16 Aug 2017

Mo Ibrahim Foundation Leadership Fellowship Program (Funded to work at AfDB, UNECA or the ITC) 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 15th October, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Tunisia, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, São Tomé & Príncipe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo, Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe
To be Taken at (organisation): AfDB (Abidjan), UNECA (Addis Ababa) or the ITC (Geneva)
About the Award: The Mo Ibrahim Foundation, is financing the Ibrahim Leadership Fellowship position. Established in 2006, the Mo Ibrahim Foundation aims to support good governance and great leadership in Africa.  The Foundation works to:
  • Stimulate debate on good governance;
  • Provide criteria by which citizens and governments can measure progress;
  • Recognise achievement in African leadership and provide a practical way in which leaders can build positive legacies on the continent when they have left office;
  • Support aspiring leaders for the African continent.
The Ibrahim Leadership Fellowship Programme is a selective Fellowship that prepares the next generation of outstanding African leaders by providing them with unique work opportunities at the most senior level of prominent African institutions or multilateral organizations, whose mandate is to improve the economic and social prospects of Africa.
Through this annual fellowship programme, the Foundation seeks to deepen and broaden our growing network which continues to contribute its skills and learning to a better Africa. The Fellowships offer the opportunity to work in the executive offices of either the African Development Bank (Abidjan), the UN Economic Commission for Africa (Addis Ababa) or the International Trade Centre (Geneva).
Offered Since: 2006
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • National of an African country
  • 7-10 years of relevant work experience
  • master’s degree
  • under the age of 40, or 45 for women with children
  • any additional criteria as set by the host.
Duration of Program: For a period of 12 months
How to Apply: Prospective fellows who meet the eligibility criteria are invited to apply directly to the current hosts. Link for Application and requirements are in the Scholarship Webpage (click below)
Award Sponsor: Mo Ibrahim Foundation

University of Michigan African Presidential Scholars Program (UMAPS) 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 15th October 2017
Offered annually? Yes
To be Taken at (Country): Ann Habor, Michigan, USA
Eligible Countries:  Ethiopia, Ghana, South Africa, Liberia, Uganda and other African countries
About the Award: The U-M African Presidential Scholars Program (UMAPS) brings early career faculty members from Ethiopia, Ghana, South Africa, Liberia, Uganda and other African countries to the University of Michigan for residencies lasting up to six months.
Faculty members of colleges and universities in all other African countries cannot apply directly to the UMAPS program without first being nominated and invited to apply by a U-M faculty member with whom s/he already has a pre-existing relationship. Only the stated countries can apply directly.
Scholars are paired with a faculty mentor during their stay and have full access to U-M’s resources to further their work on a research project, an academic degree, a new course, a grant proposal, or other relevant activity. The program supports the development of the next generation of African scholars and seeks to help their home institutions build capacity. Individuals may apply for a two-month, four-month, or six-month residency.
Eligibility: The Candidate must be a faculty member from universities in Ethiopia, Ghana, Uganda, Liberia and South Africa. Since a primary goal of the program is to assist in capacity building in African academe, strong preference will be given to early career members of the faculty. Mid-career faculty will also be considered.
  • Be an educator in the higher education system for less than ten years, presently teaching in a college or university in Africa
  • Be able to demonstrate support from home institution with letter of recommendation from head of department, dean, or vice chancellor
  • Be able to remain in residence from four to six months
Selection Criteria: A multidisciplinary faculty committee at the University of Michigan will review and select candidates. Selection will be based on the following:
  • academic quality of the candidate and of the proposed program of scholarship;
  • the academic fit of the candidate with others selected in the cycle-and with the areas of interest described above;
  • and the support of the candidate’s home institution.
  • Strong emphasis will be given to candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds.
  • Promotion of gender equity in the current class of scholars and in the African academy will also be given strong consideration.
Candidates who already have significant international experience will not be favored for this program.
Number of Scholarships: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: Those admitted to the UMAPS Program will receive:
  • Four to six months residency at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, paired with a faculty mentor with full access to the university’s resources
  • Round-trip airfare from their home country to Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Free housing, and a modest stipend to cover living, health care, and research costs while at U-M. The UMAPS program is unable to accommodate spouses and/or dependents 
  • Office/Laboratory space
  • Opportunity to present research to the U-M community
Duration of Scholarship: Eligible scholars may apply to visit U-M for a semester (four months) or for a half year (six months) beginning in Late August 2018 -Early February 2019
How to Apply: All candidates must:
  • Complete the online application form
  • Submit a curriculum vitae
  • Submit a scholarly program/research proposal (not to exceed five pages) (See link in scholarship Webpage)
    Applications from a wide range of disciplines and schools are welcome; applications that align with the center’s initiatives—African Heritage, African Social Research, and STEM-Africa—are encouraged
  • Provide a complete name and contact information of the department head, dean, or vice chancellor at the applicant’s home institution who will be writing their letter of support (See link in scholarship Webpage)
Sponsors: University of Michigan
Important to Note: Only applications submitted through the online system will be considered. ASC does not accept electronic (PDF) or hard copy submissions of the application.

United Nations Regional Consultation on Youth, Peace and Security in West and Central Africa (Fully-funded by the UN) 2017

Application Deadline: 18th August 2017
Eligible Countries: DRC, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, CAR, Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger, Cameroon, Chad, Gabon, Nigeria, Guinea Conakry, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Mauritania, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Equatorial Guinee, Republic of Congo and Togo.
About the Award: The “Sustaining Peace resolutions”, adopted in April 2016 refer explicitly to UNSCR 2250 and reaffirm “the important role youth can play in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and as a key aspect of the sustainability, inclusiveness and success of peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts”, and calls upon “Member States and relevant United Nations organs and entities to consider ways to increase meaningful and inclusive participation of youth in peacebuilding efforts (…)”
The discussions from various regional consultations will feed into the Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security, highlighting the positive contributions of young people in peacebuilding.
Type: Workshops/Conferences
Eligibility: In order to participate in the Regional Consultation for West and Central Africa, applicants must meet the following minimum requirements:
  • Applicants must be between 18 and 29 years old at the time of the consultation.
  • The candidate must be able to speak and understand clearly and comprehensively in English and/or French.
  • All applicants must be a citizen currently residing in any of the following countries: DRC, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, CAR, Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger, Cameroon, Chad, Gabon, Nigeria, Guinea Conakry, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Mauritania, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Equatorial Guinee, Republic of Congo and Togo.
  • Applicants must be able to travel to and participate in the entire event in Cotonou from 11 to 13 September 2017.
  • Applicants must be engaged in peacebuilding or supporting youth-led organizations working on peacebuilding, which is understood in a broad sense: peace processes, social cohesion, violence reduction, gender based violence, reconciliation, transitional justice, preventing violent extremism, disarmament demobilization and reintegration, fight against marginalization or other humanitarian work
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: All expenses, including travel and accommodation will be covered by the United Nations.
Duration of Program: 11-13 of September 2017.
How to Apply: Young people interested in participating can complete the required document specified here until the 18thAugust 2017 and send all by email to the following email addresses:
Award Providers: The United Nations

TU Delft Sub-Saharan Africa Excellence Scholarships 2018/2019 – The Netherlands

Application Deadline: 1st February, 2018
Offered Annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Sub-Saharan Africa:
Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Democratic Republic), Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Reunion, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South-Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Western Sahara, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
To be taken at (country): The Netherlands
About the Award: These scholarships give talented, motivated and broadly interested students from Sub-Saharan Africa the opportunity to study at the Delft University of Technology. The Global Initiative of the university aims to work together with scientists and entrepreneurs in developing countries to make an impact and improve people’s lives. We use cutting-edge science and technology to find solutions that will benefit everyone.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Admitted to one of TU Delft’s MSc programs.
  • A cumulative grade point average (GPA) of 80 percent or higher of the scale maximum in your bachelor’s degree.
  • A BSc degree from an accredited university in  one of the above mentioned countries.
Number of Awardees: 4 per faculty
Value of Scholarship: 
  • Full fee waiver for a TU Delft MSc programme and living expenses for 2 years.
  • Membership to the Scholarship Club giving access to personal development, workshops, seminars, etc.
  • A MSc thesis topic which relates to the Sustainable Development Goals and TU Delft | Global Initiative.
  • Be our ambassador for Sub-Saharan Africa.
Duration of Scholarship: 2 years
How to Apply: 
  • To be considered for these scholarships, your complete application for an MSc programme must be uploaded before 1 February 2018.
  • In addition to all the regular documents for a MSc programme application, you must also upload an Application Form for a Sub-Saharan Africa Excellence Scholarship, in which you make clear why you are applying for the scholarship.
  • Only students meeting this deadline and who have been (conditionally) admitted to one of the MSc programmes of TU Delft will be considered for these scholarships.
Award Provider: TU Delft

Henry Dale International Fellowship for Post-Doctoral Scientists 2018 – UK

Application Deadline: 
  • Preliminary application deadline: 20th November 2017
  • Invited full application deadline: 1st February 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries/Candidates: 
  • a non-EEA national who either has a relevant degree from a UK university, or has worked in the UK for at least a continuous three-year period
  • an exceptional biomedical scientist, who does not fall within the categories above, whose recruitment to the host organisation would be advantageous to both the applicant and the organisation.
To be taken at (country): United Kingdom
Eligible Field of Study: Candidate is expected to have relevant scientific or mathematical qualifications and, at the final decision point (i.e. at interview), be no more than seven years from the date of their PhD viva.
About the Award: The scheme supports research ranging from the molecules and cells vital to life and their role in the global spread of disease, to clinical and public health research seeking to improve the quality of healthcare. It can be based in the laboratory, clinic or field, and may involve experimental or theoretical approaches. It brings together the Royal Society and the Wellcome Trust, two of the world’s most prestigious and influential scientific organisations, in their shared commitment to supporting the future leaders of biomedical research.
The scheme seeks to support individuals who would have previously applied for a ‘biomedical’ Royal Society University Research Fellowship or a Wellcome Trust Research Career Development Fellowship hosted by a UK academic organisation.
Type: Post-Doctoral, Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • The Fellowship will expect the candidate to have spent less than two years with their current department if they plan to apply for a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship in the same location.
  • A strong justification must be provided if they have been at the proposed host organisation for longer.
  • Candidates should please note that if they hold an established post, they are not eligible to apply for a fellowship to be held at their current employing organisation. In exceptional cases, the fellowship will be willing to consider a preliminary application if candidate wishes to move organisation and is able to make a strong scientific justification for the move.
  • This scheme is not open to individuals who wish to combine research with a continuing clinical career in medicine, psychology, dentistry or veterinary practice.
  • Time spent outside the research environment will be taken into consideration (e.g time away due to personal reasons such as maternity, paternity, adoption leave or other caring responsibilities; ill health or working in a non-research environment/role such as industry).
  • Holders of a Royal Society University Research Fellowship or Wellcome Trust Research Career Development Fellowship are not eligible to apply for a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship.
  • Candidate must have made intellectual contributions to research that have been published in leading journals, and be able to demonstrate their potential to carry out independent research.
  • Resubmissions are not normally encouraged. If a previous application has been unsuccessful, candidates should please contact the Wellcome Trust for advice.
  • Also, candidate must have an eligible sponsoring host organisation in the UK with the support of the relevant Head of Department, or equivalent e.g. Centre Director, Head of School, etc., who can guarantee that they will be supported in developing their own independent career and that adequate space and resources will be provided for the duration of the award.
Selection Criteria: 
  • Sir Henry Dale Fellows are expected to conduct research in line with the agreed policies and position statements (PDF) of the funders.
  • Once the full application has been submitted it will be subject to external peer review prior to consideration by the scientifically relevant Expert Review Group.
  • The Expert Review Group will shortlist applicants for interview by the Sir Henry Dale Fellowship Interview Committee.
  • Shortlisted applicants will be contacted at least two weeks before the interview date and interviews will take place in London.
  • Awards will be conditional upon a satisfactory performance at interview.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Fellowship: 
  • a basic salary for the Fellow, as determined by the host organisation; an additional Wellcome Trust enhancement of £7,500 per annum will also be provided
  • research expenses, including research assistance if required (normally a graduate research assistant or technician; requests for additional research staff may be considered where fieldwork or clinical studies in a low- or middle-income country are proposed)
  • travel and subsistence for collaborative travel or scientifically justified overseas visits of normally up to one year
  • overseas allowances, where appropriate, for candidates working in low- or middle-income countries for 12 months or more.
  • an inflation allowance
  • a Flexible Funding Allowance
  • a contribution towards indirect and estate costs funded by the Royal Society (currently set at £11,000 per annum per Fellowship).
Duration of Fellowship: Five (5) years, with the potential to apply for renewal for an additional three (3) years.
How to Apply: Applications should be submitted through the Wellcome Trust Grant Tracker (WTGT).
Award Provider: The Sir Henry Dale Fellowship
Important Notes: Fellowships may be taken up on a part-time employment basis, where appropriate. Only the funds provided by the Royal Society may be used towards indirect and estate costs.

General Electric Africa NYSC Intern for Graduate Nigerian Students 2017

Application Timeline: 
  • Opening: 14th August 2017
  • Closing: Ongoing
Eligible Countries: Nigeria
To Be Taken At (Country): Lagos; Nigeria
About the Award: The program designed to give graduates, NYSC challenging work assignments, developmental feedback, and exposure to leadership. The duration of the internship program spans a period of 12 months, and combines hands-on experience with formal performance feedback to help participants transition from a collegial environment to the workplace.
As a valuable member of our team, GE Africa interns will receive many benefits including:
  • Challenging work assignments
  • Exposure to a multinational company
  • Developmental feedback
  • Opportunities to network with Leaders and other interns
Type: Internship
Eligibility: 
  • Graduate with an Accounting degree
  • Authorized to work in your country full-time and without restriction
  • Must have an advanced to fluent level of English
  • Ability to work in a fast-paced, changing environment
  • Demonstrated team player
  • Confident self-starter who has demonstrated drive
  • Excellent organization skills, ability to independently prioritize multiple tasks and work to deadlines
  • A valid NYSC discharge or exemption certificate will be required (please indicate clearly on your resume)
  • Must have valid authorization to work full-time without any restriction in Nigeria
Selection Criteria: 
  • Demonstrated leadership ability
  • High performer with a passion to achieve positive business results
  • Curiosity and desire to learn and expand skill set
  • Flexible, adaptable, and open to change
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: GE offers a great work environment, professional development, challenging careers, and competitive compensation. 
Duration of Program: 12 months
How to Apply: APPLY NOW
Award Providers: GE
Important Notes: GE is an Equal Opportunity Employer.  Employment decisions are made without regard to race, color, religion, national or ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, protected veteran status or other characteristics protected by law.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Internship Program 2017 – Abuja, Nigeria

Application Deadline:  21st August 2017
To Be Taken At (Country): Abuja, Nigeria
About the Award: Interns work five days per week (40 hours) under the supervision of the Representative and in cooperation with the Communications Officer.
Type: Internship
Eligibility: To qualify for an internship with the United Nations Internship Programme, applicants must meet one of the following requirements:
(a)be enrolled in a graduate school programme (second university degree or equivalent, or higher);
(b)be enrolled in the final academic year of a first university degree programme (minimum Bachelor’s level or equivalent); or
(c)have graduated with a university degree (as defined above) and, if selected, must commence the internship within a one year period of graduation (OFFICIAL PROOF FROM THE UNIVERSITY TO SUPPORT ONE OF THE ABOVE OPTIONS HAS TO BE ATTACHED TO THE INSPIRA APPLICATION).
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: The internship is UNPAID and full-time.
Duration of Program: The internship in UNODC’s Country Office in Nigeria is for two months with an opportunity for extension, dependent upon the needs of the department.
How to Apply: A completed online application (Cover Note and Personal History Profile) is required. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed.
Award Providers: UNODC

The Global Controversiality of Surrogacy

Ezra Kronfeld

As an inhabitant of this planet, you realize very early in life that there are certain things around you that are utterly profane. Things like rape, murder, corruption, and the like are rightfully-hated acts, which should certainly be outlawed and eliminated in a developed society, but pregnancy by surrogacy is certainly not one of them. When I started to research this topic extensively, I found a rather troubling pattern. It was not just the countries like Saudi Arabia that we generally view as backward who have implemented strict and regressive anti-surrogacy laws, but also countries like France and the United Kingdom.
These laws vary based on, among other things, the types of surrogacy they ban. In some countries, both altruistic surrogacy (wherein there is no monetary gain for the woman carrying the child) and gainful surrogacy (wherein there is monetary gain for the woman carrying the child) are both banned, and in some countries, only the latter is banned. There are also, of course, countries that only ban surrogacy for same-sex couples.
The core of most of these laws centers around the idea that surrogacy is nothing more than the renting of human bodies. This notion ignores the fact that adoption remains legal, and surrogacy is nothing more than the adoption of a child before the child is born. The rights of gay people and the sterile are at stake here.
In America, couples seeking a surrogate have to go through heaps of legal mishigas, and regulations vary wildly state-by-state. While my home state of Maryland is known to be rather surrogacy-friendly, surrogacy is outright banned in Arizona.
According to AGAR (Asociación de Gestación Asistida Reproductiva), most of America’s surrogacy law remains uncertain, and though couples can still manage to find surrogates in large parts of the country, this spells a whole lot of logistical confusion for them. This issue has mostly fallen under the radar for most of the populace, or at least for the people who haven’t had to deal with this kind of thing for themselves.
We in the West have this idea that we are more progressive than the primal autocracies and theocracies, and this notion is often accurate. But this is one issue where we really don’t have much to brag about in terms of the way we do things. We’ve let the groanings and moanings of all the bible-thumping moral busybodies get in the way of human rights. Aren’t these the same people that go on and on about the importance of the American family? Clearly they only wish to talk up their families, and dismiss anyone who falls outside of the extremely tight circle they’ve drawn.
Of course there are complex aspects of surrogacy, and the legality of these things should be discussed. What if the surrogate refuses to give up the child? What if the adopting parents reject the child after birth due to unforeseen complications? All of these issues should be figured out with the rights of the surrogate, the child, and the adopting parents in mind. But simply outlawing surrogacy or making it unnecessarily difficult for people to participate in surrogacy is just not the right way to go about this.

A Plague on Parliament: Australia’s Citizenship Crisis

Binoy Kampmark

“You know, when you nominate for Parliament, there is actually a question, you’ve got to address that section 44 question.”
Australian Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce
It is proving to be a toxic gift that continues to give with increasing regularity.  The latest potential victim of section 44 of the Australian Constitution, one barring a member of parliament from having an allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign country, is the Australian Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce.
On Monday, the same politician who made world headlines threatening to place the undeclared dogs of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard on death row after entering Australia, had his own moment of unrelished revelation: he was a New Zealand citizen.
This inconvenient fact came to Joyce’s attention on Thursday via advice received from the NZ High Commissioner, Chris Seed.  The punch in the advice was even greater, given the Deputy PM’s string of previous announcements that he could not possibly have a citizenship connection with the country where his father was born.
While previous politicians leapt over the ridge on discovering their ineligibility (the Greens Senators Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters being the debutants in this bloodletting), others have been attempting to clog the High Court of Australia.  Perhaps the two Senators had been too hasty.
One government Senator and now resigned cabinet member, Matt Canavan, smells a whiff of potential legal victory before the bench of the High Court, using the “blame my mother” defence in acquiring, unwittingly, Italian citizenship, or what is deemed Italian residency abroad.
But Joyce’s case provides far less room to manoeuvre, one that looks more like the cases of Ludlam and Waters. Both of those cases involved a misreading, or misperception, about the respective laws of New Zealand and Canada on nationals.
No matter, claims the government Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue, deciding that sun filled hope mattered over worn legal experience. Joyce could remain not only as Deputy PM but as the Member for New England while the High Court considers the case. There would be no glorious immolation, no sacrifice to the sacred text of constitutional law.  Furthermore, there would be no risk, at least for the moment, that this minority government might be extinguished by a textual nicety, given the government’s one seat majority.
Desperate to repel this political doomsday scenario, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has been edging close to a dangerous declaration in parliament: that the High Court will find in favour of the government and hold that Joyce can remain.
This is very much high in the wishful stakes.  What the government is banking upon, along with One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts, is a modern interpretation of section 44, one that moves away from the fact that mere entitlement to a foreign power’s good graces would disqualify.
As for the Solicitor-General’s advice, Joyce satisfies all four contrived tests, though this banks on an updated reading of the section that clips its very broad wings. The Deputy PM was not, for instance, born overseas. Nor was he on a list of citizens of another state. He never applied for the citizenship of another country nor swore, at any point, any oath or allegiance to the other country.
Sensible points, in of themselves, but the law is not alien to absurdity.  If, suggests Sydney  University Law School’s Anne Twomey, a distinction can be drawn between citizenship by descent and other forms, Joyce may well survive. “Or [the High Court] could say the purpose of the provision is to prevent dual allegiance – and if you didn’t know [you were a foreign citizen] you were not breaching the purpose.”
The opposition attorney-general, Mark Dreyfus, suggested that Turnbull might have been skirting against the separation of powers, coming “perilously close to directing the High Court.” Not so, shot back Senator George Brandis. Turnbull, he explained on Radio National, knows a thing or two about the High Court, having presented cases before them.
Ambushed yet again, the government’s latest tactic smacks of a retro approach, those bad old days when major parties would purposely use the disqualifying provisions of section 44 to eliminate an independent politician or a member of a minor party.  Show us, ventures the coalition, the paperwork of Justine Keay, Susan Lamb, Brendan O’Connor, Maria Vamvakinou and Tony Zappia.
All those Labor MPs are said to have renounced their foreign allegiances, though the party has, as yet, to move on producing any relevant paperwork.  Labor’s own response is a line so standard as to be worrying.  In refusing an offer from Turnbull that their own dubious cases be bundled up in the same government package for the High Court, Bill Shorten climbed the mountain of confidence.
“The Labor Party,” penned Shorten in his note of refusal to the PM, “has the strictest procedures in place to ensure all candidates are compliant with the Constitution prior to their nomination for election. Therefore, I politely decline your offer.” More fun, it seems, for the constitutional diggers.
Time and again since this constitutional crisis unfolded, the concept of strict procedures has itself been challenged.  The application of due diligence, these episodes show, is an entirely relative matter, one often giving way to pure hope.  But ignorance, in these cases, is proving far from blissful.  Politically, it is even proving fatal.

Gambling With The Lives Of US Citizens

Gene Watson

In November 2016, a casino owner and reality show host was somehow elected President with 63 million votes. The USA is now a casino. You get what you vote for (or at least what you allowed the deep state to vote for).
A war of words accompanied by hostile fly bys and war “games” seems to be escalating toward a Korean War. Again. One’s just not enough for some people. This time around, North Korea has nuclear bombs, long range ICBM missiles, EMP weapons on a couple satellites circling the USA (like hungry eagles ready to feast). And more.
The EMP weapons would wipe out machines in much of the USA. No more cars. No more phones. No more internet. No more water. No more power. Just hundreds of millions of Americans foraging for food. In the dark nuclear winter. Without cell phones.
What would be targeted in the USA in the event of nuclear strikes?
It’s estimated that North Korea has 60 nuclear bombs (as of the summer of ’17). The USA’s THAAD defenses are about 75% effective, which means if North Korea shoots 4 missiles at each target, then one nuke will get through to each target.
(Just one slingshot from David brought down Goliath. For good.)
Anchorage is the main city in Alaska and the closest city in the 50 states to Korea. About half of the oil and gas in the USA originates in Alaska. Nuking Anchorage would lead to oil, gasoline and heating oil shortages worse than those experienced in the 1973 oil embargo and 1979 oil embargo combined. $25 for a gallon of gas anyone? How about odd even rationing, again?
Seattle is home to Amazon, Boeing and Microsoft – 3 large corporations critical to the US economy. And 2 of the 3 richest billionaires in the world. (Vancouver would no doubt be effected. Perhaps China can insist on Trudeau talking to Trump about this.)
The San Francisco – San Jose corridor is Silicon Valley, the technology heart of the US. Even if the precision of North Korean nukes is a little off, a hit anywhere in Silicon Valley would wipe out America’s tech mecca.
Los Angeles is the media mecca of the USA (and propaganda capital for much of the world). It also hosts a metro area of 23,000,000 Americans. Being so sprawling, a land strike anywhere within 100 km (60 miles) of downtown LA. would devastate the LA Metro Area. And the “entertainment” groin of America (vulgar, lewd and violent hollywood movies, TV, music, etc.).
Chicago, 4th largest American city, has a mercantile exchange which makes the Windy City the de facto food distribution center for much of the USA and a likely target. Without Chicago, tens of millions of Americans in the USA will starve to death.
Houston, America’s third largest city, is the hub for energy distribution in the USA. A strike against Houston would all but guarantee that oil, gas, heating oil, energy would no longer get distributed to much of the USA. Lights out and all tanks on M-T in the USA. Would make for fascinating nighttime satellite imagery.
Honolulu has been described as being like Chicago with palm trees. This island paradise for rich Americans can be converted into an American island hell within the next 20 minutes. Don’t look at the flash or the fireball.
New York City is the financial bulls-eye of the capitalist empire and epicenter of a Metro Area of 25,000,000 Americans. The Almighty Dollar would become worthless – utterly worthless – upon impact (within 60 minutes of launch).
The Washington DC metro area is the den of both politics and the deep state in America. Some say the beating heart of NoAm (North America) and all of its districts and colonies.
And then there’s Guam. Poor tiny little Guam, as bankrupt as the Northern Mariana Islands, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Detroit, Hartford, Chicago, the State of Illinois, etc. etc. And as bankrupt as the entire USA will become within an hour with even just a couple mushroom clouds arising over a couple cities in the Continental 48.
Some days it feels like we are just a tweet away from Armageddon. Kingdom come. Samson’s weakness – as we discovered just before the golden bowl shattered and Samson brought the entire temple down from above him, Masada style – was his hair. In the end, will it turn out Trump’s weakness was his temper or his twitter account. Or none of the above.
And the leaders of the earth who committed bad things with the United States government and lived with her in shameless luxury will weep and beat themselves in grief over her when they see the smoke of her burning. They will stand at a distance because of their fear of her torment and say too bad too bad you great nation, USA, you strong nation because in an hour your judgment (doom) has arrived.
And the merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over the US, because there is no one to buy their full cargo anymore. The merchants cried out, weeping and mourning, and said too bad too bad, the great USA, in which all who had ships at sea became rich from her wealth, because in one hour she has been ruined.
Uncle Sam aka the whore of babylon will vanish. In a poof.
Many (many) Americans actually don’t like Los Angeles, New York City or Washington DC. We don’t know yet if North Korea is strategizing to try to win such hearts and minds by limiting strikes to LA., NY and DC. Like reading tea leaves, maps with circles in the background in some news reports from Korea are seen in the news once in a blue moon.
Then, there’s Seoul and Tokyo. Blasts to both would kill millions and decimate the economies of both South Korea and Japan. How terribly sad it would be to see the rich Japanese and South Korean survivors foraging for food the day after.
An American strike or counterstrike on the Korean peninsula raises the question of which cities would be targeted. And which way would the wind be blowing that day. Japan no doubt doesn’t want radioactive clouds flitting over Japan. Again. And should said clouds flutter to China or Russia, what then. Would there be thousands of casualties or millions of casualties in neighboring countries.
Then too there have been US government assassination threats. In the 21st Century, that includes bird drones (drones that look like birds) dropping off fly drones (drones that look like flies or mosquitoes or …) filled with poison. Fly drones that can ‘sting’ poison or drugs into victims. Who would have thought protection for presidents would have to include screen doors and insect screens in windows, etc.
Then again, catch these little drones and billions of dollars in US government R & D can be reverse engineered for a fraction of Uncle Sam’s cost. And then the improved upon. Then, the tables turn.
Perhaps peace is a better path.
President Trump’s military attack threats (fire and fury, locked and loaded, etc.) against the DPRK appear to have been hasty and we all know what haste makes.
China’s declaration that if North Korea is attacked first, then China will help North Korea and if the USA is attacked first then China will remain neutral – seems to have helped both the DPRK and the USA to dial back the threats. For a little while at least
It is also possible that the Commander In Chief just can’t take the heat of the incessant seemingly endless media grilling (about Russiagate, etc.). Oh and that nagging and lingering FBI investigation (into Russiagate, etc.) and he simply wants to get those two pesky flying monkeys off his back. With a war. With Korea. Or Iran. Or Venezuela. Or fill-in-the-blank.
(Some candidates for US President actually don’t consider that they will become the most criticized person in the world if elected.)
Uncle Sam has over $50,000,000,000,000 in debts that it can’t pay (pensions, US Treasury bonds, etc.) Endless war (against Afghanistan (Graveyard of the Empires and heroin capital of our planet), Iraq, Syria, Yugoslavia, Libya, Yemen, etc. etc.) and the seemingly ever expanding global surveillance state has been quite expensive. Too expensive.
In the meantime, before the USA’s next financial collapse, the more war, the more surveillance, the more money for the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex (MIC). And their bankers.
The day is soon coming when – one way or another – someone will have to announce that Uncle Sam is broke, dead broke and cannot pay its bills anymore and that lenders who lent money to the US treasury will not get paid back, no pensions for retirees in the US. No more money for endless war. No more money for the global surveillance state either.
And – what a coincidence – we now have a casino owner in the White House who has experience with not just one, but 4 (count ‘em 4) bankruptcies. Who better to say so sorry Charlie than … Trump is in the right place at the right time to use his extensive bankruptcy experience to declare bankruptcy for the government of the United States of America.
What better way to distract from major problems (like major financial problems or major news media problems or major FBI investigation problems) than wars. Big devastating wars. The bigger and the more devastating the war the more distracting it will be from other problems.
6 of the 7 largest Banks in the world are now forecasting that an imminent financial collapse in the USA will commence within the next 18 months (forecasts range from October 2017 to February 2019). Perhaps, the deep state wants us staring and squinting at North Korea while they are up to other things. Like getting ready for the final countdown to the final financial collapse of the American Empire. Coming soon.

Breaking The Seal: Child Abuse And The Confessional

Binoy Kampmark 

The only surprise was that it did not come sooner. Australia’s Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has gotten on with the gruesome task of making 85 recommended changes to the law that will provide some measure of future protection for victims of child abuse.
The notable words that should be highlighted and even shouted from every pulpit are those that insist that “no excuse, protection nor privilege” will cover priests who fail to inform the authorities on instances of such violations, even if obtained in the sacred confines of the confession.
“We are satisfied that confession is a forum where Catholic children have disclosed their sexual abuse and where clergy have disclosed their abusive behaviour in order to deal with their own guilt.”
The report acknowledges an orthodox dilemma arising in other professions where confidentiality exists alongside the assessment of breach.  “We acknowledge that if this recommendation is implemented then clergy hearing confession may have to decide between complying with the civil law obligation to report and complying with a duty in their role as a confessor.”
The historical precedent marshalled in favour of the law of the seal of confession is hefty.  As Gratian noted in his 1151 compilation of principles of Church law, including various council edicts, Deponatur sacerdos qui peccata penitentis publicare presumit (roughly, “Let the priest who dares to make known the sins of his penitent be deposed”).  Those breaching this would be duly subjected to opprobrium and a lengthy period of disgrace.  Among other additional notes come the stern words of Canon 21 of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), which insist on secrecy and punishment of perpetual penitence should that injunction be violated.
These musty injunctions explain, in part, the militant reaction by Australia’s clergy to the Royal Commission’s note on the subject of the seal.  Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart, as president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, felt that the confessional was sacred and irreducible, an immutable institution.
How Hart went about his case was bound to jar the defenders of secular, temporal justice.  “Confession in the Catholic Church is a spiritual encounter with God through the priest.” To override that particular “spiritual encounter” would be a grave breach of freedom of religion, notwithstanding its harm to children.  The confession was a fundamental canon in that regard, “recognised in the law of Australia and many other countries.”
Nor did progressive priests, known for their flag waving for various social causes in Australia, disagree with Hart.  Frank Brennan SJ was certainly in agreement, showing a lack of comprehension about how disturbing the seal was merely analogous to the necessary reporting obligations other professions might have when being informed of an abuse.  The seal of confession remained sacrosanct and exceptional.
A questioning Brennan wondered whether the confession had necessarily aided a culture of abuse and its corollary, the all-smothering cover-up. “I don’t think it has, and that’s why I will continue to honour the seal of the confessional.”
Other reasons had less than sufficient ballast.  One considered the fact that pursuing such laws would drive the offender away.  Penitents would be reluctant to come forth.  “Common sense tells me that a sex abuser would be even less likely to present for confession if he knew that the confessional seal did not apply.”
Another was frequency – the sacrament of confession was rarely used by Catholics these days, which meant that it could go on undisturbed.  Over the course of 32 years, reflected Brennan, not a single person had “confessed the sin of child sexual abuse to me.”  Personal experience, it seemed, took the precedence over institutional realities.
Hart furthered his own interpretation of institutional reality: the Catholic Church had been given a dusting reform, and such laws were needlessly intrusive.  Nothing of the order of child abuse on that scale, he claimed “would ever happen” today.  It was adequate, claimed Hart, to persuade a penitent to tell another individual or body outside the profession.  To that voice could also be added Brennan’s.
An old, stubborn defiance against the state, that all-secular nasty beast that jousted with Papal power for centuries, seemed to resurface.  A mandatory reporting rule to report abuse was far less important than the seal of confession, the breaking of which would be tantamount to spitting in the face of the divine.
While the mandatory reporting requirements would merely bring the clergy in line with other relationships of a fiduciary nature, traditional reservations about such rules remain.  Would it, for instance, do less for the victims than intended?
People With Disability Australia, for instance, suggest a consensual element to the disclosure, though this, in a seedy sort of way, sounds much like the rape victim’s lament on not reporting a crime out of fear.  Consent, it would seem to follow, would be indispensable for exposing the offence, an unfortunate weakening of any reporting requirement.
Care Leavers Australasia Network offers a necessary demurral.  “Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to ensure the right thing is done is through the threat of a penalty of punishment.” The state and the Catholic Church (for some, the only Church), have renewed an ancient battle, with the divine enlisted as alibi and sacred protector.  The priests, as they have done before, will be its militant vanguard.  As with any political struggle, the victims risk being forgotten – again.

Saudi Arabia Wants Out Of Yemen War: Mid East Eye

Abdus Sattar Ghazali

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince has told two former US officials that he “wants out” of the two-year war he started in Yemen, and that he is not against US rapprochement with Iran, Al Jazeera reported Tuesday (August 15) quoting leaked emails published by Middle East Eye.
The revelation sheds light on the thinking of Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the 31-year-old heir to the Saudi throne, also known as MBS, Al Jazeera said adding: The leaks pertain to discussions he held on the Middle East with Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, and Steven Hadley, who served as US national security adviser during George W Bush’s presidency.
The conversation took place at least one month before Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt severed diplomatic and economic ties with Qatar, accusing it of trying to undermine their war in Yemen and for having friendly relations with Iran.
The details of the meeting between MBS and the former American officials were revealed in an email exchange between Indyk and Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE’s ambassador in Washington, DC. The email exchange was obtained by the GlobalLeaks campaign group, according to Middle East Eye.
The conflict in Yemen has escalated dramatically since March 2015, when Saudi-led forces launched a military operation against the Houthi fighters who toppled the government of President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi in September 2014.
Casualties
Since the conflict began, more than 10,000 people have been killed, and millions have been driven from their homes.
The Saudi-led operation has been blamed for the spread of cholera in Yemen, where an estimated 500,000 have reportedly been afflicted.
The war has also left the country on the brink of a famine, with millions of people displaced, and an estimated  seven million people going hungry, according to a UN report.
In Sanaa, Emma O’Leary of the Norwegian Refugee Council, told Al Jazeera that the needs of the civilians are “enormous” and “difficult to describe”.
“We are doing our best to respond to the crisis, but the reality is that this is an extremely difficult environment for all of us,” O’Leary said.
“Security issues, such as the air strikes and the ground fighting, as well as bureaucratic constraints” are a real concern, and that the warring parties must return to the negotiating table, she said.
Yemen crisis ‘an absolute shame on humanity’
International human rights organization CARE has denounced the humanitarian crisis in war-torn Yemen, which is also suffering from a cholera epidemic, as “an absolute shame on humanity”.
Wolfgang Jamann, the head of the CARE, told a news conference after a five-day visit to the impoverished Arabian Peninsula country last month:  “We are now in the 21st century and the current situation is an absolute shame on humanity.”
“Thousands of civilians have died since the start of the conflict and millions more have been displaced inside the country,” he said adding: “60 percent of the country is food insecure and over half the population is unable to access safe drinking water. Many areas in Yemen are just one step away from a famine situation,” he said, and urged the international community to “end the suffering”.
The situation in the country of some 27 million has been worsened by a massive outbreak of the bacterial infection cholera.  More than 600,000 people are expected to contract cholera in Yemen this year, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) warned recently.
Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament
According to Sultan Barakat, a senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament.
“Mistakenly viewed by many observers as a two-sided conflict between the Saudi-led coalition and the Houthi rebels, Yemen’s war is actually a multifaceted predicament involving a volatile combination of local, regional, and international actors, all of them armed and having major and competing interests in the country’s future. The political transition process set out by the Gulf Cooperation Council back in 2011 failed to incorporate key sections of Yemeni society into the decision-making process, such as the southern separatist Hirak movement, the Houthis, and Yemeni youth and women.”
“As a result, Hadi’s transitional government was increasingly viewed as illegitimate and unrepresentative of the demands and concerns of the Yemeni people. Constructing a truly all-inclusive decision-making process to pick up where the National Dialogue Conference left off will be key to reaching any power-sharing agreement,” he concluded.
Several rounds of UN-mediated peace talks in Switzerland and in Kuwait have failed to produce an agreement.
The Houthis and the General People’s Congress (GPC) party of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh are demanding an agreement on a new administration comprising all parties to run the country until new elections, while Hadi supporters say that the Houthis must hand over their weapons and quit the cities they have seized since 2014.
President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi  was removed after Houthi forces took control of Sanaa in September 2014. His forces have regained territory since the intervention began, but the rebels still control Sanaa and ports on the southern coast.