15 Jan 2018

Pangea Accelerator Program for African Entrepreneurs 2018

Application Deadline: 19th February 2018
Eligible Countries: African countries
To Be Taken At (Country): Nairobi, Kenya
About the Award: The Pangea Accelerator offers dedicated expertise to help your company reach full potential and connect you to capital and investors to scale your company. Apply before 19th February for a chance to accelerate the growth of your company.
  • Validation and Scalability: Get the skills and tools you need to validate and scale your business.
  • Mentoring: Tap in to a pool of experience and expertise from the angel investor and diaspora communities in Europe, US and Africa. Learn from succesful entrepreneurs, angel investors and experts.
  • Management and Operation: Learn how to run the daily operational activities of your business
  • Access investors: As a startup, having the right investment and competence partner is a crucial aspect of growing your business. At Pangeaa, we match you with best investors to accelerate your company.
Field of Funding: Fintech – Agribusiness – Green Initiatives – Education – Healthcare – and many more.
Type: Entrepreneurship
Eligibility: 
  • Impact Driven Early Stage Startups: Your idea is unique and scalable.
  • Pre-Revenue & Revenue Companies: You have either generated some income or in the process of doing so.
  • Potential To Create Employment: Your project will create jobs in your community.
  • Passionate Team: You believe in your project and work hard to reach your goals.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: 
  • Dedicated expertise to help you reach the potential in your team, business model and market strategy
  • Matchmaking to connect you to capital and investors to scale your company
  • Opportunity to get up to $50 000 in funding
  • Working with other people going through the same challenges makes a huge difference
Duration of Program: 3 months
How to Apply: Apply in the Program Webpage (see Link below)
Award Providers: Pangea, Strathmore University and @iLabAfrica

ACU Commonwealth Scholarships for Study in Low and Middle Income Countries 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 11th March 2018 at midnight GMT.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Commonwealth Low and Middle Income Countries
To be taken at (Universities): The following universities in Low and Middle Income countries:
  • Bangladesh – University of Dhaka, one scholarship available (all Master’s courses)
  • Botswana – University of Botswana, one scholarship available (all Master’s courses)
  • Ghana – Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), two scholarships available (all Master’s courses)
  • Ghana – University of Ghana, one scholarship available (all Master’s courses)
  • Pakistan – COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT), two scholarships available (all Master’s courses)
  • Rwanda – University of Rwanda two scholarships available (Computer Science, Engineering, Environmental Conservation, Medicine)
  • Swaziland – University of Swaziland, two scholarships available (Animal Science, Conservation Ecology, Crop Science, Family Nursing Practice, Horticulture and Midwifery courses only)
  • Tanzania – University of Dar es Salaam, one scholarship available (Agriculture, Economics, Engineering and Technology, ICT, Mathematics and Natural Resources courses only)
  • West Indies – University of the West Indies, one scholarship available (various Master’s courses)
About the Award: Association of Commonwealth Universities is currently offering 13 scholarships, tenable at ACU member universities in 9 low and middle income Commonwealth countries. For more information about each scholarship and to apply, click on the Scholarship Webpage link below.
The scholarships give talented students – who can be from any Commonwealth country other than the host country – the opportunity to gain a Master’s degree while developing new skills and experiencing life in another country.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Applicant must be a citizen of a Commonwealth country other than the host country (See list of commonwealth countries in link above).
  • Applicant must hold a Bachelors degree of at least upper second level.
Number of Awardees: 13
Value of Scholarship: The scholarships are fully-funded. They provide full tuition fees, a return economy flight, an arrival allowance, and a regular stipend (living allowance).
How to Apply: Interested candidates should click the Scholarship Webpage link below For more information about each university scholarship and to apply.
Award Provider: Commonwealth Scholarship and Fellowship Plan (CSFP).

DAAD: German Egyptian Research Short-Term Scholarship Program (GERSS) for Egyptian Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 15th May 2018
Offered Annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Egypt
To Be Taken At (Country): Germany
Type: Masters, PhD, Short courses
Eligibility: 
  • The programme is aimed at Master’s students, doctoral candidates and young postdocs.
  • Applicants must be enrolled at a private or state university or research institute in Egypt.
  • Applicants for a GERSS scholarship must have a Bachelor, Master or PhD degree.
  • Age Limits
    – Graduates: should not be older than 26 years
    – Medicine / Dentistry Graduates: should not be older than 29 years
    – PhD candidates: should not exceed 36 years
    – Post doc candidates should not be older than 40 years
  • Generally, candidates residing outside Egypt for a period longer than 6 months are not allowed to apply for GERSS
  • Candidates who have been granted the GERLS scholarship may apply for GERSS – at least – one year after returning from Germany
  • Applicants who have been rejected 3 times in the GERSS programme, are not entitled to reapply
  • Candidates from non-public universities will be limited in number according to the internal regulations between MHESR and DAAD
  • Applicants submitting dual applications in MHESR or DAAD programmes are kindly requested to inform the DAAD Cairo Office in writing
  • Candidates who received a DAAD/MHESR funded scholarship at a certain academic stage are not allowed to apply for GERSS, unless they change their academic status
  • Academic studies in musicology are offered within the GERSS scholarship; however instrumentalists can apply for the programme “Study Scholarship for Foreign Graduates in the field of Performing Artists”. For more information, please refer to the scholarship database (www.funding-guide.de)
  • Candidates from the field of medicine / dentistry can only apply for GERSS, if they intend to visit Germany for research purposes with no direct contact with patients
  • Applicants employed at the public universities or research institutes should fulfill the eligibility criteria of the mission Department
All applicants must submit proof of English language skills/abilities. The proof should be either IELTS (band 6.5) certificate or institutional TOEFL ITP (minimum score 550) or international TOEFL IBT (minimum score 80). Research projects submitted in German language in the fields of German studies, Islamic studies in German are exempted.
Please note: Post-doctoral candidates who can submit a proof that they have conducted their PhD degree in English language in the context of an international program could be exempted .
Selection Criteria: Selection will take place at the DAAD-Branch Office Cairo.
The candidates will be selected in two rounds. First, a pre-selection is a paper-based procedure which will identify the group of applicants who will be invited for the second phase consisting of a personal interview with the GERSS independent selection committee. Pre- and final selection of the candidates should be conducted according to, but not limited to the following criteria:
  • Excellent Research proposal
  • Scientific merits, including:
    – Quality of the proposal
    – Preparation and feasibility of the project
    – Quality of the acceptance letter
  • Excellent study achievement
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: This programme funds research visits to a research institute, a state or state-recognised private university in Germany.
Travel allowance for scholarship holders:
  • A lump sum will be paid for travel and an accident and liability insurance will be provided
Monthly scholarship payment according to academic status:
  • Post-Doctoral scholarship holders will be granted an amount of Euro 2.145 (two thousand one hundred forty-five Euros) per month
  • Doctoral and MSc scholarship holders will be granted an amount of Euro 1069 (one thousand and sixty-nine Euros) per month
  • GERSS scholarship does not include family allowances
Health insurance:
  • The amounts for the DAAD health insurance will be deducted from the monthly stipend of each scholarship holder
  • One additional insurance installment will be added and will begin 15 days prior to the arrival to Germany and end 15 days after the scheduled departure date to Egypt
Duration of Program: The scholarships are awarded for a period of 3-6 months.  Scholarship periods are not extendable
How to Apply: The application is only valid, when all required documents are uploaded on the DAAD portal AND submitted as one hard copy to the DAAD Cairo office.
It is important to go through the Application Procedure in the Program Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Award Providers: DAAD

International Monetary Fund (IMF) Internship Program for International Students 2018

Application Deadline: 21st January 2018
Eligible Countries: International
To Be Taken At (Country): Work is undertaken at IMF headquarters in Washington D.C.
About the Award: Interns are assigned cutting-edge research in macroeconomics or a related field (the exception being an internship in the IMF’s Legal Department), supervised by an IMF colleague. Fund interns work under the supervision of experienced colleagues to carry out a research project, and prepare a research paper. Papers may be presented to IMF staff at the end of the internship, and those of the highest standard may be published internally to the IMF.
Research topics are derived from the IMF work program—the host department’s needs. Past projects have delved into a broad spectrum of economic issues. A few of the 2016 and 2017 FIP research topics included:
  • Preferential access to credit: evidence from Brazil
  • Credit Demand and Supply during the U.S. Recovery
  • Climate change—a contribution to this analytical chapter in the October 2017 WEO
  • Impact of commodity price shocks on financial stability in developing countries.
  • Explore non-linear effects of oil price shocks on growth (Kazakhstan).
  • Spillover effects of ECB unconventional monetary policies
  • Impact of foreign direct investment and portfolio investment on gender inequality in developing countries
  • Systemic risk amplifiers for stress testing based on inferred networks
  • Survey literature on public sector BSA
  • Spillovers: measuring third party effects
  • Technology and income polarization
  • Carbon tax, structural transformation and inequality
  • Consumption and wealth in Italy
  • Debt sustainability, capacity to repay and other risk assessments
  • Productivity and volatility in Europe/Euro Area
  • Financing costs in sub-Saharan Africa—Overshooting or fundamentals?
  • Trade Integration in Latin America
  • Macroeconomic and structural policies and gender inequality
  • Bond trading: big data analytics
  • Evaluating post-implementation effects of the G20 financial regulatory reforms
  • Benchmarking policy frameworks in low-income countries
The IMF’s Legal Department is also offering an internship under this program. The successful applicant will be assigned research for the Legal Department and be supervised by a senior member of the department. In past years, the Legal Department’s FIP has had the opportunity to complete:
  • Analysis of the legal framework for capital controls under the European Economic Area
  • Research on the insolvency of non-bank financial institutions
  • Research on the legal mandate of the IMF in financial regulation
  • Cross-country comparisons of effectiveness of AML/CFT efforts
Type: Internship
Eligibility: To be eligible for the FIP, candidates must meet the following criteria:
PhD students
  • Must be within one to two years of completing a Ph.D. in macroeconomics or a related field and be in student status (i.e. must be returning to university after the internship). Typically, internships are sought by those who are interested in the IMF’s Economist Program following graduation from the Ph.D.
  • Be below the age of 32 at the commencement of the internship.
  • Have an excellent command of English, written and oral.
  • Possess strong analytical, quantitative and computer skills.
Master’s degree students
  • Must be in student status at the commencement of internship (not yet graduated).
  • Be below the age of 28 at the commencement of the internship.
  • Have an excellent command of English, written and oral.
  • Possess strong analytical, quantitative and computer skills
Number of Awards: Internships are offered to about 50 students each year.
Value of Award: IMF interns receive:
  • A competitive salary;
  • Round-trip restricted economy class air travel to Washington, D.C. from their university; and
  • Limited medical insurance coverage.
Duration of Program: between June and October 2018.  Internships are a minimum of 10 weeks duration, and maximum of 12 weeks duration.
How to Apply: 
  • If you are a Ph.D or Master’s student in macroeconomics click here to enter the IMF’s job application system, then enter 1701251 into the field titled “Job Number”.
  • For the Legal Department Internship: candidates must be within one or two years of completing an LLM, J.D, or equivalent advanced degree in law and below the age of 32. To apply for this internship, click here to enter the IMF’s job application system, then enter 1701249 into the field titled “Job Number”.
Award Providers: IMF

Holland Scholarships for International Students 2018/2019 – Bachelors & Masters

Application Deadline:
  • 1st February 2018
  • 1st May 2018.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: international students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA)
To be taken at (country): Netherlands research universities and universities of applied sciences
Fields of Study: courses offered at the Universities
About Scholarship: The Holland Scholarship is financed by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science as well as several Dutch research universities and universities of applied sciences. This scholarship is meant for international students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) who want to do their bachelor’s or master’s in the Netherlands.
Type: full-time Bachelors, Masters.
Eligibility Criteria
  • Your nationality is non-EEA.
  • You are applying for a full-time bachelor’s or master’s programme at one of the participating Dutch higher education institutions.
  • You meet the specific requirements of the institution of your choice.
  • You do not have a degree from an education facility in the Netherlands.
Number of Scholarships: not specified
Value of Scholarship: The scholarship amounts to €5,000.
Duration of Scholarship: You will receive this in the first year of your studies.
How to Apply: The deadline for application is either 1 February 2018 or 1 May 2018. Please check your specific deadline on the website of the institution you want to apply to.
Further information about the application procedure, the participating institutions and the specific deadlines is available on the website of the institution of your choice.
Check further instructions below.
  1. Choose a course and/or institution with the Studyfinder tool.
  2. Check whether the Dutch higher education institution is participating.
    a. Participating research universities
    b. Participating universities of applied sciences
  3. Check the selected fields of studies on the website of the Dutch higher education institution.
  4. Check whether you meet the application criteria above.
  5. You can start applying from 10th Jan 2018 onwards.
  6. You need to apply for the Holland Scholarship directly at the institution of your choice and meet their selection criteria.
  7. If you have any questions about the procedure, please contact the institution you are applying to directly.
  8. After the application deadline, the institution you applied to will contact you to let you know if you have been awarded a scholarship.
Scholarship Provider: Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science as well as several Dutch research universities and universities of applied sciences.
Important Notes: You can find the specific closing dates and the fields of study for this academic year on the website of the institution you want to apply to.

Hong Kong Politics: a Never-Ending Farce

THOMAS HON WING POLIN

Hong Kong used to be the can-do capital of the world. Few economic achievements seemed beyond the reach of its plucky people and savvy entrepreneurs. Its public infrastructure was a marvel. The place exuded unbounded vitality and irrepressible self-confidence. Everything worked. Facilitating their feats were the British, who ran a superficially benign and reasonably efficient colonial dictatorship.
Came time in 1997 to return the prime booty of the Opium Wars to China, the Brits left behind a quasi-democracy designed to be dysfunctional. Against Beijing-friendly forces were entrenched a formidable coalition of Beijing-haters and mentally colonized West-is-besters. Naturally, the latter have been discreetly supported by the Anglo-American Empire — a fact Hong Kongers are too “polite” to point out forcefully even today.
The latest reminder of the territory’s predicament came this week, when carelessness on the part of the new Justice Minister over illegal structures at her home gave anti-Beijing forces an opening to fan a public scandal. Incredibly, the incident was a bizarre rerun of the controversy that crippled C.Y. Leung politically as he took office as HK’s Chief Executive five years ago. Coming after a series of battles typically manufactured by the opposition coalition, the new tempest prompted Michael Chugani, a prominent local newspaper columnist, to write:
“North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has a nuclear button. US President Donald Trump says he has a bigger one. We in Hong Kong have a self-destruct button. Kim and Trump haven’t used theirs yet but we use ours regularly. We press it first thing in the morning to blow ourselves up.
“When I wake up every morning, I put on the news. I see and hear people talk about co-location, political persecution, politicised judges, police fury over the jailing of comrades, Beijing’s heavy hand, and lately even illegal structures – a long-buried phrase that has returned to haunt us. It’s always the same people repeating the same points, which pass for news.”
Billing themselves as “pro-democracy,” this anti-Communist alliance has paralyzed governance in Hong Kong for two decades with its relentlessly obstructionist behavior. Such sustained, slow-motion suicide has dropped HK substantially down the global rankings of human accomplishment, sparked deep social divisions, and revived among the middle class a desire to emigrate. Above all, the internecine conflict has disenchanted many young HKers, turning them into rebels without a cause. Politically, their loss of direction and hope has been channeled by the pan anti-Communists into mindless, know-nothing opposition to both the local government and the central authorities in Beijing, worsening the tensions. Meanwhile, during the same 20 years, China achieved historically unprecedented progress and prosperity — which bypassed HK almost completely, thanks to the faux- democrats’ bone-deep Sinophobia and tireless efforts to segregate the two.
The anti-Communists’ control of the key sectors of education, the legal system and mainstream media, plus the protections of One Country Two Systems, ensured they would continue their depredations without let or hindrance. The intensification of their antics recently has turned political life in HK into a never-ending farce.
Summed up commentator Chugani:
“Our first post-colonial Chief Executive was forced out. Our second was jailed. Our third was so loathed he couldn’t seek a second term. And now we have Carrie Lam, who expected the political honeymoon her predecessors never got but is instead getting her teeth knocked out. Some are already saying she is the second coming of C.Y. Leung.”

New Zealand spy agency illegally accessed immigration data

Tom Peters

On December 12, New Zealand’s government-appointed Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Cheryl Gwyn released a report on the Security Intelligence Service (SIS), revealing that for almost 20 years the internal spy agency illegally accessed personal information held by the Customs and Immigration departments.
This is the latest in a series of revelations of illegal activity by the intelligence agencies. In 2013 and 2014, whistle-blower Edward Snowden exposed that the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB)—NZ’s external spy agency—carried out mass surveillance of New Zealanders. The agency also spied on the Pacific islands, China and other countries, as part of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence alliance.
According to Gwyn’s report, between 1997 and 2016, under successive Labour Party and National Party governments, the SIS used a Customs computer terminal to routinely gather information on the movements of people entering and leaving the country. The number of people whose privacy was violated by this tracking has not been revealed. Gwyn states that “at the time there was no lawful basis under the Customs legislation, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Act, or any other legislation” for this type of monitoring.
The Labour Party-led government welcomed the report and used it to argue that there were now good “checks and balances” on the intelligence agencies.
Andrew Little, the Minister responsible for the GCSB and SIS, told Radio NZ on December 14: “I’ve made it clear to both the directors general of both the services, and the agency, that I expect them to be fully compliant with the law at all times. They are now, and the reason we have the Inspector-General is to make sure there is a good check and balance on those services complying with the law.”
Asked whether anyone would be held accountable for decades of law-breaking, Little brushed the question aside, repeating that the spy agencies were “now acting lawfully” with “good, strong oversight.”
These sentiments were echoed by the corporate media. An editorial in the Dominion Post declared: “Democratic society owes Gwyn a debt of gratitude.” It described her as “the public’s only real watchdog over the spies.” The New Zealand Herald’s David Fisher wrote that the discovery of the illegal SIS conduct was “a signal of the extraordinary change our agencies have undergone in the past five years.” The newspaper’s liberal columnist Bryce Edwards gushed that Gwyn was “the brightest note in the spy sector [in 2017].”
The notion that New Zealand’s spy agencies are behaving more democratically than in the past is ludicrous.
In 2013, in response to revelations of illegal spying by the GCSB, the National Party government changed the law to greatly broaden the agency’s powers, making mass surveillance of New Zealand citizens legal. The move provoked large protests throughout the country.
In 2017, the National Party government, supported by the Labour Party, passed legislation that widened the powers of the SIS and the GCSB and allowed the two agencies to work more closely together.
In response to Gwyn’s report, director-general of the SIS Rebecca Kitteridge stated that the Intelligence and Security Act 2017 “explicitly confirmed NZSIS’s authority to access the [Customs and Immigration] databases.”
In other words, the SIS is “now acting lawfully” only because the law was changed, with bipartisan support, to legalise anti-democratic surveillance methods that were previously illegal.
Far from being an independent “watchdog”, as the media and political establishment portrays her, Gwyn was appointed to her role in 2014 by the then-National Party government. Having spent some years in an anti-Marxist Pabloite group in the 1980s, Gwyn later pursued a career in the state apparatus, working as Deputy Solicitor-General during the 1999–2008 Labour government.
Members of the Labour Party and its coalition partners the Greens and the right-wing populist New Zealand First attended rallies in 2013 and 2014, fraudulently presenting themselves as opponents of the National government’s moves to broaden the GCSB’s powers. Following the change of government in September 2017, however, the 2013 and 2017 legislation remains in place.
The Labour government has stressed its commitment to the Five Eyes alliance with the US, and its readiness to support a US war against North Korea. It has given NZ First, a xenophobic anti-Asian party, the positions of Foreign Minister and Defence Minister. New Zealand troops remain posted in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
A witch-hunt against Chinese “influence” is underway, driven by NZ First, the intelligence agencies and the media. NZ First leader and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters has demanded an investigation into Chinese-born National Party MP Jian Yang, based on unsubstantiated claims that he is a Chinese Communist Party agent.
The NATO-funded academic Anne-Marie Brady, widely promoted in the NZ media, has called for the SIS to be empowered to investigate anyone in business, politics and universities with links to China. The Wall Street Journaland the UK-based Financial Times reported last month that the GCSB and SIS had raised “concerns” about the supposed “threat” posed by China.
The anti-China campaign, which parallels similar moves by the intelligence agencies in Australia, is aimed at aligning New Zealand with the already far-advanced war preparations by Washington against China and North Korea.
At the same time, the strengthening of the GCSB and SIS, together with the recruitment of more police and military personnel, is aimed at establishing the framework of a police state. New Zealand is experiencing immense social inequality, poverty and homelessness; the Labour government is preparing to confront and suppress the opposition to war and austerity that will inevitably emerge in the working class.

Malaysian opposition chooses autocratic Mahathir as top candidate

John Roberts

Mahathir Mohamad, the 92-year-old former Malaysian prime minister, was chosen on January 7 by the opposition coalition, Pakatan Harapan (PH), as its top candidate in this year’s national elections. If PH wins, Mahathir will become prime minister, a post he occupied from 1981 to 2003.
Prime Minister Najib Razak must call an election by August 24, but it is widely expected earlier. Najib heads the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the dominant party in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) government.
The opposition’s endorsement of Mahathir as its lead candidate is an extraordinary about-face that underscores its utterly opportunist politics.
From 1993 to 1998, PH de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim was Mahathir’s deputy in UMNO, also deputy prime minister and finance minister. In 1998, amid the political turmoil following the Asian economic crisis of 1997, Anwar fell out with Mahathir over the direction of economy policy.
Mahathir expelled Anwar and his supporters from the government and UMNO. When Anwar launched a nationwide campaign of protest rallies over government corruption, Mahathir had his former deputy arrested under the country’s draconian Internal Security Act. Held incommunicado, Anwar was bashed so severely that he sustained lifelong injuries. He was then charged, tried and jailed on trumped-up charges of corruption and sodomy.
Yet the PH delegates at its convention, held in the Selangor state capital of Shah Alam, voted unanimously on January 7 for Mahathir to head the coalition. If PH wins the election, Mahathir has agreed to seek a pardon for Anwar and step aside if that takes place. Anwar is due to be released from prison in June, but without a pardon will be barred from any political involvement.
The four PH parties consist of Mahathir’s United Malaysian Indigenous Party (PPBM), formed in 2016 after he split from Najib and UMNO; Anwar’s People’s Justice Party (PKR); the ethnic Chinese-based Democratic Action Party (DAP); and Parti Amanah Negara, a breakaway from the Islamist Parti Islam se-Malaysia (PAS). PAS was formerly allied with the opposition coalition, but broke away in 2015.
The integration of Mahathir and PPBM into PH was formalised last June after days of tense wrangling. The key issue was what position Mahathir would have. Some delegates had pushed for him to be a special adviser, but Mahathir insisted on a leadership post.
Mahathir argued the four parties needed to unite to remove Najib. He emphasised Najib’s involvement in the 1Malysia Development Fund (1MDB) scandal, in which up to $US6 billion went missing, including hundreds of millions that international investigators claim went into Najib’s personal accounts.
Mahathir declared that PPBM could deliver ethnic Malay votes from UMNO and PAS. UMNO has ruled over Malaysia since formal independence from Britain in 1957. It has pursued an aggressive policy of discriminating in favour of the country’s Malay majority in jobs, business and education at the expense of ethnic Chinese and Indians.
Mahathir remains a vehement proponent of this racialist New Economic Policy and speaks for layers of Malay crony capitalists that have benefitted from it. He ousted Anwar in 1998 precisely because Anwar was advocating the opening up the Malaysian economy to foreign investment that could have bankrupted such Malay businesses.
Nevertheless, during an opposition convention last June, Anwar intervened in the debate with a message from prison arguing that PH “should benefit from the position and role of Mahathir.” Anwar insisted that, in “amassing all the strengths in a team to go up against” UMNO’s BN coalition, it was “fair to ensure the participation of all leaders effectively.”
In the end, Anwar was elected PH ketu umum or de facto leader, Mahathir was elected chairman and Anwar’s wife and PH parliamentary leader Wan Azizah became coalition president.
At this month’s opposition convention, Anwar sent another message, read by his daughter Nuril Izzah, emphasising his support for the decision to nominate Mahathir as the opposition’s prime ministerial candidate. In part, this message sought to quell resentment and opposition within the opposition ranks.
The alliance with Mahathir is based on the crude electoral calculation that he can deliver a sizeable vote from disaffected Malays. DAP leader Lim Kit Siang, whose party had for decades been the target of Mahathir’s anti-Chinese chauvinism, heralded the formation of his PPBM as a “game changer”.
One DAP leader has calculated that at least 40 of UMNO’s ruling BN coalition’s peninsular seats are vulnerable. The convention on January 7 agreed to allocate the largest number of peninsula seats, 52, to Mahathir’s party, with Anwar’s PKR receiving 51; DAP 35 and Parti Amanah Negara 27.
At the last national election in 2013, the opposition coalition won the popular vote but failed to gain enough seats to form government due to widespread fraud and blatant gerrymander. Najib and UMNO were clearly shaken by the result and have used every dirty trick in the book to undermine the opposition.
Najib, following Mahathir’s example, had Anwar re-arrested in 2008 on bogus charges of sodomy. Anwar was tried and, after a lengthy legal battle, finally jailed in 2014. Najib helped engineer the breakaway of PAS from the opposition, and undermined the opposition’s control of several state governments.
At the same time, however, Najib adapted to the opposition’s policies, easing restrictions of foreign investment, and softening the discrimination against non-Malays. He also sought to undercut international support for the opposition by cautiously endorsing President Barack Obama’s “pivot to Asia” against China, including the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership.
When Obama visited Malaysia in 2015, he ignored the imprisoned Anwar. Washington’s ties with Najib have continued under Trump, who welcomed Najib to Washington last year and made no mention of the 1MDB scandal that wracked Najib’s government.
It was Najib’s economic concessions to the US that primarily lay behind Mahathir’s break with UMNO. Mahathir and his party remain deeply opposed to any policies that undermine the dominant economic and political position of the Malay ruling elites. Thus, they are hostile to the political program for which Anwar and his opposition coalition have campaigned. As a result, the opposition alliance is inherently unstable.
There is no doubt bitter resentment toward Mahathir in the opposition’s ranks. Significantly, after he was installed as prime ministerial candidate, the Selangor branch of Anwar’s PKR refused to sign a formal declaration that stressed “our unwavering support towards all declarations made during the convention.” Selangor is Malaysia’s most economically important state, producing 22.6 percent of the gross domestic product, and a centre of corporate support for Anwar’s advocacy of pro-market “reforms.”

US AFRICOM blacklists reporter Nick Turse as “not a legitimate journalist”

Eddie Haywood

Journalist Nick Turse, who has reported extensively on US military operations in Africa, was recently told that he has been deemed “not a legitimate journalist” by AFRICOM, the US military command which oversees operations across the continent.
The move is of a piece with the US government’s drive to silence critical reporting by alternative news outlets and comes amid the global effort to censor oppositional and alternative viewpoints on the Internet.
Turse explained in an article published by the Intercept on Saturday that AFRICOM officials began stonewalling his queries after he authored an article in July which documented torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces at a US base in Salak, Cameroon.
For several years, the Pentagon has been perturbed by Turse’s reporting, which has exposed the vast spectrum of United States military operations across Africa, most of which it wishes to keep shrouded in secrecy.
Turse related a telephone conversation in October with Lt. Commander Anthony Falvo, the head of AFRICOM’s public relations office, in which Falvo told him, “Nick, we’re not going to respond to any of your questions...We just don’t feel that we need to.”
When asked by Turse if Falvo believed AFRICOM did not need to address questions from the press in general, or just Turse himself, Falvo stated abruptly, “No, just you. We don’t consider you a legitimate journalist, really.” Falvo then hung up on Turse.
Turse noted several attempts by AFRICOM to stonewall his queries into US military operations on the continent in the weeks following his phone call with Falvo. During the course of his investigation into torture by US-trained Cameroonian forces, he stated that AFRICOM essentially ignored his emails and telephone calls.
Around 10 days before his call with Falvo and after several fruitless phone calls to AFRICOM by Turse to verify details in his July article published by the  Intercept, “Cameroonian troops tortured and killed prisoners at base used for US drone surveillance,” his call was finally taken by AFRICOM spokesperson Robyn Mack, who told Turse to proceed with his questions.
Bizarrely, Turse says that while in the middle of giving her his list of queries, Mack interrupted, “Hello, hello, Nick are you there? Hello?” as if the two had a faulty connection. Turse replied several times that he was still on the line, but after several moments, Mack hung up.
After several attempts to call back went unanswered, finally someone picked up the line. When Turse asked to speak to Mack, he was told that she “went out for lunch, along with everyone in the office.”
On November 15, several days after the first phone call, Robyn Mack answered, but when Turse identified himself, Mack again hung up.
Turse’s exposures have shed light on the Pentagon’s vast array of secret military bases and its operations across the African continent. In the course of several year of reporting Turse has sought to exhaustively documented the extent of Washington’s criminal drive to re-colonize Africa.
Since October, when five Green Berets were killed in an ambush in Niger, exposing the extent and scale of the US military offensive in West Africa, AFRICOM and its offensive operations across the continent have come under greater scrutiny.
With the blacklisting of a journalist who has exposed its criminal operations, the United States military is attempting to control the flow of information to those media outlets who toe the official line, such as the New York Times,Washington Post, and other such officially approved media organs which make up the corporate press on which the ruling class can depend.
The antidemocratic attempt by the US government to establish “genuine journalism” coincides with Washington’s drive to censor the Internet in coordination with the big tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Twitter.
The attempt to smear Turse as an illegitimate journalist comes after Google’s introduction last April of a new search engine algorithm which resulted in a decline in search results leading to sites with political views which are critical of the right-wing reaction coming out of Washington.
Various left-leaning and anti-war websites have seen a drastic decline in incoming traffic from Google, with the World Socialist Web Site suffering the most with a 75 percent decline in incoming searches. The Intercept has also experienced a noticeable decline in traffic generated by Google searches.
The attack on the democratic right of the American population to freedom of the press and access to information online should be taken within the broader context of the campaigns conducted against former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and journalist Julian Assange of Wikileaks, who have been condemned and pursued as criminals by Washington for exposing the crimes of US imperialism.

UK National Archives: Key government files “missing,” and documents on Europe withheld

Richard Tyler 

Some 1,000 files “on loan” from the National Archives to various government departments have “disappeared.” Officially, they are said to have been “misplaced while on loan to a government department.”
According to the Guardian, the government has admitted the loss, but neither the Foreign Office nor the Home Office are able to explain why files of serious historical importance have been taken, nor if copies of the missing documents they contain had been made.
The missing files are thought to include thousands of government papers dealing with critical chapters of recent history that can prove to be a major political embarrassment, such as the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland. During the 30 years between 1968 and 1998, British troops occupied the province and were responsible for such atrocities as the 1972 Bloody Sunday massacre, which cost the lives of 14 innocent civilians in the Bogside area of Derry.
The importance of the records held by the National Archive in providing evidence of government wrongdoing was highlighted in 2014, when Irish Broadcaster RTÉ’s Investigation Unit uncovered a letter dated 1977 from then-Labour Home Secretary Merlyn Rees to Prime Minister Jim Callaghan which makes clear that ministers­­—including Lord Carrington, then secretary of state for defence—had tacitly agreed the use of torture. “If at any time methods of torture are used in Northern Ireland contrary to the view of the government of the day I would agree that individual policemen or soldiers should be prosecuted or disciplined; but in the particular circumstances of 1971-1972 a political decision was taken,” Rees stated.
Also said to have “gone missing” are papers relating to the 1983 Falklands (Malvinas) war, in which the British government ordered the sinking of an Argentine ship, the General Belgrano, leading to the loss of 323 lives among the crew of the light cruiser. In 1985, a Whitehall whistle-blower revealed that the ship had been sailing away from the British-imposed “exclusion zone” around the South Atlantic islands at the time it was sunk.
The historical reach of the naked censorship is underscored by the disappearance of an entire file relating to the “Zinoviev Letter.” Published by the Daily Mail four days before the 1924 general election, the letter was supposedly sent by the then head of the Communist International to the Communist Party of Great Britain instructing it to carry out seditious activities. The letter has been long-recognized as a forgery, generally attributed to Russian monarchist elements. The intention was to whip up fear of social revolution to ensure the defeat of the minority Labour government of Ramsay—the first time the party had won office.
Maya Foa, director of human rights organisation Reprieve, said the loss of such government files was “deeply troubling and unfortunately follows a pattern we have seen before.” In 2014, ministers blamed “water damage” for destroying critical files showing the complicity of the UK in Washington’s rendition and torture programme following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and subsequent invasion of Afghanistan.
“Right now, they are forcing legal cases seeking to expose the truth about UK involvement in George Bush’s ‘war on terror’ into secret courts where the public and press are denied access,” Foa said, adding, “With a new US president openly supporting torture and other human rights abuses, the tendency of the British government to conceal and cover up creates a serious risk that abuses carried out in our name in future will be hidden from the public until it’s too late.”
In 2012, thousands of files previously declared “lost” were uncovered in a secret government storage facility in Buckinghamshire. These documents provide clear evidence of the brutal colonial regimes established by Britain throughout its empire. What remains, however, is just a fraction of the trove of colonial papers, with the most sensitive documents having been culled and incinerated to cover up the worst of the atrocities and criminal actions carried out by the British government and its local henchmen in the colonies.
The National Archives house more than 11 million documents going back over 1,000 years. The archives include the Domesday Book from 1086, and centuries of government papers and other public records.
Now, government papers that could shed important light on Britain’s relations with the European Union (EU) in the early 1990s are being withheld from release into the National Archive. The Cabinet Office has retained 13 out of 45 files covering sensitive issues such as the creation of the euro and the Maastricht Treaty negotiations, which lead to the European Single Market.
Labour’s Shadow Cabinet Office minister said there was a “pattern of obfuscation from this government, with vital information that could be key to our understanding of the current political situation being concealed.” People were entitled to ask why the government was “refusing to release significant dossiers from our recent history, some of which are of critical importance in connection with the EU,” he said.
Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable said the Conservatives—who were in coalition with Cable’s party as recently as three years ago—“have form on unnecessarily holding back documents related to Europe so that they avoid public scrutiny,” adding, it looked suspiciously like “they are trying to hide information that could be embarrassing during the Brexit negotiations.”
The comments from Labour and the Liberals come from parties who have substantial factions opposed to the dominant hard-Brexit wing of the Tories and who are supportive of remaining in the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union. The Liberal Democrats are formally committed to holding a second referendum on EU membership. This is the primary reason for their newly minted commitment to open government.
Defending the withholding of documents from the National Archives, a Cabinet Office spokesman said this was because “we have to ensure all files are properly reviewed and prepared before they are transferred, so that they do not harm national security or our relations with other countries.”
A subsequent letter from the Cabinet Office claimed that the numbers of withheld documents was diminishing, but still amounted to around 10 percent in 2017. But this stands in contrast with reports that of 490 files from the Prime Minister’s office due to be transferred to the National Archive, 100 have been retained, equivalent to more than 20 percent.
Other retained files that should have been released into the National Archives at the end of 2017 are thought to contain information on the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, which was blamed on a single individual, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi; the 1992 Scott Inquiry, which whitewashed the clandestine sale of arms to Iraq; the basing of US cruise missiles in the UK and the 1981 marriage of Prince Charles to Lady Diana Spencer.
The hiding and even destruction of documentary records shows that, behind the face of parliamentary democracy, the ruling elite zealously guards its dirty secrets to leave itself free to carry out further crimes.

Homeless deaths skyrocket in major Canadian cities

Janet Browning 

Homelessness levels have risen so sharply in Toronto, Canada’s largest city, that city officials have announced the creation of 400 new beds in shelters this winter. This move, which is entirely inadequate to deal with the spiraling crisis, came after Toronto reported a sharp increase in homeless deaths in the first nine months of 2017.
On any given night, 35,000 Canadians are homeless, including some 5,000 in Toronto and 4,000 in Vancouver. An activist with the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty told CTV News last month that meeting the demand for beds in Toronto would require making a thousand more available immediately.
At least 70 homeless people died in Toronto in the first nine months of 2017, an average of approximately 2 per week. The city’s medical officer of health, Dr. Eileen de Villa, reported that 57 were men, or 81 per cent, while 13 were women. The median age of those who died was 48.
Cathy Crowe, a street nurse, educator and activist who has worked in the area of homelessness since 1988, said the data doesn’t tell the whole story. A man decapitated by a train, another beaten to death in a bus shelter, others burned to death in a makeshift shelter or dead due to a drug overdose, women burned to death in a ravine or murdered on the streets--this is how Toronto’s homeless have died. “These deaths are violent. They are never natural,” Crowe told reporters.
The average house price in Toronto was $1.2 million in March 2017. There has not been a subsidized affordable housing program in Ontario since the New Democratic Party (NDP) provincial government stopped approving rent geared to income (RGI) units in the 1990s. The federal Liberal Chrétien government ended Canada’s subsidized affordable housing program in 1993.
With 176,000 people on the subsidized housing waiting-list in Toronto, anyone currently homeless in Toronto will continue to be so and that means their chances of living out their natural life-span could be reduced by as much as 40 percent, according to a study by Dr. Stephen Hwang, director of the Centre for Urban Health Solutions at Toronto’s St. Michael’s Hospital.
Based on the most recent available data, at least seventy homeless people died in British Columbia in 2015, a 56 percent increase over 2014, reports Megaphone Magazine, a non-profit group that advocates for homeless and low-income people. That is the highest number on record going back to 2006 and compares with 45 homeless deaths in 2014 and 27 in 2013. These deaths pre-date the full-scale eruption of BC’s deadly opioid crisis and the figures, from the BC Coroners Service, are likely underestimates. Even so, this equates to over one death a week. The Coroners Service deemed more than half of the homeless deaths were accidental or preventable, as compared to just 16.5 percent of those it reviewed among the general population.
The Coroners Service found the number one cause of homeless deaths in 2015 was poisoning by alcohol or drugs, for a total of 34, up from 13 in 2014, and the number two cause was natural disease. In BC, the homeless die on average between 40 and 49 years of age, compared with the average person who can expect to live 76.4 years. The findings also show a 114 percent increase in homeless deaths in the Fraser Valley region, up from 14 people in 2014 to 30 in 2015.
The Coroners Service statistics includes deaths of those who were considered “street homeless” and “sheltered homeless,” but not those who were staying in temporary accommodations such as a hotel, a correctional institution or a residential treatment facility with no permanent home to which to return. Deaths that must be reported to the coroner include all non-natural deaths and sudden and unexpected deaths of those not under the care of a physician; homeless deaths that did not meet this criteria were not included.
The average house in Vancouver now costs $1.6 million, forcing people to seek shelter in the outer suburbs and beyond. “If you were to go to the Wal-Mart parking lot in Abbotsford at 2 AM, you would see about 20 vehicles there and every single one would have one or two people sleeping inside,” said Jesse Wegenast, minister at Abbotsford Street Church. “We’ve definitely seen a demographic shift away from the stereotypical, street-entrenched homeless … and we’re seeing more and more single-parent families. We’re seeing more people coming out here from Metro Vancouver, coming out here thinking they’ll find something more affordable.”
The Metro Vancouver Homeless Count happens every three years and on March 8, 2017, volunteers counted 3,605 living rough over a 24-hour period. Based on this count, it was estimated that the homeless population had increased by 44 percent to over 4,000 people, with more youth, those under 18, and seniors, those 55 and older, living on the streets or in shelters than ever before. In Surrey, a young girl who aged out of foster care recently died in a tent.
Just 51 seniors were identified in the 2002 count, and 371 in 2014 out of an estimated homeless population of 2,777. In 2017 the count found 556 homeless seniors out of just fewer than 4,000.
The number of homeless who identified as First Nations people rose to 746 from 582, although they make up just 6 percent of BC’s population and just 3 percent of Vancouver’s.
The report said five people become homeless within Metro Vancouver every week and 80 percent of homeless people in the region have a chronic health issue, 49 percent have an addiction and 34 percent suffer from mental illness. The report said the need for systemic improvements to “effectively manage the crisis is urgent” and requires action from all levels of government, though it specifically called on the province to do more. It said the region’s homeless population has steadily increased over the past 15 years and 60,000 households are vulnerable to homelessness because they spend more than half their income on shelter.
More than 70 homeless camps operate in BC’s Lower Mainland. “Advocates point to a lack of affordable housing, as well as limited provision of harm reduction and shelter services in asserting that people experiencing homelessness in the Fraser region experience marginalization that makes them increasingly vulnerable,” the report states.
When David Eby was the Opposition BC NDP’s housing critic, the NDP tabled private member’s legislation calling for a poverty reduction plan six times. Before the 2017 election he said in an interview, “I think you’re going to see this election contested on who has the best housing plan as one of the key issues for Metro Vancouver.”
The NDP has been in power in BC since July, yet no new plans were made to shelter the homeless this winter. Instead, the new government has focused on boasting that its spending commitments will comply with the austerity financial framework laid down by the big business Liberals, who slashed public spending to the bone and handed out tax breaks to the super rich during their 16 years in power.
The death rate among the homeless population also underscores how thoroughly cynical and insincere the federal Liberals’ national housing strategy is. Rolled out amid much media fanfare in late November, the plan pledged to cut the homeless population in half over the next decade. Most of the funds included in the much-touted $40 billion “strategy” will come from existing programs or must be contributed from the provinces, whose financial resources are already stretched to breaking point due to austerity measures pursued by successive federal governments, including cuts to transfers for health care, education and welfare.
The housing strategy will also provide billions to private companies to build “affordable” housing, which is considered to be housing available at 80 percent of the local median rent price. With typical rent prices in Vancouver for an apartment standing at $2,000 per month, that means an “affordable” apartment would cost $1,600, well out of reach for many working class people.