25 Aug 2017

US massacring hundreds of Syrian civilians every week in Raqqa

Jordan Shilton

The US-backed onslaught on the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa is claiming hundreds of civilian lives every week, including dozens of women and children. US aircraft and troops on the ground are deploying indiscriminate force on a civilian center where an estimated 25,000 people remained trapped and a further 270,000 have already fled.
According to Airwars, which monitors air strikes by the US-led coalition in Syria and Iraq, 725 civilians have lost their lives in the two-and-a-half months since the Raqqa offensive began in June. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based monitoring group with ties to the anti-Assad opposition, reported that between Aug. 14 and Aug. 22 alone, 168 civilians died in US air strikes and shelling attacks.
The humanitarian situation is so bad that the United Nations appealed yesterday for a pause in military operations to allow civilians to escape. An official in Washington unceremoniously dismissed the UN’s plea, declaring that a pause would give ISIS “more time to build up its defenses and thus put more civilians in harm’s way” and “reinforce [its] tactics of using civilians as human shields.”
US imperialism is determined to consolidate its geostrategic and economic interests in Syria, Iraq and the wider region against its rivals, even if this means laying waste to entire urban centers and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians. While Washington’s official propaganda claims that the US wants to eliminate Islamic State, the principle reason for the ruthless assault on densely populated cities over the past year has been to ensure that US-backed forces gain control over strategically important regions of eastern Syria and western Iraq before pro-Assad fighters, backed by Russian air power and Iranian soldiers, do so.
An Amnesty International report released Thursday revealed that US ground troops, supposedly deployed to act as “advisers” to the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces, are indiscriminately firing unguided shells into Raqqa. One incident documented by the group saw twelve shells strike a residential building, causing the deaths of twelve civilians, one of which was a baby. “Whether you live or die depends on luck because you don’t know where the next shell will strike,” a resident told Amnesty.
Amnesty Senior Crisis Response Adviser Donatella Rovera said that the US-backed assault was helping create a “deadly labyrinth” for civilians in the city, who were coming under fire from all sides. It also accused the Assad government of bombing villages to the south of Raqqa.
Reports suggest that around 60 percent of Raqqa has been recaptured by the SDF, which is led by the US-armed Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG). But even in areas allegedly under the militia’s control, ISIS fighters have been able to mount counterattacks.
The horrific slaughter of civilians in Raqqa comes just months after US-backed Iraqi forces, relying on US air power, laid waste to vast swathes of the city of Mosul in northern Iraq. US warplanes repeatedly used overwhelming force on residential areas, frequently resorting to the dropping of non-precision-guided munitions against ISIS snipers. Some estimates place the number of deaths in the city as high as 40,000, and there have been widespread reports of systematic human rights abuses by Iraqi forces, including summary executions.
These vicious crimes against the long-suffering population of Syria and Iraq are war crimes and blatant violations of international law, which prohibits the targeting of civilians and the use of indiscriminate attacks in urban areas. They implicate not only the top officials in the Trump administration, including the president himself who has boasted about removing any restrictions on the use of military force, but also the government of Barack Obama, who became the first two-term president to wage war throughout his term in office, and launched the Mosul offensive.
The imminent prospect of ISIS being forced from its last major urban stronghold will not lead to a decrease but rather an increase in US military involvement in Syria. US and British special forces have been training Syrian Islamist rebels in the southeast of the country with the aim of using these proxies to take ISIS territory further north, rather than allowing it to fall into the hands of Assad’s troops. The eastern border region is of considerable strategic significance, since it would enable Iran to establish a land bridge from Teheran to Damascus and its Hizbollah ally in Lebanon. The Trump administration, which has demonized Iran as the chief sponsor of terrorism in the region, views such a prospect as intolerable.
An indication of the discussions well under way within US ruling circles is provided by an article entitled “Does Trump intend to thwart Iran’s ambitions in Syria?” published Thursday by Foreign Policy, which warned, “The president risks going down in history as the man who defeated the Islamic State only to make the Middle East safe for Iranian hegemony.”
Alleging that Israel, feeling threatened by the establishment of an Iranian corridor to the Mediterranean, the article’s author, John Hannah, who served as Dick Cheney’s National Security Adviser during the Bush administration and is now a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, proceeded to argue that Trump’s chief goal in Syria should be “preventing a fundamental shift in the balance of power in favor of America’s most determined enemies in a region of the world long deemed vital to US interests.”
The unrestrained use of Washington’s military will not be restricted to Iraq and Syria. On Monday, President Donald Trump spoke to an audience of soldiers in military uniform and boasted that full decision-making powers would be given to military commanders to determine when to use overwhelming force to “obliterate” enemies in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands more civilian casualties are inevitable in the impoverished Central Asian country, where hundreds of thousands have already lost their lives in the brutal, 16-year-old neocolonial war of occupation led by the United States.
Trump and Defense Secretary James Mattis have used no less inflammatory language in their bellicose threats against North Korea. After Trump warned that Pyongyang would face “fire and fury” from the US, Mattis left no doubt about the scale of the onslaught being prepared against Pyongyang when he proclaimed that a war with North Korea would lead to the “destruction of its people.”
The eruption of US imperialist violence in ever more bloody forms is a devastating indictment of all of those political forces which have sought over the past quarter century to portray Washington as the defender of “human rights” and “democracy.” The Democrats, led by the “liberals” at the New York Times, provided the necessary propaganda to justify the war in Iraq in 2003, the bombardment of Libya to bring about regime change in 2011 under the pretext of the bogus “responsibility to protect,” and the arming of Islamist rebels in Syria in the name of supporting a so-called “democratic” opposition. They were supported by numerous pseudo-left groups who went so far as to portray events in Syria as a “revolution” and appealed to the US and its European imperialist allies to intervene more decisively on the side of the “rebels.”
Last year, the corporate media issued incessant denunciations of Russia and the Assad regime for war crimes and violations of international law during their assault to drive US-armed Islamist Jihadis out of eastern Aleppo. The hundreds of civilians killed or maimed in the joint Russian and Syrian offensive pale in comparison to the tens of thousands massacred by US-led operations so far this year, not to mention the millions who have been killed as a result of the uninterrupted US wars of aggression over the past twenty-five years throughout the Middle East.
Precisely because of this fact, the major media outlets have deliberately sought to bury coverage of the latest events, giving as much space to the absurd denials of responsibility from the US military as they do to the damning findings of the reports from Airwars and Amnesty.
These findings have not stopped Thomas Friedman, a columnist at the Timeswho has propagandized for every US-led war of aggression since the 1990s, from continuing to glorify America’s military prowess. In a recent column entitled “From Kabul to Baghdad,” Friedman enthused over his visit to the US joint strike center in Irbil in northern Iraq, from where many of the rockets and missiles that have killed civilians have been fired. He witnessed US forces fire a 500-pound bomb at a building where ISIS snipers were based, and could barely contain his enthusiasm. “The screen rebroadcasting the F-15E’s targeting pod showed the bomb going straight down through the roof,” wrote Friedman, as if he was describing a video game.
“‘We have splash,’ said one of the controllers in a monotone as a huge plume of smoke engulfed the video screen.” All that was left of the target, Friedman continued, was a pile of “smoldering rubble,” a result that has clearly been produced many hundreds of times in the US’s brutal air war.
Over recent months, the Democrats have spearheaded a vicious anti-Russia campaign that has sought to pressure the Trump White House to maintain Washington’s bellicose stance towards Moscow.
The anti-Russia campaign has simultaneously portrayed the military, including Mattis, Chief of Staff John Kelly and National Security Adviser H.R: McMaster, all of whom are implicated in the war crimes of US imperialism around the world, as “moderates” and the “adults in the room” capable of restraining Trump.
The bloodbath being inflicted on Iraq and Syria, and the imminent threat of its expansion into Afghanistan, show how fraudulent such claims are.

24 Aug 2017

Amelia Earhart Fellowship for Women in Aerospace/Mechanical Engineering 2018

Application deadline: 15th November 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Women from Any Country
To be taken at (country): Any University or College offering Accredited Degrees in any country.
Subject Areas: PhD/Doctoral degrees in Aerospace-related Sciences and Aerospace-related Engineering
About the Award: Zonta International established the Amelia Earhart Fellowship in 1938 in honor of legendary pilot and Zontian, Amelia Earhart. Today, the Fellowship of US$10,000 is awarded annually to 35 talented women, pursuing Ph.D./doctoral degrees in aerospace-related sciences or aerospace-related engineering around the globe.
Offered Since: 1938
Type: PhD/Doctoral
Eligibility
  • Women of any nationality pursuing a Ph.D./doctoral degree who demonstrate a superior academic record in the field of aerospace-related sciences and aerospace-related engineering are eligible.
  • Current fellows may apply to renew the Fellowship for a second year and will undergo the same application and evaluation procedures as first-time applicants.
Number of Awards: 35
Benefits of Fellowship:
  • Fellowship of US$10,000 is awarded annually
  • The Fellowship enables these women to invest in state-of-the-art computers to conduct their research, purchase expensive books and resource materials, and participate in specialized studies around the globe.
  • Amelia Earhart Fellows have gone on to become astronauts, aerospace engineers, astronomers, professors, geologists, business owners, heads of companies, even Secretary of the US Air Force.
Duration of Fellowship: One year (current fellows can reapply to renew the fellowship each year)
How to Apply: The Zonta International Amelia Earhart Fellowship Committee reviews the applications and recommends recipients to the Zonta International Board of Directors. All applicants will be notified of their status by the end of April.
Sponsors: Amelia Earhart Fellowships are made possible by generous contributions to the Zonta International Foundation Amelia Earhart Fellowship Fund.
Important Note: Please note that post-doctoral research programs are not eligible for the Fellowship. Members and employees of Zonta International or the Zonta International Foundation are also not eligible to apply for the Fellowship.

International Symposium on China-Africa Educational Exchange and Industrial Capacity Cooperation (Funded to Tianjin, China) 2017

Application Deadline: 7th September 2017.
Eligible Countries: African countries
To Be Taken At (Country): Tianjin, China
About the Award: Over the past half century, China has been an increasingly important partner of Africa in education and training exchange and in industrial capacity cooperation. A central factor in ensuring that the cooperation and investments deliver on economic and social returns for both Africa and China depends on the quantity and quality of skills in African countries. Enhancing both how skills are delivered and the range and quality of skills will be a critical pillar for the economic transformation of African countries and the achievement of both Agenda 2063 and the global Sustainable Development Goals.
The number of scholarships and training opportunities provided by the Chinese government for African countries continue to grow. Yet, the effectiveness of the education and training programs, especially their contribution to the industrial development in Africa has largely remained unstudied. Key questions for discussions include:
  • How can African countries benefit from intensified social, cultural and economic ties with China?
  • How can China benefit from socially and economically sustainable investments into African economies?
The conference aims to integrate African perspectives on Africa-China cooperation in education/skills development and industrial capacity transfer, featuring presentations by African and Chinese scholars and officials. The conference will also bring together established and aspiring thought leaders on Africa-China collaboration, offering first-hand insights and unparalleled opportunities for networking and exchange.
Type: Call for Papers, Conferences
Eligibility: The Conference Organizing Committee invites proposals for papers from scholars, experts, decision makers and opinion leaders on the following themes:
  • Education and Industrialization: Lessons and Experience of China.
  • Industrialization and Human Resource in Africa: Demands and Supply.
  • China-Africa Industrial Capacity Cooperation: Achievements, Challenges and Future.
  • China-Africa Education and Training Cooperation and its Effect on China-African Industrial Cooperation
Selection Criteria: The proposals may explore the undermentioned sub-thematic areas that could be embedded within more than one main themes.
  1. Capacity Building to promote social protection interventions for enhancing access and retention in education, including Home Grown School Feeding and  Policy Support for Member States
  2. A paper that uncovers the engagements of China-Africa relation
  3. Internationalization of Higher Education and Research: Lessons for Africa; and
  4. Quality Assurance in Higher Education: What lessons can Africa draw from the Chinese experience?
  5. Forecasting for 21st Century skills. Challenges and lessons in skills supply and demand in Africa.
  6. Building Human capacity to unlock the Demographic Dividend in Africa
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: The Tianjin University Technology and Education will cover the costs for the participation of selected African experts.
Duration of Program: 24th – 25th November 2017
How to Apply: Paper abstracts (not exceeding 500 words) and a curriculum vitae should be submitted to the Association of African Universities (AAU) by 7th September 2017. The selection of papers for the symposium will be undertaken by the AAU.
Each papers has to stress on the points highlighted below:
  1. Addressing the main theme or subthemes as exhaustive as possible
  2. Concentrating on links to Africa–China Relation
  3. Draw applicable lessons from Chinese experience to Africa
The deadline for submitting final paper is 6th October 2017.
Award Providers: Tianjin University Technology and Education

Promotion of Think Thank Work on Migration and Socio-Economic Challenges in Morocco (Funded) 2017

Application Deadline: 10th September 2017
Eligible Countries: Countries in the MENA Region and Europe
To Be Taken At (Country): Berlin, Germany and Rabat, Morocco
About the Award: The thematic focus lies on migration and socio-economic challenges in Morocco. This can include, but is not limited to, questions regarding the integration of the informal economic sector, reforms of the education system, Morocco’s challenges as a sending as well as a receiving country of migrants, as well as links between smuggling, human trafficking, and terrorist networks.
The project’s objectives are:
  • to analyze pressing issues and developments in selected countries and the region as a whole;
  • to provide training to develop new as well as to enhance existing policy analysis and advice capacities;
  • to network with peers, political decision-makers, and senior experts to exchange experiences and increase visibility and credibility.
Type: Call for Papers, Workshop
Eligibility: 
  • The main target group are mid-level professionals from Morocco and Europe who work in the field of policy analysis and advice in think tanks, academic research institutions, or comparable organizations.
  • Applicants must have a background that is relevant to the topic and should demonstrate in their application how participating would benefit their professional activities.
  • The working language is English. Participation in both workshops and submission of a final paper are mandatory.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: 
  • The organizers cover accommodation and provide for travel subsidies based on participants’ country of residence.
  • Berlin workshop: participants travelling from Morocco may receive a subsidy of up to € 500, participants travelling from the EU one of up to € 200.
  • Rabat workshop: participants residing in Morocco are eligible for a subsidy of up to € 50, participants travelling from the EU for a subsidy of up to € 500.
  • Travel expenses will be reimbursed separately after each workshop.
Duration of Program: 
Workshop in Berlin: December 7–December 10, 2017
  • Two days of topic analysis and discussion with external experts and presentation of first drafts
  • Two days of training on policy-paper writing and research
Workshop in Rabat: March 15–March 18, 2018
  • Presentation of final papers to the group and relevant decision-makers
  • Two days of training on policy advocacy and communication
How to Apply: Applications must include:
  • completed application form
  • CV (max. three pages)
  • letter of motivation
Please send your application to kabis@dgap.org. An application form is available for download below this entry. Kindly note that only complete applications in English can be considered.
Award Providers: The project is funded by the German Federal Foreign Office and the Robert Bosch Stiftung.

University of Laval Masters Scholarship for African and European Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 15th September, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Students from African or European country (other than France)
To be taken at (country): University of Laval, Canada
Eligible Field of Study: Scholarships are awarded within the Faculty of Law, Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies,. Faculty of Forestry, Geography and Geomatics, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Faculty of Music, Faculty of Pharmacy, Faculty of Philosophy, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Faculty of Nursing, Faculty of Social Sciences and Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies.
About the Award: The purpose of this program is to promote academic excellence by offering scholarships to foreign students who are citizens of an African or European country (other than France*) and are admitted to a master’s program at Université Laval.
This scholarship of $7,000 per year is renewable once, subject to compliance with the faculty’s criteria of excellence and upon the research director’s recommendation and faculty approval.
Type: Masters degree
Eligibility:
  • At the deadline indicated below, must have submitted a complete application package* at Université Laval in an eligible first master’s program and have been accepted in this program.
  • You are a foreign student who is a citizen of an African or European country other than France.
  • You graduated from a public university accredited by the ministry of higher education in your country of origin. For private institutions, eligibility is determined when the file is reviewed.
  • You are registered full time for the two firt semesters in the program of study for which the scholarship was granted (winter 2015 and summer 2015).Number of Scholarships:
Number of scholarships: Participating faculties can determine a fixed number of scholarships to be awarded.
Value of Scholarship: $7,000 per year
Duration of Scholarship: Renewable once
How to Apply: There is no form to complete for master’s level scholarships. Recipients are selected using information from admission applications received by Université Laval. To be considered, candidates must submit a complete application for admission to the University no later than the deadline of the target semester (see application deadlines above).
Visit scholarship webpage for details to apply
Provider: University of Laval, Canada
Important Notes: Please refer to the person in charge of this program at your faculty to get more information.

Erasmus MOBILE+3 Scholarships at University of Porto 2018/2019 – Portugal

Application Deadline: 15th September 2017 (23:59 CET)
Eligible Countries: The 14 countries include Algeria, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Egypt, Georgia, Morocco, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, Thailand, Ukraine, United States, Uzbekistan.
About the Award: Within the 2 years of duration of the project, 144 scholarships will be granted to students and staff from the different programme and partner institutions, after the signature of an Inter-Institutional Agreement between the University of Porto and each one of the 44 partner institutions from the 14 countries abovementioned. The implementation of the project will be ensured through this website and the online platform that the U.Porto has been developing in the last years for the management of its projects.
Type: Short courses
Eligibility: In order to be eligible for an Erasmus + scholarship under this project, candidate
  • must be a student/staff from the institution which are a part of the project’s Consortium.
  • The MOBILE+3 project offers grants for exchange mobility. As so, all the students must be registered in a HEI and enrolled in studies leading to a recognized degree or another recognized tertiary level qualification.
For Undergraduate studies:
  • must be enrolled at least in the second year of higher education studies in order to be eligible to undertake an exchange period abroad.
For Master studies:
  • must have completed at least one semester at the home institution before undertaking an exchange period.
For Doctorate studies:
  • must have completed at least one year of studies and have already a research project.
For academic and administrative staff:
  • must work (full-time) at a partner institution of the project in order to be eligible to apply for a grant.
All applicants must receive the formal support of their home institution, through the issuing of a support letter (this documents is mandatory at the application stage).
Erasmus+ enables students to study or train abroad more than once as Erasmus+ students as long as the minimum duration for each activity and a total maximum of 12 months per study cycle is respected.
Number of Awards: 144
Value of Award: The MOBILE+3 project provides the following financial support to the grant holders:
  • Monthly allowance (the amount per month will depend on the mobility’s direction);
  • Round trip plane ticket between the grant holder’s home city and the host country;
  • Health, accident and travel insurance valid during the entire mobility period
Duration of Program: 
  • Undergraduate: 6 months:
  • Master:  6 months
  • Doctorate: 6 months
  • Academic and Administrative Staff: 7 days
How to Apply: After selection the candidates approved to the MOBILE+3 scholarship should also fulfill the admission criteria of each host institution.
Interested candidates should go through the Admission criteria and application instructions on the Program Webpage (see Link below) before applying
Award Providers: European Commission

Yousriya Loza-Sawiris Masters Scholarship for Egyptian Students 2018/2019 – University of Minnesota

Application Deadline: 19th October, 2017.
Offered Annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Egypt
To be taken at (country): University of Minnesota, USA
Field of Study: Master’s of Development Practice (MDP)
About the Award: The Yousriya Loza-Sawiris Scholarship is a fully-funded program for students seeking to earn a Master’s Degree in Development Practice (MDP) from the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, USA.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • ​Egyptian national
  • Hold a Bachelor’s degree or equivalent from a well reputed academic institution in a related field of study
  • Satisfy the entry requirements into the academic MDP program
  • Demonstrate excellent professional and academic track record
  • Demonstrate strong interpersonal skills (extracurricular activities/community work/entrepreneurial initiative)
  • Demonstrate inability to finance studies from own resources
  • While no specific experience or academic track is required, students with a strong liberal arts education background and sound quantitative and analytical skills will be best prepared for academic success at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
  • Previous coursework in mathematics, statistics, and economics is recommended
  • English language proficiency is required. Valid TOEFL or IELTS exam scores with a minimum of 600 (paper-based), 250 (computer-based), 100 (internet-based, minimum 22 on each section) on the TOEFL, or 7 for the IELTS.
  • A valid Graduate Record Exam (GRE) score is required. No specific score is required, however, Fall 2015 admitted students tested within average GRE Verbal Reasoning Percentile: 68% and average GRE Quantitative Reasoning Percentile: 54%
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship will cover full tuition, living expenses, travel and health insurance.
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course
How to Apply: An interested applicant should download the application and fill in all the required fields, then mail their hard copy application, and required documents to Newton Education Services.
Address: Building 4, Floor 4, Regus Offices, Arkan Plaza, El Sheikh Zayed, Plot 31, in front of Zayed 2000 Compound, Giza, 11728, Egypt.
Email: ylss@sawirisfoundation.org

Award Provider: Newton Education Services on behalf of Sawiris Foundation for Social Development (SFSD).
Important Notes: Please note that the Yousriya Loza-Sawiris Scholarship candidates must apply to, and be accepted at, the Masters of Development Practice (MDP) program at the Hubert H. Humphrey
School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, USA, independently from this scholarship application. Being shortlisted for the Yousriya Loza-Sawiris Scholarship does not guarantee acceptance at the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota.

Soraya Al Salti Masters Scholarship for Female Students in MENA Countries 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 31st August 2017
Eligible Countries: Egypt
About the Award: This scholarship, managed by Newton Education Services, offers a number of fully funded and partial scholarships for Arab women looking to pursue a masters degree in various fields, for up to two years.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Female national of the MENA region
  • Candidates must hold a Bachelor’s degree or equivalent from an accredited academic institution
  • Demonstrate excellent professional and academic record
  • Demonstrate excellent interpersonal skills (extracurricular activities, community development or entrepreneurial initiative)
  • A minimum of two years of work experience and/or significant community service-related activities.
  • English language proficiency is required. Valid TOEFL or IELTS exam scores with a minimum of 600 (paper-based), 250 (computer-based), 100 (internet-based, minimum 22 on each section) on the TOEFL, or 7 for the IELTS.
  • Depending on the field of study, candidates may be required to sit for the GRE or GMAT exam
Upon graduation, scholarship recipients are required to work within the MENA region and/or projects related to the MENA region for a minimum of one year.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value and Duration of Award: Full or partial tuition and/or living expenses coverage for a maximum of two years
How to Apply: An interested applicant should download the application and fill in all the required fields, then mail their hard copy application, and required documents to Newton Education Services.
Address: Building 4, Floor 4, Regus Offices, Arkan Plaza, El Sheikh Zayed, Plot 31, in front of Zayed 2000 Compound, Giza, 11728, Egypt.
Email: soraya.scholarship@newton-prep.com
Award Providers: Newton Education Services

Nuclear Apocalypse: Trump and Kim Should Not Hold the World Hostage

Ramzy Baroud

Not too far away from Seattle, Washington there are eight ballistic-missile submarines carrying the world’s large shipments of nuclear weapons.
The 560-foot-long black submarines are docked at the Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor, hauling what is described by Rick Anderson in a recent Los Angeles Times article as “the largest concentration of deployed nuclear weapons in the US.”
“If it were a sovereign nation,” Anderson wrote, quoting government estimates, “Washington State would be the third-largest nuclear-weapons power in the world.”
One is often haunted by this manifest reality, especially whenever a nuclear crisis between the US and North Korea flares up, such as the one which started late July. At the time, US President Donald Trump threatened Pyongyang with “fire and fury like the world has never seen before”, while Kim Jong-un seemed undaunted.
Americans are assured by their military power – both conventional and nuclear. Most people here are either not aware, or simply do not care, about the disparity between their country’s nuclear capabilities and the miniscule nuclear weapons program operated by North Korea.
Visiting Kitsap-Bangor early August, US Defense Secretary, James N. Mattis, toured the USS Kentucky and declared that the submarine is ready for action, if needed.
The nuclear load that the USS Kentucky alone carries is equal to 1,400 bombs, the size of which the US dropped and subsequently destroyed Hiroshima, Japan in 1945.
North Korea’s saber-rattling in recent weeks – which are a repeat of previous episodes such as in April of this year and twice last year – should be cause for alarm. But far scarier is the fact that North Korea’s entire nuclear stockpiles consist of 60 nuclear weapons, compared with 6,970 owned by the US, out of which 1,750 are operational.
To place these numbers in a global perspective, there are an estimated 15,000 nuclear weapons, worldwide.
While the North Koreans require a sixth successful test to put a nuclear warhead on an intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), the US had conducting 1,030 such nuclear tests, starting in July 1945.
Surely, one cannot excuse the foolish and desperate behavior of Pyongyang and its ‘beloved leader’. But the truth is Kim Jong-un is behaving in a way consistent with the legacy of his forefathers – paranoid dictators, desperate to survive amid global rivalries and an old regional war that has never truly ended.
Indeed, there is more to this crisis than Kim Jong-un and his unpredictable antics.
In mainstream media, North Korea is often referred to as a ‘highly secretive nation’. Such references give pundits and politicians an uncontested platform to make whatever assumptions that suit them. But the legacy of the Korean War (1950-53), which divided Korea and its peoples is hardly a secret. An estimated 4 million people were killed in that most savage war, including 2 million civilians.
The US and its allies fought that war under the flag of the nascent United Nations. It is not very difficult to imagine why North Koreans detest the US, distrust US allies and loathe the UN and its repeated sanctions, especially as the country often suffers from food insecurity – among others problems.
The North Korean leadership must also be following the development between Iran and the US regarding the nuclear deal signed in 2015.
While the two issues are often discussed separately, they must be linked for various reasons.
One of these reasons is that North Korea, too, reached several understandings with the US through mediators in the 1990s and 2000s to curb its nuclear program. In 2005, it agreed to ditch “all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.”
The issue was never pursued with the necessary seriousness, partly because the US requires some kind of threat to justify its military presence in East Asia, in order to challenge the rising Chinese influence there.
But the cost of that policy comes at a high price, as the nuclear menace is once again emerging, repeating previous scenarios and setting the stage for an all-out conflict.
Iran has no nuclear weapons. The nuclear deal it reached with the west – officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan for Action – required the lifting of most sanctions on Tehran, in exchange for the latter curbing its nuclear program.
However, following the agreement, a short-lived period of relative calm between Tehran and Washington ended with renewed hostility. US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, is pushing for more sanctions against Iran, prompting Iranian President, Hasan Rouhani, to warn that his country is ready to cancel the nuclear deal ‘within hours’ if new sanctions are imposed.
Rouhani dubbed Washington “not a good partner.”
Having also reached their own conclusions that Washington is “not a good partner”, the North Koreans seem determine to acquire the ICBM-class ballistic missiles, needed to miniaturize nuclear weapons to fit warheads. By achieving this disturbing milestone, Pyongyang would feel that it has a good chance to reach a more concrete agreement in future negotiations with Washington.
The latter, at least for now, is using the flare-up with North Korea to further advance its ‘pivot to Asia’, a thus-far failed process that began under the administration of Barack Obama. The motive behind the policy is encircling China with US allies and military hardware that would prevent the Chinese military from expanding its influence past its immediate territorial waters.
Certainly, China has been frustrated by North Korea’s behavior for some time and has, in fact, joined Russia and others to mount more UN sanctions on Pyongyang. However, considering that China fully understands that Washington’s behavior is largely motivated by its desire to halt an expansionist China, Beijing knows that the battle for North Korea is also a fight for China’s own regional leadership.
In a recent editorial, the ‘Global Times’, published by the Chinese Communist Party’s official People’s Daily had this message for both Washington and Pyongyang:
“If North Korea launches missiles that threaten US soil first and the US retaliates, China will stay neutral,” it wrote. But if the US and its ally, South Korea, take on Pyongyang and try to “overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so.”
While many in Washington focused on the word ‘neutral’, they paid little heed to the phrase “will prevent them.” China is clearly speaking of a military intervention, as both China and North Korea are still allies following a treaty they signed in 1961.
Both Trump and Kim are dubious figures, driven by fragile egos and unsound judgement. Yet, they are both in a position that, if not reigned in soon, could threaten global security and the lives of millions.
Yet, the problem is far greater than two unhinged leaders. There are seven other countries that possess nuclear weapons. They are Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, China and France. These weapons have only one horrific use.
If the intention is, indeed, to make the world a safe place, there is no need for anyone to possess them, for ‘deterrence’ purposes or any other. Neither Washington, nor Pyongyang, Tel Aviv or anyone else should hold the world hostage, exacting political and economic ransom in exchange for not destroying our planet.
Investing in such evil at a time where the world is already suffering from war, economic inequality, hunger and climate disasters, is the very definition of madness.

The Rise of the Killer Robot

Binoy Kampmark

“As companies building the technologies in artificial intelligence and robotics that may be repurposed to develop autonomous weapons, we feel especially responsible in raising this alarm.”
Open Letter to the UN on Autonomous technology, August 2017
Melbourne: Do you leave the gruesome task of killing, pulverising and maiming to robots?  The US Defence Department gave a portion of its report Unmanned Systems Safety Guide for DOD Acquisition (2007) to the possibility of designing functional unmanned weapons systems. Other defence departments, including the UK Ministry of Defence, also see the removal of the human element in the drone killing mechanism as a distinct possibility.
It is these points troubling those at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Melbourne, which opened with a letter authored and signed by 116 figures known for their prowess in the field of robotic and artificial intelligence.  Among the penning luminaries were Elon Musk, taking time out from some of his more boyish endeavours to get serious.  Serious, that is, about humanity.
Reading the words of the open note, oddly titled “An Open Letter to the United Nations Convention on Certain Chemical Weapons” (since when are conventions recipients?) is to be cast back into an aspirational idyll, thrown into archives of hope that humanity’s insatiable appetite for killing itself might be curbed:
“Once developed, lethal autonomous weapons will permit armed conflict to be fought on a scale greater than ever, and at timescales faster than humans can comprehend.  These can be weapons of terror, weapons that despots and terrorists use against innocent populations, and weapons hacked to behave in undesirable ways.”
For the artificial intelligence sage Toby Walsh, a salient figure behind the note and the 2015 open letter which first urged the need to stop “killer robots”, such weapons were as revolutionary as any since the advent of nuclear weaponry. Be aware of “stupid technologies” or, as he puts it, the stupid variant of artificial intelligence.
A central point to bringing robots into the old fray of battle is the notion that machines will be used to target other machines.  It is the view of John Canning of the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division. The people, in other words, are sparred the misfortune of death – except the clever ones who wish to continue targeting each other – while “dumb” robots are themselves neutralised or destroyed by other, similarly disposed weapon systems.
Even more direct is Ronald Arkin, who insists that robots can better soldiers in the business of warfare at first instance while also being “more humane in the battlefield than humans.”  The idea of a humane machine would surely be a misnomer, but not for Arkin, who contends that robotic platforms may well have the “ability to better adhere to the Laws of War than most soldiers possibly can.”
Both Arkin and Canning are merely fumbling over notions already hit upon by Isaac Asimov in 1942.  Robots, he outlined in a series of robot laws in the short story “Runaround” would not injure human beings, had to obey orders given by humans, except when in conflict with the first law, and had to protect their own existence, as long as neither conflicted with the first two laws.  Giddy stuff indeed.
These are not points being cheered on by Musk and Co.  At the beginning of an automated robotic creature is a potential human operator; and at its end, another human, with a moral and ethical dimension of such dire consequence that prohibition is the only safe choice.
The obvious point, seemingly missed by these figures, is that the nature of automated killing, the technological distance between the trigger puller and the destroyed target, is an inexorable process that continues the alienation of humans from the technology they use.
“We do not have long to act,” comes the cry.  “Once this Pandora’s Box is opened, it will be hard to close.”  But this box was prized open with each technological mastery, with each effort to design a more fiendishly murderous weapon.  The only limit arguably in place with each discovery (chemical and bacteriological weapons; carpet bombing; nuclear weapons) was the not-so-reliable human agent ultimately behind using such weapons.
The elimination of pathos, the flesh and blood link between noble combatants, was already underway in the last days of George Armstrong Custer and the Battle of the Little Bighorn. To win the battle, the machine imperative became irresistible. It was only a matter of time before the machine absorbed the human imperative, becoming its near sci-fi substitute.
Human stupidity – in the making and misuse of technologies – is a proven fact, and will buck any legislative or regulatory trend.  Some in the AI fraternity prefer to think about it in terms of what happens if the unscrupulous get hold of such things, that the line can be drawn underneath the inconceivably horrid. But even such a figure as technology investor Roger McNamee has to concede, “bad things are already happening.”
Ultimately, it still takes human agency to create the lethal machinery, to imbue the industrial killing complex with its brutish character. For that very reason, there will be those who think that it is about time machines are given their go.  Let the robots, in short, sort out the mess made by human agents.  But taking humans out of the business of killing would be a form of self-inflicted neutering.  Killing, for all its critics, remains a true human pursuit, the sort of fun some will resent surrendering to the machine.

Facebook, Youtube, other tech giants launch joint, state-backed censorship programs

Zac Corrigan 

Internet censorship extends far beyond Google. Recent announcements by Facebook and others indicate that virtually all the world’s largest tech firms, in close collaboration with governments around the world, are engaged in a coordinated effort to clamp down on Internet speech.
Following on the heels of the April 25 announcement by Google Vice President Ben Gomes (titled “Our latest quality improvements for Search”), Facebook Vice President Adam Mosseri announced an equivalent program on June 30 in the form of an update to Facebook’s own News Feed algorithm.
The Orwellian language of these two statements is remarkably similar. Mosseri’s memo, titled “Showing More Informative Links in News Feed”, states that “a tiny group of people on Facebook” are sharing “low quality content”, “sensationalism”, and “misinformation”. The updated algorithm will "deprioritize” these “problematic”, “low quality” posts in order to “surface” better content. (By comparison, Gomes wrote that “a small set of queries” are returning “unsubstantiated conspiracy theories”, and that Google’s new algorithm will “demote low-quality content”, “fake news” and “misleading content”, in order to “surface more high-quality content”.)
In other words, like Google, Facebook will no longer serve as an ostensibly unbiased platform to connect people and information, but will openly take on the role of gatekeeper, judging the “quality” of information and deciding what ideas will and will not be available to its users.
But even these measures are apparently too little. August 1 saw the first meeting of the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT), comprised of Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, YouTube (which is owned by Google) and Snapchat. This time, the companies set out to vanquish not the bogeyman of “fake news”, but rather “terrorists and violent extremists”. UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd and US Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke attended the meeting.
The June 26 memo announcing the formation of the GIFCT makes no bones about the program’s ties to imperialist governments, citing the participation of the European Union, the UK “and other governments,” the G7, the United Nations Security Council, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (a Washington think-tank connected to intelligence agencies), the Anti-Defamation League, as well as unnamed “counter-terrorism experts,” “academics and other companies.”
A major project of the GIFCT is its Shared Industry Hash Database. Using this tool, content that is flagged by one firm as “terrorist” or “violent extremist,” etc., is automatically censored on all the others. For its part, YouTube has deployed artificial intelligence to automatically flag “extremist” content on behalf of the group, with no need for human intervention. YouTube boasts in an August 1 blog post that “over 75 percent of the videos we’ve removed for violent extremism over the past month were taken down before receiving a single human flag,” and “in many cases our systems have proven more accurate than humans at flagging videos that need to be removed.”
The premise of this program is that terrorism spreads not because of imperialist war, and in particular the active funding and arming of backward groups by imperialist governments, but rather because people can be dazzled by mind-altering extremist propaganda on the Internet faster than it can be taken down.
Given that Google’s assault on “fake news” has resulted in the blacklisting of anti-war and socialist websites, there can be little doubt as to the real target of such “extremist” censorship. Indeed, the results so far of Youtube’s AI dragnet give some indication of what is to come.
Chris Woods, the director of the organization Airwars, which documents the effects of international airstrikes, told the New York Times that YouTube removed around a dozen of its videos earlier this month and threatened to remove its YouTube channel entirely. Middle East Eye (MEE) reports that several of its own YouTube videos have likewise been removed. These include drone footage of fighting in Mosul, where Airwars documented the deaths of more than 5,000 civilians as a result of US-led attacks between February and June of this year.
Journalist Alexa O'Brien, who covered the 2013 court-martial of whistleblower Chelsea Manning, told MEE that videos used as evidence in that trial have also been removed. (Some of the above-listed videos have since been reinstated.)
As private entities, firms like Facebook and Google are subject to zero public oversight, and in any case they can make no claim to be a neutral arbiters of information. They are connected by a thousand threads to the oligarchy and the military-state-intelligence apparatus. According to Opensecrets.org, Facebook Inc. has spent more than $8 million each year since 2014 lobbying the US federal government, and $5 million so far in 2017. Among Internet firms, only Google’s parent company Alphabet, and sometimes Amazon, have spent more. The $70 billion net worth of Facebook's 33-year-old founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg places him among the very richest individuals on the planet, alongside Microsoft’s Bill Gates ($84 billion) and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos ($81 billion).
It should also be recalled that Facebook, Google, and Microsoft, as well as Apple, Yahoo!, and others, were implicated in the massive state spying operation revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.
And yet, like Google, Facebook has taken on the character of a global public utility. The social media platform is the world’s third most-visited Internet site (after Google and YouTube) and it is linked to by more sites than any other. As of June, it has more than 2 billion monthly active users, despite being banned in China. It is a main gateway to news and information for a large percentage of the planet.
The roll out of these worldwide corporate-state censorship programs takes place under conditions of intensifying social, geo-political and economic crisis throughout the globe. Billions of people are searching for answers to the life-and-death questions of war, inequality and dictatorship. The suppression of oppositional viewpoints is an ever more crucial prop for a moribund social order—capitalism—which offers no progressive way forward.