23 Aug 2017

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Internship Program 2018 at UNFPA Headquarters, New York, USA

Application Deadline: 31st December 2017 – 5:00pm (New York time)
Eligible Countries: International
To Be Taken At (Country): New York, USA
About the Award: Applicants should have expressed interest in the field of development; ability to adapt to new environments and work with individuals from different cultural backgrounds. Interns work under the supervision of a staff member at UNFPA. The background of the interns is matched with the needs of the organization.
Type: Internship
Eligibility: Candidates for the internship programme are selected on a competitive basis. The profiles of the interns are matched with the needs of the organization. The following qualifications are required for consideration:
 Students should be enrolled in an advanced degree programme or have recently graduated;
• Students must have written and spoken proficiency in English; fluency in French, Spanish or Arabic is an asset.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: Interns do not receive a salary or any other form of remuneration from UNFPA. The costs associated with an intern’s participation in the programme must be assumed either by the nominating institution, which may provide the required financial assistance to its students, or by the students themselves, who will have to meet living expenses as well as make their own arrangements for accommodation, travel and other requirements. In addition, applicants must have medical insurance for the duration of the internship. Proof of insurance will need to be submitted before the internship begins.
How to Apply: Apply here
Award Providers: United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

ISQua Fellowship Programme for Students in Developing Countries 2017

Application Deadline: 4th September 2017
Eligible Countries: Developing Countries
About the Award: ISQua offers scholarships to individuals who are both born and working in countries of economic transition whose work and region can benefit from their participation on the ISQua Fellowship Programme.  Priority will be given to healthcare professionals and healthcare academics who are in the early phase in their careers and whose organisations are considered least able to afford such an opportunity.
Candidates will be considered from Lower Income (LI) and Lower Middle Income (LMI) countries based on the WHO and World Bank ratings. The aim is to have representation from all WHO Regions, dependant on range of applications received and the set criteria.
Type: Short Courses/Training
Eligibility: To qualify for the ISQua Education Scholarship applicants must:
– Have been born in and currently work in LI or LMI country;
– Not have received an ISQua Scholarship (Education or Conference) in the past; and
– Be able to demonstrate the potential benefit to their work and region from participation in the ISQua Fellowship Programme.
– Not be a current ISQua Member or Fellowship Participant.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: 
  • The Fellowship Scholarship covers: Course fees for the Membership and Fellowship package.
  • The Fellowship Scholarship does not cover: Annual maintenance fees post graduation.
How to Apply: 
  1. Click here to complete the application form.
  2. After this has been submitted, email Eveline Holmes with the first page of your passport and a letter from your current employer, on headed paper, verifying that you work in a qualifying country.  If this documentation is not received, then your application will not be considered.
  3. All completed applications (including the supporting documentation) must be received by 17:00 IST, 4 September 2017. No extensions will be granted.
Award Providers: International Society for Quality in Health Care

World Bank/African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) PhD Scholarships for African Students 2018

Application Deadline: 31st August 2017
Eligible Countries: African countries
To Be Taken At (Country): University of Cape Town (UCT) in South Africa
About the Award: The course is targeted at both students and practitioners with an understanding at the second year PhD level in Economics, Agricultural Economics, Development Economics or other relevant doctoral programs, who would have an interest in continuing research on a land related topic.
The course is also open to faculty from AERC partner institutions and Network of Excellence on Land Governance in Africa (NELGA) affiliated institutions, subject to meeting the course qualifications. It is part of capacity building efforts under the Strengthening Advisory Capacities for Land Governance in Africa (SLGA) program, being jointly implemented by the Land Policy Initiative (LPI) in UNECA, GIZ and the World Bank.
This intensive PhD course aims to help build and strengthen the analytical capacity in Land Economics and Governance in Africa, building the capacity of network universities in teaching and research in conformity to best global practices with deep African perspectives.
This course will be offered as a pilot pending formal accreditation within the AERC, and will be hosted at the University of Cape Town (UCT) in South Africa from January 7 to February 11, 2018. The course will be delivered by local and international experts on land related research of both academia and the World Bank, equipping participants with the latest theories and tools to conduct state of the art research on the subject.
Type: Short courses, PhD
Eligibility: 
  • Applicants must be nationals of an African country;
  • All applicants must be holders of at least a masters degree in agricultural and applied economics, or related discipline from an internationally recognized university;
  • Applicants must be enrolled in a PhD program in Africa, or be a faculty member of an African University in a AERC accredited university or a NELGA affiliated institution;
  • Possession of at least a publication or acceptance of an article for publication on land, in a refereed journal will receive special consideration.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: Upon acceptance, flights, accommodation and per diem will be fully covered.
Duration of Program: January 7 to February 11, 2018
How to Apply: Interested applicants must submit their applications for admission directly to the AERC. Application documents can also be submitted via the AERC website at http://scholarships.aercafrica.org/ not later than August 31, 2017. These should include:
  • Signed curriculum vitae; please use the Europass CV template (http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu)
  • Certified copies of all university degree certificates
  • Certified copies of all university transcripts as necessary
  • Admission letter to a doctoral program as appropriate/proof of employment as a faculty member
  • Letter of motivation (Maximum 2 pages)
  • Two (2) recommendation letters of academic referees
Award Providers: AERC and GIZ, in partnership with the World Bank Research Department.
Important Note: Female students and applicants from less privileged regions as well as candidates with disabilities are especially encouraged to apply.

Health Systems Global (HSG) Media Fellowship 2018. Funded to Liverpool, UK

Application Deadline: 30th September 2017
Eligible Countries: The Fellowship will be open to six professional journalists in each of the six World Health Organization regions (one from each region will be selected):
  • Africa
  • The Americas
  • South-East Asia
  • Europe
  • Eastern Mediterranean
  • Western Pacific.
To Be Taken At (Country): Liverpool, UK
About the Award: This is an opportunity for journalists to engage and build relationships within the community and report on some of the biggest issues and challenges facing the global community in a rapidly changing world.
The fellowships will include funded attendance and participation in the Fifth Global Symposium on Health Systems Research in October 2018 and close collaboration and support from health systems research and policy experts. The journalists will be working closely with leading thinkers and practitioners to promote the agenda of Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) and address critical health systems and health policy related topics in their country and region.
The Media Fellowship will begin in January 2018, with fellows beginning research or investigation for a feature piece to be published in a major outlet before September 2018. This published piece will be considered for the inaugural Health Systems Global Media Prize.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • Print journalists – Newspaper/magazine (to submit at least 3 pieces from recognised media outlet with applicant by-line on the article)
  • Broadcast journalists and film-makers (to submit at least 3 audio or video files of broadcast programmes)
  • Freelance journalists (to submit at least 3 pieces from recognised media outlet with applicant byline on the article or audio or video files of three broadcast programmes)
  • eNews journalists (official news website); (to submit at least 3 pieces from recognised media outlet with applicant byline on the article).
Applicants will need to:
  • Pitch one idea for a feature piece
  • Have experience in public policy; health or human development and/or have a clear interest in health systems and policy by providing 3-5 published articles/podcasts/radio shows/blogs
  • Be employed or regularly freelance for an accredited outlet, as verified by an editor.
Thereafter, Fellows will be expected to:
  • Place at least 1 piece ahead of HSR2018, for consideration for the prize, by the panel in October 2018 (it must be published and submitted to the panel by September 2018). The byline will need to express that this is their submission for the HSG Media Fellowship.
  • Express their interest in who they would like interview during HSR2018
  • Place at least 1 piece during the symposium (or within 2 weeks of the event)
  • Place at least 1 piece within 2 months of the end of the symposium.
*All pieces must speak to the symposium themes
Number of Awards: 6
Value of Award: 
  • Certificate and citation from Health Systems Global
  • Profiling on Health Systems Global website and social media
  • Full access and support to participate in the Global Symposium in Liverpool in September 2018, including satellite and skills sessions (flights, accommodation and subsistence for five days)
  • Opportunity to interview leading thinkers/actors within health systems
  • Full membership of Health Systems Global for 1 year
  • Chance to win the inaugural Health Systems Global Media Prize for their feature piece.
Additional support to successful applicants will include:
  • Introductory welcome webinar for successful applicants
  • Support in developing the pitch idea contributed at the application stage
  • A toolkit to strengthen their work on reactive pieces, e.g. access to HSG spokespeople people (including people in their country and region); glossary of key terms.
Award Providers: Health Systems Global

DAAD Masters in Tropical and International Forestry Scholarship for Developing Countries 2018 – Germany

Application Deadline: 15th October 2017
Offered Annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Developing Countries
To Be Taken At (Country): Germany
About the Award: The Georg-August-Universität Göttingen offers the MSc programme Tropical and International Forestry with the international degree Master of Science (M.Sc.). The programme is for students interested in pursuing an international career in forestry, nature conservation, ecosystem research or in development organisations.
Students are admitted to the MSc programme on the condition that they obtain a scholarship or bring their own financial support. The DAAD Scholarship Program is offered to students from Developing Countries.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: To be considered for the DAAD scholarship:
  • Applicants work at either a public authority or a state or private company in a developing country
  • Holds a Bachelor’s degree (4 years) in a related subject (Forestry, Biology, Agriculture, Ecology, Geography, etc.)
  • Will have completed an academic degree far above average (at least 2nd class upper division) and at least two years of related professional experience
  • Is no older than 36; his/her respective academic degrees should normally not be more than 6 years old
  • Has an internationally recognized English test score: IELTS (minimum: band 6.0) certificate or TOEFL (minimum score: 550 paper based, 213 computer based, 80 internet based)
To be considered for the programme, applicants must have:
  • BSc degree (or equivalent) in Forestry or a related field (e.g. Agriculture, Biology, Ecology, Geography) with very good to good results conferred by an institute of higher learning or a similar qualification
  • proven proficiency in English (TOEFL 80 points/ibt, IELTS 6 points at least)
  • Professional experience is also welcome
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: The scholarship covers living costs, study fees, health insurance, travel costs and German language courses for the whole course (24 months). The monthly allowance is about € 750 plus additional payments.
Duration of Program: 24 months
How to Apply: Interested applicants should go through all application instructions before applying.
Award Providers: German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

Countries Underwater: the Looming Crisis of Climate Migration

Arthur Wyns

A recent statement to a UN council by Sheikh Hasina Wazed, the prime minister of Bangladesh,  declared that the predicted one meter sea-level rise would render 30 million people in coastal areas homeless and migrating to Dhaka, Bangladesh’s capital.
A staggering number, comprising the combined population of Belgium and the Netherlands, and one that has been much contested by studies and during international talks.
We asked Dr. Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development (ICCCAD) and a world expert on climate change adaptation, how accurate his prime-minister’s statement is, and how Bangladesh is planning for the climate migrants to come.
The smokescreen of numbers
“The emphasis on numbers in the current debate is a very great distraction, generating more noise than coming up with any strategy on how to deal with the issue. This type of debate is creating a smoke curtain, without necessary having a fire behind it,” urges Dr. Huq.
“The number of expected climate migrants in Bangladesh being 30 million is not what matters here. Thirty million is as right as any number. Nobody can be certain of the exact amount of climate migrants that our global society will have to deal with.”
“What we can say with absolute certainty,” states Huq, “is that ‘human-induced climate change is causing sea-levels to rise’ as well as ‘more than 30 million people living in coastal Bangladesh now will no longer be able to live where they are living today if the sea-level rises by 1 meter’.  When discussing the future, attributing migration to human induced climate change can be done with a lot of credibility and a strong scientific basis.
“It becomes more problematic when you are trying to determine the pace at which these processes are currently developing: most projections for a 1 meter sea-level rise for the coast of Bangladesh run well past 2100, by which time of the population itself will have doubled, if not tripled.
“Low-lying areas like the coast of Bangladesh and island states like Tuvalu and Kiribati will disappear into the ocean. And when these lands disappear, their inhabitants will become climate migrants and climate refugees, without any question. Whether climate migration is already happening TODAY, is still strongly disputed in the current debate, because migration always has multiple reasons: they can be political, sociological or environmental reasons. And attributing climate change as the main or only reason for moving, to any group of migrants, is a very difficult thing to do … for now.”
He adds: “Climate change is already a super-imposed factor in the web of push- and pull-factors that makes people decide to leave their homes. And more and more of these climate-related factors are going to contribute to push-factors for migrants making the decision to leave their homes. In the future, the existence of climate migrants will be undeniable.”
Terminology Counts
“When talking about climate migration, terminology counts: the media has adopted the terms ‘climate migrants’ or ‘climate refugees’ to describe this issue, although in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCCC, these terms do not exist, because none of the parties can agree on what they mean. But to be able to deal with the issue, we have to find a way to name it first,” states Huq.
Although consensus is lacking regarding the definition of climate migration and whether it is a phenomenon that is already taking place or not, the issue itself did already find its way into the negotiations of the United Nations.
In the UNFCCC – which is a negotiated treaty within the United Nations for which a Conference of Parties (or COP) takes place every year – the discussion of climate migration falls under a category called ‘Loss & Damage’ (L&D).
L&D forms the last of three chapters making up the Paris Agreement, with the first two being ‘mitigation’, which regulates the scaling down of emissions, and ‘adaptation’, or building resilience against climate change. In some cases, it is too late for the first two strategies to protect communities from the effects of climate change, and the loss and damage that come with climate change-induced effects are inevitable.
Dr. Huq explains: “Loss refers to things that are lost for ever due to climate change, such as human lives or species loss, while damages refers to things that are damaged, but can be repaired or restored, such as roads or embankments.”
Although this third chapter in the Paris agreement opens up a discussion for climate migration, recognising that climate change can indeed cause the necessary harm for people to become displaced, the chapter itself is also very controversial and the product of a decade-long international debate.
One of the most significant steps forward in this discussion, before the Paris Agreement, was made during COP19, which took place in Poland in2013, where the Warsaw International Mechanism or WIM was put in place.
The WIM is an integral part of the L&D chapter, and is the first formal international mechanism that addresses the effects of  irreversible damage due to human-induced climate change.
It includes an executive committee and a 9-item action plan, one of which is ‘forced migration due to climate change’. Together with an additional article in the Paris agreement (article 8), these 2013 and 2015 landmarks delineate the progress so far.
A country under water
In Bangladesh, however, the government is already several steps ahead of what little progress has been made in an international context. Dr. Huq states: “Our country already has a climate strategy and action plan in place, performing adaptation projects and building climate resilience. This plan now recognises, however, as the recent statement of our prime-minister confirmed, that we will be dealing with millions of people who will have to leave the coastal areas.”
The forced migration away from the Bangladeshi coasts, additional to the direct trauma it inflicts on people, also holds a greater sociological threat that can have enduring consequences for Bangladeshi society: the resettlement will mainly be a move from rural to urban communities.
Dhaka city is already the fastest growing mega city in the world, with a current population of 15 million people and predicted to absorb another 10 million in the coming two decades.
The high influx of people from rural areas into cities is likely to cause large bodies of people without the background or skill-set to make a living in an urbanised environment, causing enduring poverty, a strong class division and political unrest in a country where large areas of rural land are soon to become part of the seafloor.
“Our current revision of the national climate strategy and action plan will still keep helping coastal communities to adapt to their changing environment. Additionally, as a long-term strategy to deal with the predicted rural-to-urban migrations, education will be a key adaptation strategy: we are handing over the right skills and knowledge to the youth, so they don’t need to become farmers and fishers like their parents, and they are able to get jobs in towns elsewhere.”
By both educating the youth in rural areas, as well as creating new job opportunities in provincial towns, the Bangladesh government is hoping to stimulate so-called ‘facilitated or assisted migration’ to address both the projected loss of agricultural communities and the overpopulation in the capital.
Saleemul Huq explains, “By helping people to become more resilient to climate change, and by educating them so they can utilise migration as a choice instead of a necessity, we are turning the rising sea-level around from a problem to an opportunity. Planned migration offers a solution by enabling people instead of forcing them to move.”

Ten percent of Mexican families earn two thirds of country’s income

Alex González

A new study by the United Nation’s Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL) reveals that economic inequality in Mexico is much higher than had been previously estimated. According to the study, the top 10 percent of Mexicans received over two thirds of the country’s income in 2012, while the bottom 10 percent earned just 0.4 percent that same year. This level of inequality is 77 percent higher than what had been previously calculated using official data.
According to the study, the richest 1 percent of Mexicans—between 125,000 and 220,000 people—own one third of the country’s assets. Meanwhile, half of the population—over 60 million people—lives in poverty. If the country’s wealth were to be equally divided among the population, each individual would receive a lump sum of $56,300, an amount greater than one person working at the minimum wage would earn working every day for 30 years.
After two centuries of vast improvements in the productive process, contemporary levels of inequality have reached standards not seen since feudal times. In nineteenth century New Spain, a mine’s owner earned between 700 and 1,000 times more than an average miner. In 2012, the top 1 percent earned 729 times more than the bottom 1 percent.
The results of the study would place Mexico, alongside Chile, as the countries with the highest levels of inequality in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an organization encompassing supposedly “developed” countries.
Most workers in Mexico—some 24 million people—work without a contract or as temporary workers. One of out every five Mexicans goes hungry, and the daily minimum wage ($5 USD) is not sufficient to support a family. Over half of the population does not earn enough to cover basic expenses, such as food, clothing, transportation, and housing. According to a 2015 report by Oxfam, the wealth of Mexico’s 16 billionaires multiplies fivefold each year, while 48 percent of state schools have no access to sewage, 31 percent have no drinking water, 13 percent have no bathrooms or toilets, and 11 percent have no access to electricity.
The study lays bare the degree to which financial corporations, many from the United States, have come to dominate every aspect of life in Latin America, producing widespread social misery while filling the pockets of the top 1 percent and the next 9 percent.
In Mexico, the average yield from capital has been 15 percent annually in recent years, compared to a rise in the average industrial wage of only 4 percent per year. Eighty percent of financial assets in the country are in the hands of 10 percent of the population. A mere 23,000 people and corporations control about one fifth of the country’s financial assets, while half of the population does not even have a bank account.
The vast monopolization of the economy is also present outside of the financial sector. Six hundred companies own 64 percent of assets in the manufacturing sector, 40 companies own one-third of assets in retail, and 22 companies own 89 percent of assets in the telecommunications sector. Overall, just 10 percent of Mexican companies control 93 percent of the country’s assets.
While nominally owned by Mexican firms, these companies are overwhelmingly controlled by US finance capital. In 2015, Delta Air Lines announced plans to acquire up to 49 percent of Aeroméxico, the airline with the highest domestic market share and second highest international market share in the country. Delta’s majority shareholders are Berkshire Hathaway, Vanguard, and J.P Morgan. Vanguard is also the largest shareholder of Bachoco, the country’s largest chicken producer, while mutual fund company Dodge & Cox is a leading shareholder of Mexican multinational building materials company CEMEX.
The claims of various pseudo-left groups that Chinese trade in Latin America has supplanted US hegemony in the region are nothing short of absurd. As the figures from the CEPAL study lay bare, it is US finance capital that calls the shots in the Mexican economy. Their cries of “Chinese imperialism” serve to obscure the reactionary role of the US in the region and to position their own forces as willing partners in the suppression of working class opposition.
These conditions of mass misery and want have created a social powder keg, where further attacks on the living conditions of the working class can generate reactions—such as the spontaneous gasolinazo protests that erupted throughout the country earlier this year—that could explode into a massive movement throughout Mexico, and even throughout the continent.
In this context, Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the “left” Movement for National Regeneration (Morena) is seeking to channel this social anger into a nationalist program that blames “corruption” and the “mafia in power” for massive inequality in Mexico.
In fact, the growth of millionaires and inequality in Mexico is the inevitable outcome of capitalist economic relations, where the socially produced labor of workers enriches the private owners of the means of production. López Obrador speaks for the “next 9 percent” of Mexican society, who seek better terms for the Mexican bourgeoisie from US finance capital and are deeply hostile to the Mexican working class.
As the CEPAL study’s figures starkly reveal, any significant improvement in the lives of the Mexican masses will require a direct attack on the wealth of the ruling class, in Mexico and around the world. This reallocation of wealth from the pockets of the few to the benefit of the masses can only take place in a struggle for international socialism in unity with their North and South American class brothers and sisters.

Peruvian teachers strike as Kuczynski’s government plunges into crisis

Armando Cruz

For two months, Peruvian teachers have been on strike, demanding higher pay, the abolition of an education counter-reform and the improvement of the callously neglected state of public education in Peru. Reportedly, more than 200,000 teachers in 18 regions of the country are participating in the strike, making it one of the largest in the last decade.
The evident indifference with which President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski’s right-wing government has been dealing with their demands and its obsessive effort to brand the militant teachers as “terrorists” has further damaged its approval rating, already plummeting in the wake of the devastating effects of the so-called “Niño costero” landslides earlier this year.
The education workers’ strike follows a nationwide miners’ strike against new anti-labor laws in July that was cancelled by the bureaucracy after only two days for a round of negotiations; a nearly month-long public doctors and nurses strike for better wages and the improvement of the nearly bankrupt state of the public healthcare sector and a two-day strike by judicial employees.
The teachers’ strike was set off on July 4 after the Kuczynski government failed to fulfill its promise to raise teachers’ wages during its first year in office. But the issues in the strike run deeper. As with the Peruvian working class as a whole, teachers have seen a decline in wages and living standards as government after government has adhered to the main premises of austerity, deregulation and destruction of labor rights contained in the so-called Washington Consensus of free-market neoliberal counter-reforms initiated by the authoritarian government of Alberto Fujimori in the 90s.
Teachers confront the continuation of these measures in the so-called Education Reform (Ley de Reforma Magisterial), a tool of the ruling class that, in the name of “meritocracy,” establishes eight salary levels based on the results of nationwide teacher “evaluations,” with the highest scores resulting in the highest salaries. Most of Peru’s teachers work in impoverished areas where the scores are the lowest, and the “reform” is seen as a way to lay off public teachers who fail the evaluations.
Even right-wing figures have been forced to acknowledge the despairing conditions under which teachers are struggling: currently 40 percent of basic education public teachers in Peru lack labor stability and have no benefits, and the number has risen every year. The average monthly wage ranges from 1,200 to 1,500 Peruvian soles (US$400 to US$500), only a tenth of what teachers received in real terms less than five decades ago.
Teachers began walking out on June 15. They have blocked roads and access to airports in the regions of Cusco, Puno, Junin, Ayacucho and Arequipa – including in the Machu Picchu sanctuarywith repeated confrontations with the police.
After a series of negotiations between the striking regions’ governors and union representatives, on July 4 the Kuczynski government declared it would raise the teachers’ wage to 2,000 Peruvian soles (approximately US$650).
However, the government declared that wages would be cut for any teacher who failed to return to classes by July 7. This threat failed. Only four regional unions agreed to end the strikeLima, Cusco, Pasco, Lambayequewhile 16 others voted to continue the walkout. Reportedly, some regional governors have supported the strike for fear of losing local support for their administrations.
Upset by the prolongation of the strike and the determination of the teachers, the government proceeded to slander the workers, using the well-worn Peruvian tactic of accusing them of being sympathizers of Sendero Luminosothe Maoist guerrilla movement that employed acts of terrorism in their “popular warfare” against the state in the 80s.
The government’s propaganda campaign was supportedto the surprise of many workersby leading members of Patria Roja (“Red Fatherland,” PR), the so-called “radical left” party that four decades ago founded SUTEP (Sindicato Unitario de Trabajadores por la Educación en el Perú), the confederation of unions that represents most of Peru’s teachers.
PR, which traces its origins to a 1970s Maoist split from the Stalinist Peruvian Communist Party, has for decades staffed the bureaucracy of SUTEP. Its representatives manage the teacher’s pension fund“Derrama Magisterial”as a business, investing its assets and profiting from them.
Rolando Breña, the PR’s general secretary, claimed in an interview that there are “political interests” behind the teachers’ strike mobilization and that its supposed “violent excess” is the result of infiltration of SUTEP by MOVADEF, a political party seen as the descendent of Sendero Luminoso (SL), whose principal aims are amnesty for both SL members and members of the military who committed human rights crimes during the so-called dirty war of the 80s and national “reconciliation.”
Alfredo Velásquez, SUTEP general secretary, emphasized the union bureaucracy’s interest in negotiating with the government and called for the “demarcation” of “groups that incite hate and disorder” and went on to personally brand regional union leaders as MOVADEF members for their insistence on continuing the workers’ mobilization.
These remarks prove how integrated into the political establishment the union bureaucracy has become and demonstrate its abandonment of the most basic demands of the teachers.
Teachers have responded with public denunciations charging that the SUTEP bureaucracyand Patria Rojaare “traitors” who do not represent them. Kuczynski’s government has been negotiating agreements with political operatives who don’t exercise control over their supposed rank-and-file.
Over the last week, teachers have poured into the capital of Lima from all the regions to protest against the government, staging sit-ins in San Martin squarea traditional site for left-wing demonstrations in downtown Lima. Attempts to march towards Congress have been met with police repression. Despite this, polls show that a significant number of Peruvians support the teachers’ demands.
Kuczynski’s government, which never had mass support, has been further discredited by the confrontation, with its approval rating sinking to a staggering 29 percent. Other Peruvian administrations have reached that same low (and even worse), but only at the end of their terms. Kuczynski’s government has just finished its first year in office.
In a populist attempt to gather support among teachers, Fuerza Popular (FP), Kuczynski’s right-wing rival that dominates Congress, began talks with teachers in order to assume the role of an intermediary with the government. The FP’s cynical opportunism was on display when an FP congresswoman declared that: “FP identifies itself with the teachers whether or not they’re terrorists.”
The right-wing opposition along with the main pseudo-left opposition fronts, the Frente Amplio and Nuevo Peru, have asked for the Education Minister, Marilú Martens, to resign in an attempt to placate workers and find someone more capable of negotiating an end to their strike.

South Asian floods kill more than 800 and affect over 24 million people

Sathish Simon & Arun Kumar 

Flooding has created havoc across India’s northern and eastern states and neighbouring Bangladesh and Nepal, killing over 800 people, devastating hundreds of communities and impacting on millions of people throughout South Asia. Charities and NGOs are warning that contaminated water, food shortages and lack of decent accommodation will see outbreaks of dysentery and cholera.
In Bihar, India’s worst-affected state, the official death toll is over 250. In neighbouring Uttar Pradesh over 340 have been killed, with almost half the state’s 75 districts severely hit.
In West Bengal and Assam, in eastern and northeastern India respectively, over 180 have died and three million are affected. In Assam, almost half a million people are living in relief camps. Lightning storms in Odisha and Jharkhand have killed 21, while the north eastern states have reported large numbers of casualties.
Over 140 people have been killed and 30 are missing in Nepal, where 20 percent of the country’s 28 million population suffered the worst flooding in the past 15 years.
In Bangladesh, over 115 people have lost their lives, more than 300,000 are displaced and at least 5.7 million people directly impacted. According to the country’s flood forecasting and warning centre, some 30 percent of the country has been inundated in what have been described as the worst floods in a decade.
The catastrophic situation is expected to worsen, with the Indian Meteorological Department predicting more heavy rain. Last Friday, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies said the flood was “fast becoming one of the most serious humanitarian crises this region has seen in many years” and called for “urgent action.”
Late last month, over 220 people died and 450,000 people were hit by floods in India’s western state of Gujarat. An estimated 39,000 people were shifted to higher ground and 11,400 people had been rescued as of August 1.
Millions of people in South Asia are hit by monsoonal flooding every year. But Indian governments, past and present, and their regional counterparts, have refused to implement any serious flood mitigation measures.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government were denounced in the parliament over their slow and insufficient response to floods. Opposition MPs accused the Hindu supremacist-led regime of discriminating against non-BJP state governments and not providing adequate financial assistance.
Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju denied the allegations. He arrogantly claimed the government planned to find a “permanent solution to floods” and “experts will help find a solution.” Rijiju failed to explain why his government, which took office in May 2014, has done nothing to resolve the escalating annual human tragedy. Even more cynical was the fact that the government allocated a meagre one billion rupees ($US15.6 million) “to find a permanent solution.”
Last month, during floods in Assam which inundated 14 districts, displaced 200,000 people and killed over 70, Prime Minister Modi declared that Indian scientists had to “rise up to the challenges” created by the floods. He previously blamed the flooding on climate change.
While climate change is no doubt a factor in changing global weather patterns, his government refuses to take any real action to prevent the devastating impact of these catastrophes or provide adequate relief. Instead, it spends billions of dollars upgrading the Indian armed forces in pursuit of the ruling elite’s geo-political ambitions.
The Indian government’s contemptuous attitude toward the poor was highlighted by a recent Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report revealing lengthy delays in flood mitigation measures.
According to the Hindustan Times, “the CAG report evaluated 206 Flood Management Programme projects, 38 flood forecasting stations, 49 River Management Activities and works related to Border Area projects and 68 large dams in 17 states and Union Territories between 2007 and 2016. They found ‘inordinate delays’ in almost a quarter of the projects, in the release of funds and ultimately the completion of projects ranging from 10 months to 13 years.”
The CAG report also noted: “After two decades of investing in telemetry systems, that provide real-time data so that flood warnings can be issued, and investing of crores [tens of millions] of rupees, the government still depends on manual data.”
Popular anger is rising among flood victims over the failure of authorities to provide adequate relief. On August 18, flood victims from Itahar, West Bengal, broke into a state food and supplies store and requisitioned food. There were also protests and demonstrations over inconsistent supply of relief material by the North and South Dinajpur districts administrators.
Pradip Dutta, a flood victim in Raiganj, told the media: “Not a single person from the district administration has come to help us.” In Raiganj over 20,000 people have been displaced from their homes and at least six wards have been inundated by the flooded Kulik River.
Indian authorities have mobilised police to suppress the protests. According to media reports, police fired rubber bullets to break up a crowd of flood victims who demanded tarpaulins from administration officials. Bijoy Burman, a youth from Sripur of Itahar, was injured when police opened fire.
Gopi Nath Raha, a senior meteorologist at the Meteorological Centre in Gangtok, told the media that while his facility could predict rainfall patterns, it could not predict flash floods. “We can only issue a warning for heavy rainfall; the relief and disaster management is in the hands of the state government.”
In another indication of the Modi government’s contempt for flood survivors, New Delhi announced a “relief package” of just 5 billion rupees ($78 million). It also promised to make an ex-gratia payment of 200,000 rupees ($3,120) for the next of kin of those killed and 50,000 rupees to people seriously injured.
Coordinated flood mitigation and natural disaster management is blocked by the geo-political rivalry between the various bourgeois states in South Asia and the underlying capitalist profit system.

The German army’s Nazi heritage

Sven Heymanns 

Two developments in recent days illustrate the extent of ultra-right thinking and activities in the German army (Bundeswehr) that are supported and covered up at the highest level.
Last Thursday, the German television investigative programme “Panorama” reported on a far-right incident involving the Bundeswehr’s special forces unit, KSK. The elite unit KSK is stationed in the town of Calw in the state of Baden-Württemberg and operates under strict secrecy.
“Panorama” reported that the incident occurred on April 27 at a farewell party for a KSK company commander. Far-right music was heard at the party with drunken soldiers singing loudly in accompaniment. Four soldiers are alleged to have stretched out their arms in a Hitler salute.
A woman had informed the “Panorama” editorial office about the incident some months ago. She was invited to the ceremony by a friend who worked for the KSK. The commander was expected to navigate an obstacle course that, according to the woman’s testimony, included the throwing of pig heads. At the end of the obstacle course, the woman was expected to be the “sex prize” for the commander. According to the woman, the only reason why the commander did not exploit her sexually was because he was too drunk—like many of the other soldiers.
The planned sex was supposed to be on a consensual basis, but the victim was repelled by the right-wing music. She noted the text of the music and then sought out the band responsible. The band in question is called Sturmwehr, a World War II Nazi shock troop. The group has appeared at concerts organised by the neo-Nazi German National Party (NPD). In 2004, the band recorded an album of far-right songs that NPD supporters then distributed free of charge to children and young people at their schools.
The text included lyrics such as, “Poor Germany, what has become of you? Poor Germany, they are out to kill you,” and was played at the KSK party, according to “Panorama.” The text continues: “Once a country of greatness, culture and strong workers, you have managed to run yourself down in nearly 60 years.” The song then refers positively to the Nazi regime and presents Germany’s post-war history as one of continual national decline.
The Bundeswehr has confirmed that the retirement party for the KSK commander did take place. In an e-mail to the editor of “Panorama,” army representatives declared that the obstacle course took place under the motto “Roman-medieval games,” including the slicing of melons and pineapples with a sword and the tossing of pig’s heads. The army has promised an internal enquiry to investigate the allegations of Hitler salutes and playing of far-right music.
According to Hanspeter Bartels (SPD), the German parliamentary defence commissioner, any use of Hitler salutes or far-right songs should be regarded as “beyond tasteless. This would also possibly be a criminal offence.”
The incident at the KSK is not an isolated case, but is symptomatic of an army under the influence of the far-right as an integral part of its tradition. This is most clearly shown in the case of the naming of Bundeswehr barracks.
Following the discovery of a far-right group, involving army officers who planned terrorist acts and would then blame refugees, German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen announced a review of the Bundeswehr and its traditions. She declared that the modern Bundeswehr had nothing in common with Hitler’s army and promised to rename barracks that bear the names of leading Nazi officers. Her proposal was criticised at the time by leading generals.
It is now clear that her initiative was merely empty talk. In response to a parliamentary question, it has been revealed that a number of Bundeswehr barracks bearing the names of officers active during the Third Reich will not be renamed.
In four cases, the names of the barracks are to be retained. Three of the barracks are named after Nazi officers.
The Rommel barracks in the Augustdorf district of North Rhine-Westphalia will keep its name. Erwin Rommel, the “Desert Fox,” was one of Hitler’s favourite officers and was elevated to the status of war hero by Goebbels’s propaganda ministry. It was only at the end of the war that he fell into disgrace and was forced to commit suicide.
Two other military officers are also regarded as suitable role models for the Bundeswehr. Two barracks in the Lower Saxony town of Munster are to retain their names: the Bamm and Schulz-Lutz barracks. Who were these men?
Peter Bamm served as a military physician in World War II, first in France and later in Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union. Adelbert Schulz was a brigadier general and commanded a division of the Wehrmacht. He was active in the invasion of the Sudetenland and Austria. He was awarded the Iron Cross in 1940 for his rapid advance in the French campaign and the breakthrough to Cherbourg on the English Channel. Schulz was also awarded the Knight’s Cross, first and second class. He received, as well, several awards for his military role on the Eastern Front before he died in battle in January 1944 in Ukraine.
Only one barracks is to change its name. The General Thomsen barracks in a North Frisian town are to be renamed the Südtondern Barracks. In World War I, Hermann von der Thomsen fought in the German Luftwaffe. The then-68-year-old played a leading role in 1935 under the Nazis in re-establishing the Luftwaffe. Despite being blind by this time, he was appointed Luftwaffe general.
The Junge Welt newspaper has reported that discussion about a possible renaming was not carried out at a number of barracks, meaning their names will be retained. This includes barracks named after leading generals who served under Hitler and then participated in establishing the post-war Bundeswehr during the 1950s. A possible renaming has yet to be decided at another seven Bundeswehr locations.
In its reply to a question by the Left Party, the government declared that any new renaming of army sites will be decided on location by the respective post commands.

US hits China, Russia with punitive sanctions over North Korea

Peter Symonds

The Trump administration yesterday unilaterally imposed sanctions on Chinese and Russian entities and individuals over their alleged trading activities with North Korea. The US Treasury’s announcement is a deliberate slap in the face to Beijing and Moscow after both voted earlier this month in the UN Security Council for tough new UN penalties on Pyongyang over its long-range missile tests in July.
The sanctions target six Chinese-owned companies, one Russian, one North Korean and two based in Singapore. Six individuals—four Russians, one Chinese and one North Korean—have also been hit. As a result, all of the individuals and entities will have any property and funds in the US frozen and will not be able to do business with US corporations, banks or citizens.
US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin declared that it was “unacceptable” for Chinese and Russian individuals and companies “to enable North Korea to generate income” for its weapons programs. While nominally acting to reinforce UN sanctions, Mnuchin’s sweeping statement effectively precludes any company from doing business with North Korea—well beyond the scope of UN resolutions.
Moreover, the US Treasury has not substantiated any of its allegations. Among those targeted are three Chinese companies accused by the US of breaching UN sanctions by importing nearly $500 million worth of coal from North Korea between 2013 and 2016. The purchase of North Korean coal was subject to an annual limit, not a complete ban until this month’s UN sanctions. Earlier this year China suspended further coal imports.
Coal sales are worth more than $1 billion a year for North Korea and represent a significant portion of total exports of around $3 billion. By targeting coal and other minerals, the US is seeking to cripple the North Korean economy and undermine the Pyongyang leadership.
Other entities hit by sanctions include Dandong Rich Earth Trading, a Chinese company accused of importing vanadium; Gefest-M, a Russian company alleged to have bought procuring metals for a North Korean company involved in weapons development; and Mingzheng International Trading, a China- and Hong Kong-based bank that allegedly provides financial services for North Korea’s Foreign Trade Bank.
In addition, the US Justice Department has filed suit against two of the companies, Velmur Management of Singapore and China’s Dandong Zhicheng Metallic Material Company, demanding more than $11 million over alleged money-laundered for North Korea.
The imposition of so-called secondary sanctions, that is, unilateral US penalties, has been under discussion in the US for some time. The US imposed similar sanctions in June on the Bank of Dangong, a Chinese financial institution, which it accused of helping Pyongyang engage in money laundering, and several other individual and entities.
The US targeting of Chinese and also Russian companies makes clear that Washington is exploiting the tense situation with North Korea as part of its wider confrontation with Beijing in particular. The supposed threat posed by North Korea’s limited nuclear arsenal provides a convenient pretext for the Pentagon’s military expansion in the Asia Pacific that began as part of the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia” aimed against China.
China has reacted angrily to the latest round of US sanctions. Its embassy in Washington stated that China opposed any unilateral sanctions outside the UN framework, “especially the ‘long-arm jurisdiction’ over Chinese entities and individuals exercised by any country in accordance with its domestic laws.” A spokesman called on the US to “immediately correct its mistake” and hinted at retaliation by adding, “so as not to impact bilateral cooperation on relevant issues.”
The US sanctions, which are aimed at forcing Beijing and Moscow to force Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear program, will only heighten tensions in the Asian region. They follow a series of reckless statements by President Trump menacing North Korea with “fire and fury like the world has never seen” if it threatened the United States.
Pyongyang responded by announcing plans to test fire missiles into waters close to the American territory of Guam but North Korean leader Kim Jong-un backed off last week saying he would watch what the US did before acting.
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson yesterday hinted at a possible path to talks with the Pyongyang regime. Speaking to the media in Washington, he said that North Korea had “demonstrated some level of restraint that we have not seen in the past” by not conducting missile launches since the latest round of UN sanctions.
“We hope that this is the beginning of this signal that we have been looking for,” Tillerson said, adding that “perhaps we are seeing our pathway to sometime in the near future having some dialogue.” He concluded, however, that “we need to see more on their part.”
Tillerson has previously made clear that any talks must be premised on North Korea’s complete abandonment of its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and existing arsenals. Pyongyang, however, insists that it will not give up its nuclear weapons while confronted with the continuing threat of US attack.
While Tillerson and other Trump officials have suggested that a diplomatic solution to the confrontation with North Korea could be found, the US military threat remains. The Pentagon is proceeding this week with major joint war games in South Korea involving tens of thousands of US and South Korean military personnel. 
Moreover, in the wake of a fatal collision between a US guided-missile destroyer and a tanker near Singapore on Monday, the top US commander in the Asia-Pacific warned against any attempt to take advantage of apparent weaknesses in US military operational capacity. Following the collision, the Pentagon ordered a suspension of all US fleet operations around the world to assess procedures and training.
Admiral Harry Harris, the head of US Pacific Command (PACOM), yesterday warned that it would be “foolhardy” for anyone to test the US militarily. His remarks, made at the Osan Air Base in South Korea, were clearly aimed against North Korea. Harris said that the collision did not affect the US military’s ability “to defend the [Korean] peninsula and our interests in the region.”