Italy: Cattolica Africa Scholarship Program 2017/2018 for African Masters Students

Application Deadline: 

• 1st Round: 1st December, 2016 – 1st February, 2017
• 2nd Round: 2nd February 2017 – 15th March, 2017
• 3rd Round: 16th March 2017 – 15th April, 2017

Eligible Countries: Africa countries

To be taken at (country): Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy

Subject Areas: This program consists of seven 2-year MSc programs (Laurea Magistrale), all taught in English. These programs are preparing for an academic and/or professional career. Graduates of MSc programs are also eligible to enter PhD programs at Italian universities.

• MSc in Banking and Finance (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Economics (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Management (Milan Campus) – Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Global Business Management (Piacenza Campus) Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Agriculture and Food Economics (Cremona Campus) Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Healthcare Management – Laurea Magistrale in Management dei Servizi (Roma Campus) Commencement in September 2017
• MSc in Methods and Topics in Arts Management – Laurea Magistrale in Economia e Gestione dei Beni Culturali e dello Spettacolo (Milan Campus) Commencement in September 2017

About Scholarship: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, as part of its mission to foster relationships with developing countries, has developed a special program for students from the African continent. This program will enable students to study for undergraduate and postgraduate degree programs taught in English at UCSC’s Milan, Piacenza and Cremona campuses.

Through the Cattolica Africa Program all accepted applicants will be offered tuition fee reductions (see the chart below). However, students will still be responsible for their own living expenses, hence the Cattolica Africa Program is NOT a program through which full scholarships can be obtained.

Type: Taught Masters degree

Eligibility: Students, either citizens or residents, of all African countries may apply for the Cattolica Africa Program, which is applicable only for the degree programs taught in English.

Admission requirements for all Master Degree programs include:

■ Completion of at least a Bachelor Degree from a recognized university (2nd class upper division / 2.1 degree or higher)
■ English Language Test score: IELTS 6.0 (Academic) or TOEFL IBT 80 if English is not your first language.or successful completion of a degree program taught in the English language.

An application fee of 75€ is due in order to submit the candidacy.

Number of Scholarships: Up to 47

Duration: Cattolica Africa Scholars Program will be offered for 2 years

How to Apply

1. Select the degree program of your choice.
2. Log in the online application and fill it in.
3. Remember to select “degree-seeking” when asked for your “program type”. Upload the following documents:
   1. Copy of bio-data page of your passport or ID (in Latin alphabet);
   2. If you are a Non-EU citizen already living in Italy: copy of your “permesso di soggiorno” ;
   3. Transcript of academic records, including grading and credit system explanation;
   4. Bachelor-level Diploma, if you already graduated from university;
   5. Secondary School Diploma;
   6. English Language Certificate
   7. GMAT or GRE score (optional)
   NOTE: Candidates have to upload the originals of the transcript of academic records, bachelor-level Diploma (if available), and Secondary School Diploma, plus their official translation into Italian or English. If the documents are issued in English, French or Spanish, the translation is not required.
4. Submit your application.

Visit scholarship webpage for details

Sponsors: Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy

Important Notes: Due to the restrictive and lengthy nature of the student pre-registration process required by the Italian Consulates/Embassies, we strongly advise non-EU students residing abroad to apply by April 15.

Shanghai Government Scholarship for Bachelors, Masters and PhD International Students 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 15th April, 2017

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): China

Eligible Field of Study:

1. Bachelor’s degree programs
2. Master’s degree programs (except MBA and MTCSOL*)
   • Note: MBA is short for Master of Business Administration;
   • MTCSOL refers to Master of Teaching Chinese to Speakers of Other Languages.
3. Doctoral degree programs

Type: Bachelors, Masters and PhD

Eligibility: 

1. Be a non-Chinese citizen in good health.
2. Not be an enrolled degree student in Chinese universities at the time of application.
3. Be a high school graduate under the age of 25 when applying for the undergraduate programs;
4. Be a master’s degree holder under the age of 40 when applying for doctoral programs.
5. Be a bachelor’s degree holder under the age of 35 when applying for master’s programs.
6. Be excellent in academic and extra-curricular performance and yet not be rewarded any other scholarships offered by Chinese govern

Value of Scholarship: There are two types of scholarships

Full Scholarship

1. a waiver of tuition fee
2. free on-campus dormitory accommodation
3. Stipend: Bachelor: RMB 1100/ month; Master: RMB 1700/ month; PhD: RMB 2100/ month
4. Comprehensive Medical Insurance and Protection Scheme for International Students in China.

Partial Scholarship:

1. a waiver of tuition fee
2. Free on-campus dormitory accommodation
3. Comprehensive Medical Insurance and Protection Scheme for International Students in China

Duration of Scholarship: 

1. Bachelor’s Degree Program: 4 to 5 years
2. Master’s degree programs: 2 to 3 years
3. Doctoral degree programs: 3 to 4 years

How to Apply: 

Step 1: Complete the online application procedure at SGS Online Application System (http://www.study-shanghai.org)

Step 2: Complete the online application procedure at Shanghai University online application (www.apply.shu.edu.cn).

Step 3: Complete the online payment for the non-refundable application fee RMB 500

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Shanghai government

Selling Racism—A Lesson From Pretoria

Ron Jacobs

The movement against South African apartheid was perhaps the most universal and popular movement in the western world in the 1980s. Hundreds of thousands protested in a multitude of ways—from letter-writing campaigns to shantytown occupations of city squares and college campus greens. Institutions of all types, from churches to universities, from corporations and banks to city halls, were forced to remove their investments from companies doing business with the racist South African regime, ultimately forcing that regime to end its racist legal system. Even the right wing Reagan and Thatcher regimes were ultimately forced to end their support for Pretoria’s racist system and grudgingly go along with the popular will.

However, as Ron Nixon’s new book, titled Selling Apartheid, makes clear, the South African regime was not going to go down without a fight. In addition to police and military actions of varying brutality, the regime hired advertising men to sell their brand of repression to people and governments around the world. The campaign he describes involved a cynical manipulation of emotions about race, implied white supremacist chauvinism, and outright lies. Advertising campaigns presented South Africa as a tourist destination full of beauty and the perfect climate (which it had) with absolutely no mention of the racial discrimination built into its social and political systems. Glossy photo spreads were bought in newspaper and magazines and television programs were made and sold to television networks in the United States and Britain. These shows were then shown to the unsuspecting viewer as if they were made by agencies independent of the apartheid government and their only agenda was tourism.

In a particularly cynical move, the South African government was able to buy off a few African-Americans over the years in what was ultimately a vain attempt to convince Black Americans that apartheid was okay. The first of these individuals was a former supporter of the Black resistance movement in South Africa, Max Yergan. In what can only be described as a complete sell out, Yergan went from working with early members of what would become the primary resistance organization against apartheid—the African National Congress(ANC)—to giving speeches in the United States and Africa aimed at convincing his audiences that apartheid helped Blacks. Once a committed left-winger, Yergan came under pressure during the McCarthy era in the United States, became an informer for the FBI, and turned against his friends in South Africa; friends that included freedom fighters Nelson Mandela and Joseph Tambo. Yergan was but the first of a few such individuals who would follow in his treacherous footsteps.

The bottom line for the white South African regime and the United States was money. Several US companies had millions invested in South African industry. These companies took advantage of the cheap labor (and maximized profits resulting from that labor) and minimal regulations offered by the Pretoria regime. In turn, they either supported or at the least, tacitly accepted the racism and brutality that defined the apartheid system. Consequently, it was these corporations and financial institutions that were targeted by the anti-apartheid movement’s divestment campaign. Churches, universities, and other institutions that had investments in such companies were ultimately convinced to drop those investments. Sometimes that convincing was purely of a moral plea, other times it required a concerted effort that combined direct action, monetary boycotts, and legislative pressure.

As an advocate of the current campaign against Israeli apartheid, it was more than interesting to compare the similarities in the campaign waged against the movement against South Africa’s apartheid and that currently waged against the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement of today. Residents of western nations are constantly barraged with imagery that attempts to portray the Tel Aviv government as a beacon of fairness and democracy in the Middle East. Furthermore, one is constantly told that the Palestinians who resist the occupation of their lands and the ever-present system of discrimination are nothing but terrorists. This latter phenomenon was also the case in South Africa. Indeed, the ANC was not removed from the US list of “terrorist” organizations until 2008, more than fifteen years after apartheid met its well-deserved end. Of course, there are specific differences between the two systems of separation referred to here, but the essential fact apartheid is true for the historic South African regime and the current Israeli one.

Ron Nixon’s text is an essential addition to the volume of work on South Africa’s apartheid regime. Rich in detail, it provides the reader with an extended look at the nature of propaganda in modern society. A one-time journalist for the New York Times, Nixon makes his argument with facts and writing that is both accessible and engaging. In doing so, he exposes the moral vacuousness of those who propagandized for the racists of South Africa not because they necessarily believed in apartheid, but because they made money from doing so.  Furthermore, in his telling Nixon doesn’t just rake the white South African regime over the coals, he also points his pen at the equally deserving US and British governments, especially those of Reagan and Thatcher. In terms of how the world seems to work, Selling Apartheid is a tawdry yet familiar tale.

Huge Antarctica Glacier in Serious Trouble

Robert Hunziker

The global warming crisis seems to get worse and worse, faster and faster. Now, Antarctica is in the spotlight with brand-new shocking research of a spine-chilling development.

The whole of Antarctica, if melted in its entirety, equates to a sea level rise of 200’, but that will not happen during current lifetimes. It’s too big and would require way too much heating for way too long. But, a meltdown of a significant part of Antarctica, like West Antarctica, has the potential, according to new research, to submerge Miami and New York during current lifetimes. This is the first time scientific observation has officially come to the conclusion that such a horrendous meltdown is probable so soon!

Already, Miami Beach is forced to raise streets by two feet because of persistent flooding beyond any past experience. Indeed, a rising sea is global warming’s payback for reckless, arrogant, pompously excessive anthropogenic (human-caused) fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

The frightful new findings involve Pine Island Glacier, the subject of a research paper by Seongsu Jeong, Ian M. Howat, Jeremy N. Basis, Accelerated Ice Shelf Rifting and Retreat at Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, Geophysical Research Letters, 28 November 2016.

The tenor of Jeong’s paper should scare the pants off anybody who doubts the seriousness and powerfulness behind acceleration of global warming. As it happens, Pine Island Glacier was already the world’s largest mass of irreversible ice melt before this new research came to light, but timing has always been kinda fuzzy. Now, with this new analysis, timing is taking on a whole new ugly dimension.

Here’s the problem: According to Ian Howat, associate professor of Earth Sciences at Ohio State University: “This kind of rifting behavior provides another mechanism for rapid retreat of these glaciers, adding to the probability that we may see significant collapse of West Antarctica in our lifetimes” (Source, Pam Frost Gorder, West Antarctic Ice Shelf Breaking Up From the Inside Out, The Ohio State University, Nov. 28, 2016).

That’s a brand-spanking new global warming threat. It is big, real big! It is the first time researchers have witnessed “deep subsurface rift” opening within Antarctic ice: “This implies that something weakened the center of the ice shelf, with the most likely explanation being a crevasse melted out at the bedrock level by a warming ocean,” Ibid. The bottom of West Antarctica Ice Sheet lies below sea level so warm ocean water can intrude inland, undetected.

A warming ocean figures as the culprit as the ocean has been absorbing up to 90% of Earth’s heat, helping to protect on-land creatures, like humans, from real bad overheating. But, what goes around comes around, as evidenced in Antarctica; all of that worldly heat is coming home to roost underneath big, fat ice sheets.

“Researchers found that from two-thirds to 98 percent of the substantial ocean heat gain between 2006 and 2013 took place well south of the equator… Summer sea surface temperatures in some sections have risen… nearly five times the global average. Parts of the Indian Ocean, North Atlantic, and waters surrounding Antarctica are warming at nearly the same rate. More heat stored in the ocean now means more will inevitably return to the atmosphere… The ocean’s doing us a favor by grabbing about 90 percent of our heat, but it’s not going to do it forever” (Source: How Long Can Oceans Continue to Absorb Earth’s Excess Heat? Environment360, e360yale.edu, 30 Mar 2015).

Here’s what’s different from past research: Rifts usually form at the margins of the ice shelves, calving icebergs, but not deep inland like this new discovery. Furthermore, the rift in question is 20 miles inland. Pine Island Glacier (keeping one’s fingers crossed) serves as a backstop, holding back large portions of West Antarctica ice from flowing into the sea. Pine Island Glacier is like a hockey goalie for parts of the massive West Antarctica ice sheet, the last line of defense, preventing partial collapse of the big ice sheet, which would entail quite a large splash unimaginably, inconceivably large!

One year ago, Science Magazine carried the following article: “Just a Nudge Could Collapse West Antarctic Ice Sheet, Raise Sea Levels 3 Meters,” Science, Nov. 2, 2015. The opening paragraph of that article states: “It won’t take much to cause the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet to collapse—and once it starts, it won’t stop. In the last year, a slew of papers has highlighted the vulnerability of the ice sheet covering the western half of the continent, suggesting that its downfall is inevitable—and probably already underway. Now, a new model shows just how this juggernaut could unfold. A relatively small amount of melting over a few decades, the authors say, will inexorably lead to the destabilization of the entire ice sheet and the rise of global sea levels by as much as 3 meters.” That was back then, over a year ago, but now circumstances seem to be accelerating.

With this new discovery, timing of a collapsing West Antarctica Ice Sheet is downright spooky. Previously scientists thought decades-to-centuries. Now, maybe “within current lifetimes.”

Assuming it’s not already too late, never before in world history has strong U.S. leadership been so important to do whatever is necessary to stem an impending climate change/global-warming cataclysm. Our way of life is at stake.

Along those lines, climate science is eerily similar to tracking near-Earth asteroids, which over millennia occasionally crash into Earth, wiping out the poor defenseless dinosaurs, for example. If a near-Earth asteroid is projected to hit, maybe some kind of deployment can prevent the big crash from wiping out life on the planet. Thus, begging the very big question: What deployment stops collapsing ice sheets?

Kashmir: Heaven In A Heartless World

Gowhar Naz

Speak your lips are free
Speak it is your tongue

[Faiz Ahmad Faiz]

Kashmir, a beautiful landscape, which has got admirers from all over the world is today crying for help. But its cries go unheard. Funeral after funeral. Troubled days and nights. Wounds burned and throbbed. Meaning to say, the valley is bleeding all the way. Instead of healing the wounds, people who claim it as ‘the integral part’ gave nothing but severe physical injuries and trauma to its habitants. Bullets, pellets and pava shells were used (and still) to kill, cripple and paralyse the innocents (mostly teenagers) raising voice against the State &  Central Government for their different freedoms. Thousands and thousands of the youth became the victim of security forces. More than 120 people lost their lives. More or less 200 lost full and partial eyesight. Some are recuperating from injuries and some are still battling for life.  Moreover, a huge number of young and old were detained and put behind bars in different state and outside jails. In nutshell, voices of the poor and desolate, political dissent, is being brutally suppressed. Although, there is a slight improvement in the situation & the barometer is falling. But the branches are spread -ramified and the roots absolutely still. There is a terrible feeling among the people. And the air is sensing a blizzard!

It is simple to decide to kill an innocent. If saved or not killed, he is going to die anyway shortly. Because, his remaining life will be full of miseries. By “innocent” I mean “not guilty” – not responsible for killing and not  knowing that he/she will be killed due to his/her good actions or continued existence. You are a gullible being, hoping from the cradle to the grave. But what you get in return is pain – the everlasting pain. You have no right to save your own life. The right not to be killed. You can’t breath free. You are a Kashmiri — And that’s life in Kashmir.

To be acceptable, life must be honorable. To be honorable, certain conditions (rights) must be fulfilled and upheld. No life is deemed honorable in the absence of food and shelter (property rights), personal autonomy (safeguarded by codified freedoms), personal safety, respect (human rights), and a modicum of influence upon one’s future (civil rights). In the absence of even one of these elements, people tend to gradually become convinced that their lives are not worth living. They become mutinous and try to restore the “honorable  equilibrium”. That is to say — They rebel against any massive breach of their freedoms.

Khaleel Gibran has wisely said;

“It takes two to discuss truth: one who utters it and one who understands it.”

The point is not whether talks should or should not be held. Talks are always welcome. The point is – “Fair and wide talks, and talks with  whom?” There is no alternative for India but to hold unconditional talks with Pakistan. Pakistan is part of the solution and not part of the problem. Bilateral issue — so bilateral talks. Here, I must say, our future generations will either laugh or cry at our stupidity. But to make them only smile. I have said and saying again, “If you realy want to put an end to these uprisings and resolve the Kashmir dispute permanently. Stop this bloodshed. Shun this jingoistic, complacent and biased approach. Go the extra mile — And hold fair and wide talks with the real stakeholders together with the Hurriyat leadership and Pakistan. Come up with a happy solution, meeting the aspirations of people of Jammu and kashmir and settle this issue once for all. And if that happens anytime in the future (the sooner, the better), I promise and guarantee you- a peaceful, developed India and Pakistan. Otherwise, if malarky and blame game continued to go on resolutely or stubbornly in spite of opposition, importunity, or warning, Kashmir will continue to suffer as a bone of contention for the years and years to come.”

Donald Trump and East Asia

Sandip Kumar Mishra

During the US elections, visualising Donald Trump as the next president was a daunting prospect. China, Japan, and South Korea wished for Hillary Clinton’s victory. Now, however, they have no choice but to accept and recalibrate their options and policies according to this new reality. 

It would be wishful thinking to assume that whatever Trump said during his campaign was just to woo voters and that they will not translate into policy. These expectations are also based on the premise that if the Trump administration begins to implement his stated policies, it would cause huge upheaval in East Asian regional politics and the US would therefore not like to do so. It is too premature to predict the shape of Trump’s East Asia policy. However, as a first step, in the region's politics, he has created stir by talking to Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen over the phone. This is the first time that a president-elect of the US has talked to a top Taiwanese leader and has addressed her as President. This has, expectantly, caused outrage in China. Many analysts opine that it was unnecessary. However, if it is part of a coming tectonic change in the US approach towards East Asia, then it may be seen as a predictable beginning. 

By enraging China, Trump probably wants to emphasise that he will have a tougher approach towards China’s manipulation of its currency and its taking advantage of American businesses. Trump also promised that he would take a hard-line on Beijing’s aggressive actions in the East and South China Seas. On 4 December, Trump repeated these charges on Twitter. Trump's willingness to have a more aggressive posture vis-à-vis China is understandable but if his pronouncements about other countries of the region are taken together, it becomes obvious that there are fundamental contradictions in his position. 

Trump has recognised that the US has a capacity and its global presence cannot be continued at the cost of domestic sacrifices. He has said that Japan and South Korea are not contributing enough to the regional security architecture and are taking US security assurances as a free-ride. This would mean that South Korea, which is paying around US$860 million for the presence of 28,000 American soldiers, and Japan, which is paying around US$2 billion for the presence of 50,000 American soldiers, would have to bear the full cost for this military presence. This means that South Korea and Japan, both historical security allies of the US, would have to pay almost double of what they have been paying. 

This is indeed a difficult proposition for Japan and South Korea to accept. Trump’s calculations are based on the understanding that Japan and South Korea need US' security assistance and if they are not ready to pay the full cost, the US should withdraw. However, the US presence is not because of their generosity towards these age-old allies; it is part of its global strategy to have a foothold in East Asia. If Trump is going to be stubborn, Japan and South Korea could decide to force US soldiers out of their soil. In Japanese and South Korean domestic politics, many have articulated the need to secure their interest with US' help.

Trump appears to be less committed to Japan and South Korea’s security and has said that it is time they think about their own nuclear options. This is again a superficial understanding of the East Asian conundrum. One of the main reasons that Japan and South Korea have not developed nuclear arsenals is because of US pressure, in spite of occasional domestic demands to do so. If the US security commitment to Japan and South Korea gets diluted, they would probably not be hesitant to develop their own nuclear weapons. The presence of China and North Korea in the region, states that they consider hostile, would be a justifiable excuse.

Trump’s approach towards North Korea is not clear, except that he said that he would like to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un for direct talks. Direct talks with Kim Jong-un would be a welcome development, as the present policy of the US to isolate, neglect and pressure North Korea has not brought any positive results. However, any such direct negotiations with North Korea must also be communicated to and coordinated with South Korea, Japan and China. 

Overall, it seems that Donald Trump wants to counter China without enough good will from Japan or South Korea, and in a situation where the US does not have enough capacity to do so alone. Trump Japan and South Korea to bear the full cost of the US presence in the region but does not recognise that these countries provide a foothold for the US in East Asia. He does not appear to have a problem if Japan and South Korea go nuclear, but may try to denuclearise North Korea, which does not indicate a clear approach towards global nuclear non-proliferation. He wants to have direct talks with North Korea and wants China to play a positive role but also seeks to take a tougher approach towards China.

 

These are some of the basic contradictions in Trump’s positions on East Asia that he has expressed until now. Although East Asian countries are expecting him to resolve these contradictions, his phone call with the Taiwanese president is not a good sign. However, that is still an act of the president-elect. Once his foreign policy team is constituted and he formally takes over the presidency, the picture will be clearer. Till then, it is a moment of great uncertainty in the minds of regional leaders.

Rise of the Vainglorious Policeman

Bibhu Prasad Routray



India's not so glorious counter-insurgency (COIN) history has stories of police officers who gave direction to the faltering campaign of their predecessors, mobilised the limited resources at their disposal, negotiated well with their political masters, convincing them of the need to effect a course correction, and pursued a ruthless and yet determined campaign to root out insurgency. Some succeeded and some did not. However, the urge to become such officers with their names going down in history continues to inspire the Indian Police Service (IPS). It is also true that the zeal to bring left-wing extremism (LWE) to an end has facilitated the rise of some such police officers whose unaccountable ruthlessness has become an end in itself. The sooner the state realises the danger of resting its hope on the shoulders of such officials, the better it would be for the campaign to defeat LWE.

It is a doctrinal flaw to assume that COIN campaigns can be clean wars devoid of incidents of human rights violations. These are violent contestations where extremists have violated every principle that differentiates them from terrorists, and the state has invariably been forced to adopt methods that on occasion find no mention in the rule books. In addition, the liability of fighting with ill-equipped, poorly-led and motivated forces, who often operate without their basic needs fulfilled, is bound to produce instances of high handedness. But what has been consistently reported from some of the LWE afflicted regions in recent times point to a dangerous trend affirming the allegations of some of the civil society activists. India's war on LWE especially in states like Chhattisgarh is turning out to indeed be a war on the people who have valiantly chosen to point to an alternate method of conflict resolution.

What is explored in this paragraph and below explains the extent to which the ongoing conflict has allowed police officials to assume extraordinary power without an iota of accountability. A particular senior police official in the state of Chhattisgarh has been accused of direct and indirect association with the sexual abuse of tribal women. False surrenders of people not associated with extremism have been organised to shore up support for the state. Under the said senior police official's command, innocent tribals have been imprisoned and killed after being falsely accused of sympathising with LWE. Included in the COIN method devised by him is the unique technique of male security officers pressing the breasts of tribal women to differentiate the lactating ones from the extremist cadres who the police believe undergo abortions and are thus never pregnant.

Under his direction, the COIN campaign has been outsourced to vigilante groups who unleash their ire and a misconstrued sense of nationalism on activists and media persons. Under his command, a large chuck of COIN activities are also directed at the so called 'extremist sympathisers'. Security forces have in full media glare organised the burning of the effigies of prominent social activists and academicians, an unprecedented development in the entire history of COIN. Under instructions from the said official, the Chhattisgarh police has filed false charges against Delhi University and Jawaharlal Nehru University professors, accusing them of soliciting support for the extremists. Other police officials of the rank of superintendent of police have regularly used social media platforms to issue threats to the vernacular media reporting on the ground. To ensure that negative reportage about the police is nipped in the bud, the entry of media personnel and activists into the LWE affected areas is regulated and is possible only after permission from the police.      

These police officials have been hailed as role models by the highest political office in the state, lest their actions are construed as isolated acts without the knowledge and complicity of the ruling class. Some of them have been awarded the with president's medal for bravery, and have reportedly also been assured of protection from human rights groups. Notwithstanding the persistent demands for their transfers from various quarters, the chief minister's office has clarified that these police officials remain integral to Mission 2016, an ambitious project of the police establishment in the state to get rid of the LWE problem. With barely a month to go before the year ends and extremism still retaining its firepower, the Mission has been extended for another year or two. 

For an apt illustration, the anti-LWE COIN architecture in states like Chhattisgarh can be compared with the fascist architecture of Hitler's Germany. One of the objectives of erecting these monumental structures was to make the common man look and feel utterly small and powerless, incapable of even thinking of posing a challenge to fascist ideology. COIN, however, cannot be an oppressive, decimating and unaccountable project. It is about winning the hearts and minds of the people, and not alienating them. It is not about implementing a personal project of a particular police official, but to give shape to a well-thought out strategy that provides and assimilates alternative courses of action. How much harm has been caused to the anti-LWE campaign by these overzealous police officials is something that needs urgent calculation.

Germany: New recruiting drive by the Bundeswehr

Johannes Stern

Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen wants to increase the size of the Bundeswehr (armed forces) and recruit thousands of new soldiers in the coming years.

In a video statement last week, she announced the new “human resources strategy of the Bundeswehr.” “This is the very first time in the history of the Bundeswehr that we have such a modern, open and very wide HR [human resources] strategy,” she explained. “What does that mean? We are planning ahead, we are looking at the next seven years and are saying in detail whom we need. We need the best in the Bundeswehr ... whether [in the field of] cyber operations, whether it is [for] the navy, army or air force.”

According to the official order of the day from the Christian Democrat defence minister: “As a modern, competitive and attractive employer, we want women and men with the right skills, at the right time and right place. In this way, we ensure the commitment of our human resources in a wide, varied range of operations and make it possible for Germany to carry out an appropriate security role.”

By the year 2023, some 7,000 new posts have been planned. But that is just the beginning. Von der Leyen’s strategy refers to the “need for a continuous, common Bundeswehr strategic planning of entire staff needs” and calls for “expanding the base for recruitment.” For this reason, the Bundeswehr aspires to “open up to other target groups”: for example, for people over age 30 and applicants without high school or vocational qualifications. Moreover, “the Bundeswehr [will] consider the possibilities of opening up for EU citizens as soldiers.”

To break the deeply rooted popular resistance to war and militarism, due to Germany’s history, the government and army are employing ever more aggressive methods. For several weeks, a provocative advertising campaign for the Bundeswehr has been running nationwide with posters at railway stations, on the subways, and even at universities. A multimillion-euro Bundeswehr reality show—“The Recruits”—is aimed primarily at young people, who are needed as cannon fodder for future combat missions.

The recruitment drive is part of the foreign policy turn, which President Joachim Gauck, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (Social Democratic Party) and von der Leyen herself proclaimed at the Munich Security Conference in 2014. Now, the federal government is using the election of Donald Trump as US president as a pretext to advance its own plans for a German-dominated European foreign and defence policy, and the massive rearmament of the Bundeswehr.

Only last week, the Bundestag (federal parliament) passed the military budget for the coming years containing an increase of several billion euros. Last Wednesday, the European Commission presented plans that would mean a massive increase in military spending and stronger European coordination in the research and production of armaments. Von der Leyen announced a greater military role for Germany and the EU shortly after the US election, in a speech to the Atlantic Bridge organisation on November 11 in Berlin.

“Europe too, and the EU must do more in the field of security and defence policy. And Europe can do more—especially being more efficient,” the defence minister said. “Together, we have a troop strength of 1.5 million soldiers; and if all national defence budgets in Europe were put together, we arrive at the princely sum of €200 billion. All things considered, there are many places we can increase our own output!”

Among other things, “We Europeans in the EU must be more capable of acting, because the EU is called upon in issues and regions where I do not see NATO. Like in Africa, where the economic, demographic and security problems of many regions in this neighbouring continent concern us very directly.”

Von der Leyen directly justified her call for a more independent European war policy with Trump’s election victory: “The kernel of the worldview of Donald Trump is described by the formulation: America First. Whether international trade, international relations or negotiations—the only proviso is whether it serves American interests. This is legitimate—but can this be the only benchmark?”

In response, the German government is stressing the consistent representation of its own interests with military means. In the 2016 White Paper of the Bundeswehr, Germany’s official foreign policy doctrine, which foresees more foreign missions and the deployment of the Bundeswehr at home, it states bluntly: “[O]ur capacity to act in the international—particularly, European and transatlantic—alliance is [based] on a clear national positioning.”

Von der Leyen’s recruitment drive explicitly pursues the goal of translating the “2016 White Paper” into an “overarching strategic personnel goal.” This has far-reaching consequences. More than 70 years after the end of World War II, the German elites are again seeking to create a powerful army, able to enforce their geostrategic and economic interests, if necessary, by military means against their post-war allies.

Far-right candidate defeated in Austrian presidential election

Markus Salzmann

The former chairman of the Austrian Greens, Alexander Van der Bellen, yesterday won the presidential election against his rival from the far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ), Norbert Hofer.

The 72-year-old won by a projected 53.4 percent of the vote to Hofer’s 46.6 percent. The projection takes account of the 700,000 postal votes that will only be counted today.

Van der Bellen’s lead is much larger than in May, when he won the run-off election for the position of head of state with just 50.4 percent of the vote. The FPÖ successfully challenged the election result due to irregularities. A planned date of October 2 for the second run-off was postponed after the envelopes for postal votes failed to stick properly, raising fears of a further legal challenge.

On this occasion, Hofer acknowledged his defeat half an hour after the closure of polls and congratulated Van der Bellen on his victory.

Van der Bellen benefitted from both a rise in voter turnout by 2 percentage points to 75 percent and a movement of existing voters determined to prevent the election of the first extreme-right head of state in Europe since 1945.

Young people in the cities in particular voted for Van der Bellen. In the capital Vienna, where almost one in five Austrians live, he won 65 percent of the vote, 1.6 percent higher than the original run-off. Numerous voters who abstained last time around marked their ballots in favour of Van der Bellen so as to stop the right-wing extremist candidate.

The election in Austria was viewed as a test as to whether the election of Donald Trump in the United States would further strengthen the European far right. At least in Austria, the opposite appears to have occurred, as fully 30 percent of Van der Bellen’s voters stated they voted for him to prevent such a shift to the right.

Leading European politicians expressed their relief at the outcome of the election. Though a small country, the political mood in Austria is seen as an indication of the possible fortunes of parties such as the National Front of Marine Le Pen in France, which are opposed to the European Union and champion national protectionist strategies while utilising populist rhetoric as a means of appealing to the social distress created by the eight-year-old economic crisis and austerity measures.

The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats, Sigmar Gabriel, wrote on Twitter, “Victory of reason and a weight has been lifted from my heart.”

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, the prospective presidential candidate for the Socialist Party, wrote, “Populism is not an unavoidable fate for Europe.”

Hofer heads a party whose origins are in the Austrian Nazi movement, and he advances far right and extreme nationalist positions, despite efforts to portray himself as a moderate bourgeois politician. He is a member of the “Marko Germania” fraternity, an organisation that describes post-war Austria as an “ahistorical fiction.” He repeatedly wore a blue cornflower on his lapel, which was the sign for the Nazis in Austria when they were banned in the 1930s.

Although the Austrian president enjoys mainly representative powers, the constitution provides the power for its holder to dissolve the government. Hofer, unlike his predecessors, threatened during the campaign to sack the present coalition government of the Social Democrats (SPÖ) and conservative People’s Party (ÖVP) and precipitate a general election.

Hofer and FPÖ leader Heinz-Christian Strache agitated in the election campaign against refugees and attacked the EU. Hofer thanked various right-wing governments for sealing off the refugee routes through the Balkans, called for rapid deportations of refugees from Austria and urged the exclusion of foreign workers from the social welfare system.

Van der Bellen benefitted from public hostility to such measures, but he deserves no political support. His election victory by no means signifies an end of the attacks on refugees or on the working population. Just a few days ago, he declared that Austria could not accept any economic migrants.

Most importantly for Europe’s ruling elites, Van der Bellen is a vehement defender of the EU and its austerity policies. Indeed, he was supported by the Austrian and European business and political elites primarily because they calculate that their offensive against the working class can be implemented more successfully under him.

For this reason, the election of Van der Bellen will resolve none of the problems that led to the FPÖ’s rise. He was left to run against Hofer, as the supposed candidate of the “political centre,” because the candidates of the Social Democrats and People’s Party (ÖVP), which have held the position of president over the past 70 years, were eliminated in the first round.

Both parties are widely hated for their record in imposing social attacks. Both are deeply divided. A large section of the ÖVP backed Hofer’s election. There is also a strong faction in the ÖVP in favour of the dissolution of the current coalition and fresh elections. In addition, support for party chairman Reinhold Mittellehner is falling. An increasing number of major figures in the party are backing the notoriously right-wing Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz.

For its part, the SPÖ, under Chancellor Christian Kern, has turned ever more rapidly to the right. Just days prior to the presidential election, the party made clear that it was ready to collaborate with the FPÖ and even to form a coalition. Kern declared that the SPÖ sees room for “discussion with the party leadership” of the FPÖ and expressed his admiration for Strache for “seeking to promote Austria.”

Van der Bellen himself welcomed potential cooperation between the SPÖ and FPÖ. More importantly, the continuation of austerity by the coalition government under his presidency will only serve to ultimately strengthen the far right. The likelihood that new parliamentary elections will be held prior to the regular timetable of October 2018 is high. In an article titled “After the election is before the election,” the Vienna-based Standard noted, “The federal government cannot survive. Both coalition partners, the SPÖ and ÖVP, are preparing for all eventualities.”

The FPÖ is presently the leading party in the polls, with around 30 percent of the vote, and would possibly appoint the chancellor after an election.

Italian Prime Minister Renzi resigns after defeat in constitutional referendum

Alex Lantier & Mark Wells 

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi announced his resignation yesterday after voters inflicted a humiliating defeat to his referendum on constitutional amendments modifying electoral laws to vastly strengthen the prime minister’s powers.

With a larger-than-expected turnout of 68 percent, Renzi’s proposed amendments were rejected by 59 to 41 percent of voters.

Around 12:30 a.m., Renzi appeared on Italian national television to concede defeat. He acknowledged the decisive scale of the vote against him. “I accept full responsibility” for the failure of the referendum, he said in a brief address, adding that he would go today to the Quirinale presidential palace to present his resignation to Italian President Sergio Mattarella.

The vote reflects deep opposition to Renzi’s Democratic Party (PD) government and the European Union (EU) austerity policies enacted in Italy since the 2008 Wall Street crash.

The proposed constitutional amendments were unequivocally reactionary. A “yes” vote would have turned the Senate into an unelected body stripped of its powers to bring down the prime minister. The Chamber of Deputies could then have named a prime minister, ruling without any meaningful opposition from the legislature and functioning as an authoritarian strongman.

The referendum was seen as a last chance for the banks and the EU to address Italy’s banking crisis within the framework of the EU and the euro currency. Italian banks face a massive €360 billion in bad loans, as Italy’s economic and industrial fabric has collapsed amidst austerity and mass unemployment. There is growing discussion of a bank “bail-in,” mandated by EU rules, where ailing banks would recoup their losses by taking money from their depositors or from small savers who have invested their funds in Italian bank bonds.

A victory in the referendum would have let Renzi move ruthlessly to attack working class opposition to social cuts, corporate bankruptcies and other attacks like the “bail-in” that the Italian ruling elite is preparing.

The vote is also a repudiation of the EU, whose Commission intervened via its president, Jean-Claude Juncker, to endorse Renzi’s referendum and praise him for imposing the “right reforms.”

Germany’s right-wing finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, who played a leading role in designing austerity measures across southern Europe, also endorsed Renzi's referendum, stating: “If I could vote, I would vote for him, even though he comes from a different political camp. … I wish him success.”

The Italian referendum vote underscores the deep crisis of the institutions of European and world capitalism, a month after the election of Donald Trump as US president stunned the world and shook the European political establishment.

Among masses of workers and youth across Europe, there is deep anger and political disillusionment with the EU and their national governments. Italy’s referendum vote took place only six months after Great Britain voted to leave the EU, defying the Conservative-led government’s call to remain inside the union. Now another major European economy—one that unlike Britain is also at the heart of the common euro currency—has voted against the EU and a pro-EU government.

The central danger facing the working class, however, is that opposition to the Italian referendum has until now been monopolized primarily by forces issuing aggressive nationalist appeals.

Italian President Sergio Mattarella is expected to receive Renzi’s resignation today. It is unlikely that Mattarella would urge Renzi to reconsider in light of the referendum results.

The president will then consult with various institutional and party leaders to assess whether a new majority government can be formed. This, however, remains uncertain, despite a PD majority in the Chamber of Deputies. One issue is the crisis that has erupted within the PD in recent months.

Fissures within the PD were on full display before the vote. Ex-Stalinist and former premier Massimo D’Alema opposed Renzi’s constitutional amendment. His differences, however, are purely tactical, i.e., how to contain social discontent and implement anti-worker measures more efficiently.

Mattarella may appoint a new Democratic premier. However, such a move risks provoking social upheavals following a series of unpopular technocratic and unelected governments in the last five years. Their common agenda has been to attack workers for the benefit of the banks and corporations.

If a majority is not reached following Mattarella’s consultations, the president may call for the dissolution of both the Chamber and the Senate and trigger early elections. This is what most opposition parties are demanding, as they are riding the victory of the “no” vote and are seeking to exploit it to further their reactionary agendas.

The absence of a genuinely left-wing opposition to the PD has allowed right-wing forces to demagogically and falsely pose as defenders of the oppressed and exploited.

Beppe Grillo, leader of the right-wing Movement 5 Star (M5S), issued a statement in which he exulted: “Democracy has won… Italians must be called to new elections as soon as possible.” In order not to delay a new legislature and government, Grillo claimed he would retract his criticism of the current electoral law (Italicum) to avoid the “establishment of a technocratic government Monti style.” M5S is expected to gain the most in early elections. If it reaches 40 percent of the votes, it would win 54 percent of the Chamber’s seats.

Giorgia Meloni, leader of the fascistic Fratelli d’Italia, mixed similar demands with populist rhetoric: “There must be new elections in a very short time… The Italians want a government that’s not the result of backroom deals with the big corporations but the product of a popular consultation. The 4th government not chosen by Italians is not acceptable.”

Similarly, the leader of the chauvinistic Lega Nord, Matteo Salvini, boasted about a “victory against the powers that be in three fourths of the world. No pet governments, elections immediately.”

Forza Italia’s Renato Brunetta struck a more conciliatory tone: “The PD has the parliamentary majority and has a duty to form a new government, but without Renzi.”

The pseudo-left also celebrated the “no” vote, but only to ensure that it maintains control of popular opposition and impedes an independent mobilization of the working class.

Hypocritically criticizing Renzi for his anti-working-class policies after supporting his nomination as premier, Sinistra, Ecologia e Libert à (Left Ecology Freedom Party—SEL) leader Nichi Vendola signaled his readiness to channel opposition back into the dead-end of the fake left: “The propulsive push of Renzism has exhausted itself. Today is a great day for the left to start again.”

Significantly, the vulnerability of Italian banks is the focal point of attention on international markets. A “no” vote signals the failure of an attempt to implement harsh restructuring policies aimed at eliminating small banks and, ultimately, attacking the social position of the working class.

Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS), the world’s oldest bank, is at high risk. Qatar and US investors announced they were waiting for the referendum’s results before committing to being “anchor investors,” a move that would guarantee a capital infusion of 1.5 billion euros. A collapse of MPS has the potential of causing a broader crisis in the Italian banking system as well as the entire euro zone.

World Bank Paid Summer Internship for Young Graduates 2017/2018. Funded to Washington

Application Deadline: The World Bank paid Internship is offered during two seasons, and applications are accepted during the following periods:

• Winter Internship (December–March): The application period for the Winter Internship is 1st October to 31st October 2016.
• Summer Internship (June–September): The application period for the Summer Internship is 1st December 2016 to 31st January 2017.

Offered annually? Yes

To be taken at (country): Most positions are located in Washington, D.C. (some positions are offered in country offices).

Priority Fields: This internship typically seeks candidates in the following fields: economics, finance, human development (public health, education, nutrition, population), social science (anthropology, sociology), agriculture, environment, private sector development, as well as other related fields.

About Internship:  The World Bank paid Internship offers highly motivated and successful individuals an opportunity to improve their skills while working in a diverse environment. Interns generally find the experience to be rewarding and interesting.

Type: Paid Internship

Selection Criteria : Fluency in English is required. Prior relevant work experience, computing skills, as well as knowledge of languages such as French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Portuguese, and Chinese are advantageous.

Eligibility: To be eligible for the internship, candidates must possess an undergraduate degree and already be enrolled in a full-time graduate study program (pursuing a Master’s degree or PhD with plans to return to school in a full-time capacity). Generally, successful candidates have completed their first year of graduate studies or are already into their PhD programs.

Number of Positions: Several

Value of Programme: The Bank Group pays an hourly salary to all interns and, where applicable, provides an allowance towards travel expenses. Interns are responsible for their own living accommodations.

Duration of Programme: A minimum of four weeks

How to Apply

This application checklist is meant to facilitate your application experience.

• Ensure that you use either Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, or Internet Explorer 10 or higher as your browser version.
• You will be asked to register for an account and provide an email address.
• You must complete your application in a single session and will be able to submit it only if you have uploaded all the required documents and answered all the questions (all questions marked with an asterisk-*- are mandatory).
• Provide the most current contact information.
• Ensure that you have correctly spelled out your email address, since this will be the main channel of communication with you regarding your candidacy.
• Remember to enter your complete phone number (country code + city code + number).
• Please attach the following documents (mandatory) before submitting:
  • Curriculum Vitae (CV)
  • Statement of Interest
  • Proof of Enrollment in a graduate degree

Note: Each file should not exceed 5 MB, and should be in one of the following formats: .doc, .docx, or .pdf

Once you submit your application, you will not be able to make any further changes/updates. All applications MUST be submitted online. Applications submitted after the deadline will not be considered.

Visit program webpage to apply

Sponsors: World Bank Group