die from suicide. Individuals lost—families crippled—communities damaged.”
Speaking at a media conference, ConNetica director John Mendoza said a common characteristic of electorates with the most severe rates of suicide was the impact of economic change. Workers had lost jobs or conditions. “Issues like the loss of manufacturing, the downturn in resources and construction industries, housing affordability and the high cost of education and retraining is hitting hard.”
Mendoza continued: “If you want to give people a mental health problem, if you want to raise their psychological distress, what do you do? Dose them up on uncertainty, dose them up on fear. That’s what causes mental illness, that’s what gets them to the point they see no other option but to take their own life.”
The electorates with the highest number of recorded suicides from 2009 to 2012 were:
∙ Casey, spanning the outer-eastern suburbs of Melbourne, with an official youth unemployment rate of 12.31 percent, had 184 suicides.
∙ Longman, which includes the working-class Brisbane suburb of Caboolture, with a youth unemployment rate of 14.63 percent, experienced 162 suicides. Queensland has some of the highest youth unemployment rates in the country—from 20 to 28 percent in many regions.
∙ Corangamite, which covers part of the regional city of Geelong, near Melbourne, had 111 suicides. It has a youth unemployment rate of 18.15 percent and the nearby rural town of Colac has a youth unemployment rate of 19.05 percent.
The Geelong region is being devastated by the closure of manufacturing industries, such as Ford and Alcoa, and the ongoing rise of indebtedness in the farming sector.
These disturbing figures provide a glimpse of the growing social crisis facing workers and young people as a result of unemployment, poverty, the gutting of funding to education and training facilities, lack of social supports and the absence of affordable housing.
A key aspect of the report is the under-reporting of suicides. It noted: “Suicide is implicated in many poisonings, falls and motor vehicle accidents. It is generally accepted that the actual number of deaths is 20-30 percent higher than the official numbers.”
Data released earlier this year by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in the Causes of Death Report 2014, revealed suicide was the leading cause of death for those aged 15 to 44. There was an average of 7.8 deaths by suicide each day, totalling 2,864 people during 2014. This equates to 12.0 suicides per 100,000 people. Suicide rates among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are double that of non-indigenous Australians.
A greater number of people attempt to end their lives every day—approximately 180 officially.
Successive Labor and Liberal-National governments have done nothing to address the chronic lack of mental health resources. In 2012, the Gillard Labor government commenced the rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). But this only shifts funds to cheaper service providers. While promising high-quality lifelong services for the disabled, in reality the NDIS will see hundreds of thousands of people with mental illness fail to qualify for assistance.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s government also introduced major changes to welfare payments, transferring thousands of single parents and the disabled from pensions onto lower-paying unemployment benefits. It is estimated that 60 percent of people already moved off the Disability Support Pension (DSP) suffer mental illness. There are now plans for a further 90,000 people to have their eligibility “re-assessed.”
In 2014, the current Liberal-National Coalition government made a number of changes to health funding agreements with states and territories, identifying “savings” of $1.8 billion over four years. Funding guarantees under the National Health Reform Agreement 2011 (NHRA) were replaced by “activity based funding” until July 2017. Following this, funding will be linked to movements in the consumer price index (CPI) and population growth—essentially a return to the funding model the NHRA replaced.
The National Partnership Agreement on mental health was also terminated. It was providing approximately $45 million a year to states and territories to supposedly improve services, particularly in the priority areas of accommodation support and presentation planning in hospital emergency departments.
Neither Labor nor the Coalition has committed any extra funding during this election campaign. Both are committed to the National Suicide Prevention Strategy, with the ongoing “re-allocation” of existing funds, effectively shifting the onus of responsibility and burden onto families, GPs and “local organisations.” The Greens have earmarked a paltry extra $400 million over four years, which is a drop in the ocean of what is required.
The South Australian government recently announced the closure of two key mental health facilities in Adelaide, following a $5 million cut to federal funding. One of the services, in Salisbury, is adjacent to the northern suburb of Elizabeth, which is being impacted by the closure of the car manufacturing industry.
With a further $15 million cut to funding, other services in the state are facing closure by July, including an after-hours acute community mental health service, as well as services in Whyalla, a regional city built around the steel industry that is facing the threatened closure of the Arrium steelworks and iron ore mines.
Mendoza told the media conference: “We are sleepwalking into a national disaster.” Far from “sleepwalking,” major companies and governments are consciously imposing these attacks on the most oppressed and vulnerable sections of the working class, not only in Australia but internationally.
The reality is that unless people can afford to pay for health insurance and private clinics, they are denied access to “best practice” care.
The factors that contribute to suicide are complex. However, the links between persistent and increasing economic hardship and uncertainty, and deep psychological distress and lack of hope are undeniable. The upward trajectory of suicide rates is one of the sharpest expressions of the social crisis facing the working class. Can there be a more damning indictment on society?
Under the existing economic system of capitalism, which is driven by profit and the never-ending accumulation of wealth for a tiny minority, the basic and social needs of the majority, the working class, will never be met.

UK: Tata Steel completes sale of Long Division plant to Greybull

Danny Richardson

The sale of Tata Steel’s European Long Products Division was completed last week with the new company rebranded and launched as British Steel Ltd, the name of the former nationalised company privatised in 1988.
The price paid by asset striper Greybull Capital was a nominal £1.
The sale of assets in England includes the Scunthorpe works employing more than 4,000, two mills in Teesside, an engineering workshop in Workington, a design consultancy in York, and various distribution centres. A rail mill in northeastern France is also being sold.
The Long Division employs 4,800 people—4,400 in the UK and 400 in France. Its sale lays the basis for a further offensive against jobs, wages and pensions.
At a press conference, Bimlendra Jha, the previous chief executive of Tata Steel UK, said, he hoped “the business will continue the momentum of the improvement programme that has been initiated in the last 12 months... Employees and trade unions have worked closely with the Long Products Europe management team to improve the business’s prospects, putting it in a more competitive position than it has been for many years.”
These comments were in reference to job losses, wage cuts and the speeding up of productivity contained in a plan put forward by the trade unions. In April this year, as part of the deal to prime the Scunthorpe operation for the Greybull takeover, the unions recommended a three percent pay cut along with changes to terms and conditions relating to enhanced payments outside the standard 40-hour week.
Greybull made clear they would not support the existing pension set-up as part of any takeover. Using the threat of the loss of their livelihoods if workers did not accept, the unions got a deal through, by a 2-1 margin, under the terms of which the pension contributions paid by the employers were cut three percent. The scheme will be run by the private insurance firm Legal and General and no longer by the British Steel Pension Fund. On top of these attacks, a previous “final salary scheme” under which Scunthorpe steelworkers could retire on full benefits at the age of 55, depending on their length of service, is ended. Employees will now have to work until they are 65 to benefit.
The Community trade union’s general secretary, Roy Rickhuss, said the sale opens a “new chapter in the course of the UK steel industry... The turnaround plan agreed between management and unions is already yielding positive results.”
In reality jobs will be axed and wages, pensions and working conditions undermined further with the full compliance of the unions, who will police the shop floor on behalf of Greybull. The three percent wage cut, claimed as a temporary measure, is just the beginning.
Greybull Capital was founded in 2010 by brothers Nathaniel and Marc Meyohas. Its business record is a warning to steel workers. It formed part of the backing for electrical retailers Comet, only for the chain to collapse months later with the loss of 7,000 jobs. Greybull’s financing of the deal ensured that it recouped the majority of its money after the collapse.
In 2014, it bought Monarch Airlines from the Mantegazza family. A World Socialist Web Site article dated April 13 warned Tata workers, “With asset strippers such as Greybull and Liberty House (who have taken over two of Tata’s Scottish plants), it will not be long before the unions come asking again for yet further sacrifices...
“Steel workers should be aware of Greybull’s record at Monarch Airlines. After taking over the airline in 2014, it began a slash and burn operation. Seven hundred redundancies were rammed through and crew and pilots forced into 30 percent pay cuts, with pilot pensions also slashed. Following the cuts, the airline returned to profit, making £40 million in 2015. Greybull’s owners are reportedly considering a sale of the airline, which would secure a large profit.”
Following Greybull’s Tata purchase, the Financial Times ran a story outlining a tentative deal made to Tata Steel by the Conservative government to keep open its Port Talbot plant in Wales. Reportedly close to being finalised, the FTstated, “After failing to receive assurances that any prospective buyer would keep the plant [employing 3,000] open for more than three years, the company turned to the UK government to ask for further financial incentives to stay.”
A deal would be based on the government organising a state loan of hundreds of millions of pounds on “commercial terms” to Tata. The loan could partly replace an existing £900 million loan from Tata’s Indian parent company to Tata Steel UK.
The handover of cheap money to Tata would be the latest move in bailing out privatised corporations at vast expense to the public purse and on the backs of workers. Central to this is an ongoing government consultation into potential legal changes to the deficit-hit British Steel pension fund that would reduce its massive liabilities by several billion pounds, making the sale of Tata’s remaining assets more amenable to an asset stripper.
By law employers have to provide a pension scheme for all employees, but new owners are not legally bound to take over the existing pension scheme. According to some reports, the British Steel Pension Scheme is in such a perilous state it can no longer fund new retirees.
As of December 2015, the scheme had assets of £13.3 billion, but liabilities of around £14 billion. Recent analysis shows it with one of the largest deficits of any UK pension scheme. It supports 130,000 workers, including 14,000 still employed by Tata, 32,000 deferred—those who worked for Tata/British Steel in the past but are not yet at retirement age—and 84,000 who already draw a British Steel pension.
The government launched its consultation regarding the British Steel pension scheme last month. From information emerging, it is clear that its purpose will be to introduce new measures designed to rob workers of large amounts of their pension.
The BBC reported that one proposal being discussed is for any pension increases to be paid out by the pension scheme by linking them to the generally lower Consumer Prices Index and not as is the case at present in line with the Retail Prices Index inflation measure. This is being presented as the lesser of two evils, and a better alternative than letting the scheme collapse or be taken over by the state run Pension Protection Fund (PPF). Under the PPF, those still working or who retired early receive 90 percent of the payments expected.
Another change could see some pensioners and their widows having their pensions completely frozen, or as good as frozen for the rest of their lives, with potential losses running into thousands of pounds. Widows make up a third of those receiving the British Steel pension.
The government could exploit a legal requirement to index all of a pension payment only in respect to years of service since 1997. Before that date only a very restricted legal requirement to up-rate the pension exists. The BBC reports, “Paragraph 85 of the consultation document warns that ‘If adopted, this [rule change] would mean that in the future existing pensioners would receive lower increases to their pensions... or possibly no increases at all.’”
Steve Webb, a former Liberal Democrat pensions minister, “calculated that an 80-year-old pensioner on £100 per week who did all of their service before 1997 could see their pension held at £100 for the rest of their retirement, rather than see it rise every year in line with inflation as it does at present.”

New Panama Papers revelations highlight use of tax havens by wealthy US clients

Josh Varlin

A report published by the New York Times on June 5 details how the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, the subject of the Panama Papers leak, helped wealthy US clients avoid taxes. The report, which appeared in the June 6 print edition, reveals a system of private foundations, bogus charities and shell companies, replete with codenames, to facilitate tax avoidance on a massive scale.
Until now, few Americans have been exposed as utilizing Mossack Fonseca’s services, although the Panama Papers have led to multiple scandals internationally since their April release. Icelandic Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson resigned after the Panama Papers showed that he and his wife had operated a shell company in the British Virgin Islands to avoid Icelandic taxes and profit from the post-2008 bailout. Meanwhile, UK Prime Minister David Cameron faced a political scandal due to his benefiting from his father’s Panamanian company, managed by Mossack Fonseca.
Many US-based businesses and wealthy individuals opt to leave their assets in the United States, relying instead on states with low tax rates, such as Delaware and Wyoming, in order to maximize their assets. Oxfam, in an April report unrelated to the Panama Papers, detailed the massive assets stored by US corporations overseas, effectively hiding $1.4 trillion in profits in offshore accounts.
Most of the reportage on the Panama Papers has been coordinated through the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), based in Washington, DC. The German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung originally received the leaked documents, totaling 2.6 terabytes of data, anonymously.
The Times report discusses several of Mossack Fonseca’s US clients, including an exorbitantly wealthy family, an international financial criminal residing in Texas and a self-help author attempting to hide $1 million. Interwoven with this is a discussion of the mechanisms whereby vast sums of money were squirreled away.
Mossack Fonseca helps its clients hide their identities and avoid US taxation through numerous shady practices. Chief among these is the creation of private foundations in Panama, which are untaxed and not required to donate to charity.
leaked Mossack Fonseca document describing these private foundations begins with their literally medieval origins and then describes their purpose in frank terms: “Private Foundations … need not be acknowledged by any administrative authority aside from the Public Registry, are not subject to external legal governmental control provisions and are an ideal vehicle in the offshore industry.”
Mossack Fonseca often uses its own employees as the officers of the foundation functioning on behalf of their client. The Panamanian firm handles the legal infrastructure of creating a “private Foundation/company combination for a flat fee of US$4,500.00,” Ramsés Owens, then a partner at Mossack Fonseca, said in an email to a client.
Money moved to these foundations can then be moved around, including to shell companies owned by family members—such as in the case of the wealthy Ponsoldt family, which had a father, son and daughter all employing Mossack Fonseca’s services. Moving money in this way to avoid US ceilings on tax-free gifts from parents to children is illegal.
American residents and citizens are required to pay taxes on passive income earned on offshore investments, although Mossack Fonseca’s practices actively help its clients avoid paying these taxes. The firm claims that it is the clients’ responsibility to ensure that they pay their taxes.
In one of the leaked documents, a Mossack Fonseca staff member sums up the character of the super-rich in the United States: “At hearing that he can make nearly $8 million per year just on tax savings [a client] was now wide awaken.” The staffer continues: “I could even detect sweats coming down from his forehead and his cheeks were beginning to blush with crimson excitement. Noticing his interest, I went in for the kill.”
This wide array of services attracts a well-heeled clientele. Among those profiled in the Times piece are the Ponsoldts—William Ponsoldt, a real-estate magnate and investor, and his children, Tracey and Christopher. Mossack Fonseca provided services for the family members, each of whom was given a code name (“father,” “daughter,” “son”).
All in all, the Ponsoldts used Andorran and Panamanian shell companies and Swiss bank accounts to shield tens of millions of dollars from US taxes. This was then moved around as needed—including a potentially illegal transfer of $800,000 from “father” to “son,” that is, from one offshore account to another.
Tracey Ponsoldt Powers, or “daughter,” made a revealing request in October 2008 asking for some of the money to be moved to Panama and then converted into gold coins. She wrote to Owens: “I feel VERY unsettled with this election and how the media is censoring information and spinning the American Public to vote Obama. It is so obvious to me, that they are setting us up with a Socialist — but most people can’t see it happening before their eyes! It’s like propaganda that is brainwashing Americans to forget the Principles of Hard Work, Ingenuity, Risk and Boundless Success! [sic]”. The delusion is staggering.
Mossack Fonseca has repeatedly claimed that it performs due diligence when it takes on clients, which includes not working for known financial criminals. In 2013, the firm vetted Kjell Gunnar Finstad, a Texas resident convicted of securities and accounting violations, including fraud, in Norway. However, Finstad’s prior conviction is not discussed in Mossack Fonseca’s records of his vetting, which included procuring a copy of his passport.
The last person profiled in the Times report is Marianna Olszewski, author of Live It, Love It, Earn It: A Woman’s Guide to Financial Freedom. She wanted to move $1 million without her name being attached to the transaction. Needless to say, there is a chasm separating Olszewski and the working-class women targeted by her book.
In order to conduct the transaction, Mossack Fonseca used a “natural person trustee,” that is, a resident who could affix their name to the transaction in lieu of the actual beneficiary (in this case, Olszewski). The Times describes this practice as “one of the remaining illegal ploys favored by Americans today.”
The work of investigative journalists around the world, coordinated by the ICIJ, has played a valuable role in exposing the machinations and criminality of the world’s financial elite. That being said, the ICIJ has refused to release the files to the public. WikiLeaks, founded by Julian Assange, tweeted shortly after the initial coverage, “If you censor more than 99% of the documents you are engaged in 1% journalism by definition.”

Papua New Guinea police shoot protesting students, killing four

John Braddock

Four people have been killed and at least seven injured after police shot at protesting students today when they attempted to march from the University of Papua New Guinea in Port Moresby to the national parliament.
According to the media, the police blocked the march and demanded that the students hand over the student union president for arrest. When they refused, the police fired directly into the crowd. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation is reporting that about 2,000 students and staff are currently being held by police at the University of Technology in Lae, the country’s second largest city.
The police attacks follow five weeks of protests by Papua New Guinea students.
On May 31 students demonstrated outside parliament as opposition parties attempted to call a no-confidence vote in the People’s National Congress Party government. The students have been boycotting classes for a month, demanding Prime Minister Peter O’Neill step down to face corruption allegations.
Five hundred people attended the rally but, according to a student leader, Gerald Tulu Manu-Peni, police would not let them into parliament to watch the proceedings from the public gallery.
The University of Papua New Guinea’s (UPNG) first semester has been suspended for 10 days over the protests, with the 4,000 students given 48 hours to vacate the university. The closure followed the occupation of the university by heavily-armed police, beginning May 17, in an effort by its administration, backed by the government, to suppress the student movement.
Protests have spread through other tertiary institutions, including the University of Goroka and Lae Unitech, where students are also boycotting classes. Students from at least six secondary schools joined the sit-in at UPNG.
The university council decided last Thursday to lift the suspension and resume classes from June 13. Acting Chancellor Dr. Nicholas Mann said the suspension should have given the students time to “think things through.” The Student Representative Council (SRC) said it would meet to decide whether to resume the boycott.
The National Court earlier last week granted an application by the SRC for a judicial review of the order to vacate the campus. While the case has been playing out in the courts, most of the university’s 2,400 resident students opted to remain on campus in defiance of the administration.
O’Neill has flatly refused to step down or cooperate with the corruption inquiry. Fraud squad police secured an arrest warrant for him two years ago over alleged illegal state payments of $US30 million in legal bills to a law firm, Paraka Lawyers. His arrest was prevented by a series of legal challenges to the investigation. Last month, the Supreme Court lifted the stay orders, paving the way for the case to be pursued.
The student movement reflects heightened anti-government sentiment amid the country’s devastating economic crisis, driven by the collapse in global mining and energy commodity prices. According to the Australian Financial Review, PNG ended 2015 “in crisis management with cash shortages and budget cuts more severe than those in Greece’s austerity package.”
International financial institutions are expressing growing concern. Sydney based think-tank, the Lowy Institute, cited projections by the Asian Development Outlook that PNG growth is set to fall to 4.3 percent in 2016, then 2.4 percent in 2017. “For a country that in 2015 had the fastest growth in the region, it has been a sharp and sudden reversal of fortune,” the report noted.
Massive spending cuts have been imposed, targeting the urban and rural poor. Public servants are going without pay, power blackouts have become regular in Port Moresby and Lae, and budget reductions have been imposed in health and education. This is all taking place amid a prolonged and disastrous drought.
Protests and strikes have broken out involving important sections of the working class—power workers, miners, teachers and public servants.
In the past week, groups of students have toured the provinces to campaign over their grievances. A public forum in Goroka attracted about 4,000 people. Large rallies have been held in most provincial capitals in PNG’s Highlands region. In Simbu province, around 6,000 people attended a forum.
Police have shown little tolerance for the student-led meetings. In Wewak, 18 students were arrested on May 30 after the police commander claimed the students caused a “commotion” and unlawfully assembled in the township area.
In Wabag, more than 15,000 people had gathered when about 100 police started firing tear gas. During the ensuing melee, the Bank of South Pacific and provincial centre buildings were stoned and shops around the town attacked. Government MP Robert Ganim denounced the student protests as a “threat to national security.”
Opposition politicians are continuing to exploit the student movement, while seeking to limit its demands to the issue of “corruption.” Following the Wewak arrests, Pangu Pati leader Don Pomb Polye criticised the detentions as “uncalled for in a democratic country like PNG; it is unlawful and might lead to chaos in the country.” The provincial Governor and former Prime Minister Michael Somare negotiated for the students’ release and covered their bail.
With the ruling elite under pressure from financial institutions and ratings agencies over the dire fiscal position, no section of the bourgeoisie has any solution except more austerity. The opposition parties, and the student leaders who are closely aligned with them, are desperate to confine the movement within the parliamentary system, isolating it from the increasingly restive working class. SRC leaders have emphasised they are only seeking “respect” for the office of prime minister and for the country’s constitution.
Last week’s parliamentary session was the opposition’s fourth attempt to oust the government over the corruption allegations. Previous attempts have been struck down due to questions about the validity of the signatures on documents. The governing party has asked the courts to make a ruling on the latest motion. With elections due in 2017, no-confidence votes will soon be barred as the constitution prevents them being taken less than 12 months out from a general election.
All the opposition parties are part of the ruling elite and mired in corruption. PNG Party leader Belden Namah has postured as the principal defender of the students, while warning them against taking “the law into their own hands.” Namah is Somare’s former forestry minister and was deputy prime minister under O’Neill. Before entering politics he was an army officer and businessman, describing himself as being “into the multi-billion-dollar business of logging.” In 2009, the Samoan Central Bank announced an inquiry into money laundering offences over several properties purchased by Namah, worth more than 4 million PNG Kina.
PNG’s former colonial power, Australia, may be turning against O’Neill, who was installed in 2011 through an illegal parliamentary manoeuvre. His predecessor, Somare, was ousted with Canberra’s involvement, because he was considered too close to Beijing.
In January, however, O’Neill removed 15 senior Australian officials who were working as so-called advisors within the finance, treasury, transport and justice ministries. This was a marked setback for Australia’s neo-colonial interests.
The Lowy Institute has now criticised O’Neill, saying the corruption furore was “distracting from the desperate attention the economy needs.” With an election looming next year, it complained, the “bold action” urgently required—i.e., deepening attacks on the working class—“seems unlikely.”

Clinton claims Democratic nomination after winning four of six final states

Patrick Martin

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday night after winning four state primaries, in California, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota, giving her a majority of elected delegates for the Democratic National Convention.
Clinton won the two largest states to vote June 7: California, the most populous state, and New Jersey, the 11th largest. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders narrowly won the Montana primary, as well as winning the North Dakota caucuses.
The size of Clinton’s victory in California far exceeded the two percentage point margin shown in polls leading up to the vote. This suggested that the intensive media campaign declaring Clinton the presumptive nominee, launched 24 hours before the polls opened, may have had the desired effect of depressing the Sanders vote.
Clinton’s victories in South Dakota and New Mexico, and the close contest in Montana, also suggested a significant decline in the vote for Sanders, who had been expected to win all three states.
Clinton declared victory in the overall contest for the Democratic nomination in a speech delivered just before the polls closed in California.
Her campaign set the tone of the speech with a video introduction that presented Clinton’s nomination as the culmination of nearly two centuries of struggle for women’s rights, going back to the first convention for women’s suffrage at Seneca Falls, New York. “Thanks to you, we’ve reached a milestone,” Clinton said. “The first time in our nation's history that a woman will be a major party's nominee.”
The New York Times set the tone for the exultation in the media over a Clinton nomination, writing in an editorial posted on its web site: “Mrs. Clinton’s name on the ballot in November would be another milestone in the quest for women’s rights, which, as she noted years ago, are human rights. This achievement is worth cheering by all, regardless of party, because it further opens the door to female leadership in every sphere."
This invocation of gender politics is modeled on the racial politics used to justify the Obama administration, with the claim that the policies of the first African-American president must be progressive, simply because of the race of the occupant of the White House.
In reality, Obama defended the interests of Wall Street just as fervently as his Republican predecessor Bush, bailing out the banks at the expense of the working class, and waging war around the world on behalf of American imperialism. Clinton served for the first four years of the Obama administration and would follow in its reactionary footsteps.
Clinton congratulated Sanders and his supporters on a “vigorous debate,” claiming to agree with the goals of raising incomes, reducing inequality and improving conditions for the poor and working people. But she went on to repeatedly extend an olive branch to Republicans and supporters of the candidates defeated by Donald Trump for the Republican nomination.
She denounced Trump, claiming that his signature slogan, “Make America great again,” was “code for let’s take America backwards. Back to a time when opportunity and dignity were reserved for some, not all.” In other words, she presented Trump’s appeal as a purely racial one, aimed at white men. She avoided any suggestion that the billionaire demagogue was able to gain a hearing because of the deteriorating economic conditions affecting all working people, regardless of race and gender.
In the most significant passage in her speech, Clinton declared, “This election is not, however, about the same old fights between Republicans and Democrats. This election is different. It really is about who we are as a nation.”
This is clearly to be the axis of the Clinton general election campaign: downplaying any critique of the right-wing Republican policies of budget austerity, tax cuts for the wealthy and militarism—which Clinton herself supports—in favor of an “anyone but Trump” scare campaign.
Sanders addressed his supporters late Tuesday night California time, as he prepared to fly back from the West Coast to his home in Burlington, Vermont. His campaign announced that he would travel on to Washington, DC Thursday for a campaign rally there and a meeting at the White House the same day with President Obama, “at Sanders’ request.”
Obama telephoned Sanders Sunday for a private conversation, which press reports suggested involved White House pressure for Sanders to acknowledge a Clinton victory quickly. It included the (stated or unstated) threat that Obama would make a formal endorsement of the former Secretary of State this week, ending his nominal neutrality in the nomination contest.
Also Tuesday night, the political crisis in the Republican Party came to a head over Trump’s incessant and openly racist attacks on the federal judge hearing the civil suit brought against Trump University by former students who claim that the real estate training program was a scam run for Trump’s personal profit.
Trump has blamed legal setbacks, including adverse rulings by Judge Gonzalo Curiel, on the fact that the Indiana-born judge was of Mexican ancestry. “He’s a Mexican,” Trump said in one interview. “We’re building a wall between here and Mexico.”
The racist vilification of the judge has provoked criticism of the Republican nominee within his own party, culminating in back-to-back statements by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, disavowing his comments. On Tuesday, Republican Senator Mark Steven Kirk of Illinois publicly withdrew his support for the presidential nominee, citing the attacks on Judge Curiel.
Trump gave a televised speech Tuesday night, ostensibly to thank voters in the Republican primaries held that day, all of which he won in the absence of any remaining opponents. Its real purpose was damage control. Earlier in the day, the Trump campaign released a brief statement claiming that his statements on Judge Curiel had been “misconstrued.” Trump did not refer to the affair in his speech, but his promises not to embarrass the party were clearly aimed at assuring party officials and candidates that he would avoid further controversies of that type.
The speech included an appeal to Sanders supporters, claiming shared opposition to “the terrible trade deals that Bernie was so vehemently against—and he’s right on that.” Trump also professed sympathy for “communities in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Indiana, and Ohio, whose manufacturing jobs, literally, these jobs have virtually disappeared.”
While Clinton’s victory speech oozed complacency and promised to continue the supposed progress under the Obama administration, Trump presented the condition of the United States as disastrous. “We’re broke. We are $19 trillion in debt,” he said, “going quickly to $21 trillion. Our infrastructure is a disaster. Our schools are failing. Crime is rising. People are scared.”
He combined this indictment with a rant against immigrants, characterizing them as robbers and murderers. This echoed the infamous speech in which he announced his campaign a year ago, when he vilified Mexican immigrants as rapists and murderers. It sets the tone for an increasingly fascistic turn in the Republican Party.

Fallujah: A symbol of US war crimes

James Cogan

No city in Iraq is more symbolic of the criminal consequences of the US invasion of Iraq than Fallujah. Prior to 2003, the 300,000-strong, prosperous, predominantly Sunni Muslim community on the Euphrates River, one of humanity’s oldest continuous urban settlements, was known as the “city of mosques.” After 13 years of destruction at the hands of the US military and its client state in Baghdad, it is today a labyrinth of ruins, a city of the dead.
Following weeks of air strikes by US, British and Australian bombers, a combination of Iraqi government forces and Shiite militias is reportedly on the verge of a final offensive to seize back Fallujah from some 500 fighters of the Sunni-extremist Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which took control of the city in early 2014. Iraqi special forces units are accompanied by elite troops of the US, British and Australian militaries, who direct air strikes and ground artillery bombardments and provide tactical advice to Iraqi commanders.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein has issued urgent appeals concerning the fate of the estimated 50,000 civilians who are trapped in Fallujah, without food or water. Civilian deaths caused by the offensive have been justified in advance by the US-backed Iraqi government with allegations that the occupiers are using the population as “human shields.” ISIS is accused of murdering dozens of people who have attempted to flee.
Men and teenagers who do escape are being detained by Iraqi government and militia units. According to the UNHCR, they are being subjected to “physical violations and other forms of abuse, apparently in order to elicit forced confessions” of being ISIS members or supporters. The UNHCR has received unconfirmed accounts of at least 21 summary executions.
In the media coverage, the question as to how and why ISIS was able to gain control of the city two years ago is largely ignored. To the extent it is raised, the explanation given is Sunni resentment over the sectarian and discriminatory policies of the Shiite-dominated government— after the withdrawal of American troops in 2011. The Iraqi people as a whole are generally portrayed as incurably divided along Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish lines, incapable of living in harmony together and inherently attracted to extremist ethno-sectarian ideologies.
A review of the tortured history of Fallujah since 2003 makes clear that this narrative is a lie. The current situation in Iraq and neighbouring Syria is the outcome and continuation of the deliberate stoking of sectarian conflict by the American occupation for the purpose of dividing the Iraqi masses and cementing the US grip over the oil-rich Middle East.
After the illegal invasion of Iraq and overthrow of the Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, Fallujah was the scene of one of the first widely reported crimes by American troops against Iraqi civilians. Two hundred youth demanding the reopening of their school were fired on by troops of the US 82nd Airborne Division. Seventeen were murdered and over 70 wounded.
Over the following months, Fallujah emerged as a centre of Iraqi resistance to the US occupation. By early 2004, the city was effectively controlled by armed groups overwhelmingly made up of former members of the Iraqi Army and local Sunni tribes. Religious-based extremists, such as the small grouping calling itself “Al Qaeda in Iraq,” had only a minor presence.
The killing of four Blackwater mercenaries in Fallujah in March 2004 triggered a massive American military response. Across Iraq, the defiance of the people of Fallujah became a clarion call for resistance. In the first week of April, the stand in the city against the occupation was joined by an uprising of tens of thousands of Shiite working class youth in Baghdad and cities across southern Iraq. The armed insurgency against the US forces spread to predominantly Sunni cities such as Ramadi, Tikrit and Mosul.
The dominant feature of the anti-occupation resistance in Iraq in 2004 was that it objectively unified Iraqis of all backgrounds who opposed the US occupation and its local collaborators. However, it lacked any coherent perspective or strategy. In city after city, Iraqi fighters were overwhelmed by the superior firepower of the US military, including in Fallujah in November 2004. After a months-long siege, the city was left depopulated and in rubble. Of its 200 mosques, 60 were destroyed or damaged, along with some 39,000 homes and other buildings.
The other central feature of the US occupation in 2004 was the deployment of US-trained Shiite death squads, such as the Wolf Brigade, against the Sunni population. Thousands of people were murdered. At the same time, Al Qaeda in Iraq escalated sinister bombings of Shiite civilians, which assisted the US occupation in driving a wedge between the two communities. By 2006, US policy had provoked a full-scale sectarian civil war that forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee for safety into areas controlled by the militias of their religious denomination.
The origins of the present savage sectarianism Iraq lie in the manner by which US imperialism “stabilised” Iraq under the control of its Shiite-dominated puppet state, using the criminal methods of divide-and-rule, mass killings and mass dislocation. In 2011, as it withdrew its forces from Iraq, Washington launched a regime-change war in Libya and began sponsoring a regime-change operation in Syria using the same methods that had triggered civil war in Iraq. In Syria, however, the CIA and US military worked through Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to arm Sunni-based groupings to overthrow the Russian- and Iranian-backed Shiite-dominated government of Bashar al-Assad.
One of the main groupings that benefited from the flow of arms was the remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq, which sent fighters into Syria and soon emerged as a dominant force in the civil war. In April 2013, strengthened by a flood of foreign Islamist fighters who were permitted to enter Syria from Turkey, it renamed itself the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The ISIS fighters who entered Fallujah in late 2013 and claimed control over the city in January 2014 had been financed, equipped and armed as part of the US intrigues in Syria. ISIS seized other areas of Sunni-dominated western and northern Iraq, most dramatically the city of Mosul, in July 2014. To the extent the Islamist movement received support, it was because it pledged to defend the Sunni population from the consequences of the US invasion, including the depredations and abuses of the US-backed government in Baghdad. Both materially and ideologically, ISIS is the by-product of US policy.
The current onslaught on Fallujah is only the latest chapter in the catastrophe that US imperialism has inflicted on the peoples of Iraq and the Middle East as a whole. It can be ended only through the building of a mass international anti-war movement based on the working class and the fight for socialism.

7 Jun 2016

2016/2017 Government of Japan Scholarship for Nigerian Undergraduate, Masters and PhD Students

Application Deadline: 30th of June 2016.
Brief description: The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) is offering scholarships to Nigerian students who wish to study at Japanese universities as Undergraduate and Masters students under the Japanese Government (MEXT) Scholarship Program for 2017.
About Scholarship: The Japanese Government’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) is offering Nigerian students scholarships for academic study in Japan in order to deepen their understanding of the Japanese language, Japanese affairs and Japanese culture. The purpose of these scholarships is to promote mutual understanding and deepening friendly ties between Japan and other countries through the application of advanced knowledge regarding Japan’s language and culture.
Scholarship Offered Since: Not specified
Scholarship Type:
1. Research Students: (Post graduate students who wish to conduct research in Japan for the award of Ph.D/Master’s degrees in respective fields).
2. Undergraduate students who wish to continue their education in Japanese universities for the award of first degrees.
3. College of Technology students
4. Specialized Training colleges
Eligible Field of Study: Those who wish to study in Japan as an undergraduate student must choose a field of major from (1) or (2) below. Applicants may enter a first, second, and third choice.
(1) Social Sciences and Humanities: Social Sciences and Humanities-A: Laws, Politics, Pedagogy, Sociology, Literature, History, Japanese language, and others. Social Sciences and Humanities-B: Economics and Business Administration.
(2) Natural Sciences: Natural Sciences-A: Science (Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry), Electrical and Electronic Studies (Electronics, Electrical Engineering, Information Engineering), Mechanical Studies  (Mechanical Engineering, Naval Architecture), Civil Engineering and Architecture (Civil Engineering, Architecture, Environmental Engineering), Chemical Studies (Applied Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Industrial Chemistry, Textile Engineering), and other fields (Metallurgical Engineering, Mining Engineering, Maritime Engineering, Biotechnology). Natural Sciences-B: Agricultural studies (Agriculture, Agricultural Chemistry, Agricultural Engineering, Animal Science, Veterinary Medicine, Forestry, Food Science, Fisheries), Hygienic studies (Pharmacy, Hygienics, Nursing), and Science (Biology). Natural Sciences-C: Medicine, and Dentistry.

take-our-survey2
For postgraduate, applicants should apply for the field of study they majored in at university or its related field. Moreover, the fields of study must be subjects which applicants will be able to study and research in graduate courses at Japanese universities.
Selection Criteria and Eligibility: Prospective candidates must:
  • Not be 35 years of age and
  • Have completed their first degree in a competent university with competitive Grade Point Average.
  • Health: Applicants must be free from any mental or physical disabilities that would be an impediment to the pursuit of university study.
Number of Scholarships: Not specified
Value of Scholarship:
  • -Allowance: The amount of the scholarship disbursement per month has yet to be determined.
  • -Transportation to Japan
  • -Transportation from Japan: The recipient who returns to his/her home country within the fixed period after the expiration of his/her scholarship will be supplied, upon application, with an economy-class airplane ticket for travel from the New Tokyo International Airport or any other international airport that the appointed university usually uses to the international airport nearest to his/her home address
  • -Tuition and Other Fees: Fees for the entrance examination, matriculation, and tuition at universities will be borne by the Japanese Government.
Duration of Scholarship: For postgraduate,  between 18 & 24 months.
To be taken at (country):  Japanese Universities
Offered annually? Yes
How to Apply: Nigerian candidates should visit the scholarship webpage to apply.
Interested candidates can also visit the Embassy of Japan to pick up application forms.
Address: No.9 Bobo Street (off Gana Street), Maitama, Abuja
Telephone: (09) 461-2713, 461-2714
Embassy working hours: (Mon to Thurs) 8:00am to 3:00pm, (Fri) 8:00am to 1:30pm
Visit the general scholarship webpage for details.
Sponsors: The Japanese Government’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
Important Notes: Candidates should please note that applications forms for the current exercise is clearly marked – (2017). Applications made with the 2016 forms will, therefore, not be processed by the Embassy.

Two Bayer Science & Education Foundation Scholarships for International Students – Germany

Application Deadline: Applications must be submitted between June 3 and July 18, 2016.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Germany
Brief description: The Bayer Fellowship Program targets students and apprentices in scientific and medical disciplines. Its goal is to support the next generation of researchers and teachers as they engage in “Science for a Better Life”.
Eligible Fields of Studies: Two scholarships are awarded in the following scientific disciplines:
Life Sciences: Students and young professionals in the fields of biology, molecular biology, bioengineering, bioinformatics, chemistry, biochemistry, pharmaceuticals and computational life sciences can apply for the Otto Bayer Scholarship.
Agro Sciences: Students and young professionals in the fields of agro sciences, agronomy, crop sciences, green biotechnology, environmental sciences and sustainability can apply for the Jeff Schell Scholarship.
About the Award: The Fellowship Program offers tailored financial support to candidates applying for these programmes. Important requirements for the support is that the candidate’s project to be supported must be innovative and international. Scholarships are granted to students and young professionals (up to two years after graduation) from Germany wishing to realize a study or research project abroad or to foreign students/young professionals pursuing a project in Germany.
Education, research and the courage to try new approaches have been the basis for human progress since the dawn of time. Innovations that benefit humanity develop from the combination of knowledge and pioneer spirit. That is why the Bayer Foundations take a holistic approach and consider a broad range of social actors.

take-our-survey2
They encourage students to follow their curious impulses with programs for schools, universities and scientific institutions and support those who take an active role in healthcare and the community.
Offered Since: Not known
Type: Postgraduate Research
Eligibility: All applicants should have a high level of commitment, dedication and an innovative project plan. Scholarships are granted to students and young professionals (up to two years after graduation) from Germany wishing to realize a study or research project abroad or to foreign students/young professionals pursuing a project in Germany.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The financing generally covers the cost of living, travel expenses and project costs. Each applicant is asked to set up an individual cost schedule to be approved by the Foundation Council.
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course
How to Apply: The following application documents are required for the Otto Bayer Scholarship and the Jeff Schell Scholarship
  • Confirmation letter from host institute/university
  • A description of the project (duration of 2-12 months) with financial plan within the timeline of September 2016 to August 2017. The project can consist of
    special study courses, laboratory assignments, research projects, summer classes, internships, Master’s or PhD programs.
  • Most recent transcripts
  • Any additional documents that would enhance the application
  • Photo (passport or job application photo)
Award Provider: The Bayer Fellowship Program

2016 Carl Duisberg Scholarships for Students in Human Medicine and Veterinary Medicine

Application Deadline: Applications must be submitted between June 3 and July 18, 2016.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Germany
Brief description: The Bayer Fellowship Program targets students and apprentices in scientific and medical disciplines. Its goal is to support the next generation of researchers and teachers as they engage in “Science for a Better Life”.
Eligible Fields of Studies: Students and young professionals with up to 2 years of experience from the following fields:
  • biology and molecular biology
  • biotechnology and bioinformatics
  • chemistry and biochemistry
  • pharmacy and drug discovery
About the Award: The Carl Duisberg scholarships offer individual support to committed students and young professionals with 1 to 2 years of experience in the disciplines of human and veterinary medicine, medical science, health technology, public health and health economics.
The scholarship funds students of these subjects (until completion of the doctoral degree) and young professionals who have completed their degrees no longer than 2 years before, wishing to realise a particular project in Germany: a scientific project, a specific course, a medical traineeship, a clinical internship year or simply on-the-job training.
Candidates are required to have an excellent academic record and must submit a clearly defined project including a research proposal and a cost schedule as well as a confirmation by the host organisation that facilities are available. The level of support varies depending on the project. It is, however, generally sufficient to cover the living-, travel- and project costs.

take-our-survey2
Offered Since: Not known
Type: Postgraduate Degree
Eligibility: 
  • All applicants should have a high level of commitment, dedication and an innovative project plan.
  • Applications are invited from
    • students and young professionals from Germany who wish to pursue a project abroad or
    • students and young professionals from abroad who wish to pursue a project in Germany.
Number of Awardees: about 15 to 20 scholarships each year
Value of Scholarship: The financing generally covers the cost of living, travel expenses and project costs. Each applicant is asked to set up an individual cost schedule to be approved by the Foundation Council.
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course
How to Apply: The following application documents are required for the Carl Duisberg scholarship:
  • Confirmation letter from host institute/university
  • A description of the project (duration of 2-12 months) with financial plan within the timeline of September 2016 to August 2017. The project can consist of
    special study courses, laboratory assignments, research projects, summer classes, internships, Master’s or PhD programs.
  • Most recent transcripts
  • Any additional documents that would enhance the application
  • Photo (passport or job application photo)
Award Provider: The Bayer Fellowship Program