16 Jan 2018

United Nations University IIGH Fellowship for Students in Developing Countries 2018 – Malaysia

Application Deadline: 4:00 p.m. (Malaysian local time) on 31st January 2018.
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: All. Applicants from developing countries and women are particularly encouraged to apply.
To be taken at (country): UNU-IIGH in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Eligible Fields of Study: Research topics should relate to any one of the following UNU-IIGH thematic research areas:
  • Systems Thinking for Urban Health
  • Governance for Global Health
About the Award: The UNU-IIGH PhD Fellowship Programme aims to provide an opportunity for candidates enrolled in a PhD programme to expand their intellectual vision beyond their scientific disciplines.
The PhD Fellowship Programme is open to candidates who are enrolled in PhD programmes in educational institutions around the world, and who could benefit from a period of up to 12 months at UNU-IIGH. With a view to strengthening capacity building, doctoral students from educational institutions in developing countries are strongly encouraged to apply.
Type: Fellowship/PhD
Eligibility:  
  • The Fellowship programme is open to candidates who demonstrate that they can contribute to the ongoing research projects in the Institute.
  • Applicants must have finished a PhD no longer than 5 years preceding the start of the fellowship. Language proficiency in English is essential. Applicants from developing countries and women are particularly encouraged to apply.
  • Applicants must be able to make use of the UNU-IIGH facilities in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to: (i) work on a project or projects assigned by the supervisor, and (ii) participate in other academic activities of the Institute while writing their dissertation. The fellows shall also participate in regular in-house discussions and seminars, as well as contribute to the research and writing of the UNU-IIGH Working Paper Series.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: UNU-IIGH offers a monthly stipend for the duration of the fellowship.
Duration of Scholarship: 12 months
How to Apply: Please submit a cover letter, indicating your interests and motivation to work on one or more of the areas of interest of UNU-IIGH.
Applications for 2018 fellowships are now open. The deadline for application is 4.00 pm (Malaysian local time time), 31 January 2018.
Applicants are requested to download and complete the UNU P-11 form. Please quote the reference number (2017/UNU/IIGH/FELLOWSHIP/94) and state “UNU-IIGH Postdoctoral Fellowship 2018” in the section “What post are you applying for?”
Please submit all the documents below to iigh-info@unu.edu:
  • completed and signed UNU P-11 form
  • cover letter outlining your motivation and how you would contribute to any of the Institute’s focus areas over the 12-month Postdoctoral Fellowship
  • an abstract of your current PhD research/dissertation
  • a sample of your recent publication (in English)
  • 2 references to support your application; one must come from one of your PhD supervisors
  • scanned copy of your passport details page
Be sure to state “Postdoctoral Fellowship 2018″ with your name in the subject of the email.
Note that only completed applications received by the deadline will be considered. We will acknowledge receipt of your application via email.
Award Provider: International Institute for Global Health (UNU-IIGH)

West African Research Association (WARA) Travel Grant Fellowship for African Scholars 2018

Application Deadlines: 15th March 2018
This round of applications opened January 15, 2018. 
Eligible Countries: West African countries
To be taken at (country): Any African country of candidate’s choice.
About the Award: The WARC Travel Grant program promotes intra-African cooperation and exchange among researchers and institutions by providing support to African scholars and graduate students for research visits to other institutions on the continent
Type: Research Grants
Eligibility: This competition is open only to West African nationals, with preference given to those affiliated with West African colleges, universities, or research institutions.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Grants: The WARC Travel Grant provides travel costs up to $1,500 and a stipend of $1,500. Travel grant funds may be used to:
  1. attend and present papers at academic conferences relevant to the applicant’s field of research;
  2. visit libraries or archives that contain resources necessary to the applicant’s current academic work;
  3. engage in collaborative work with colleagues at another institution;
  4. travel to a research site.
Duration of Grants:  Between June 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 for the  15th March 2018 deadline
How to Apply: All applications must be submitted online here
It is important to go through Application requirements before applying.
Award Provider: Funding for WARA’s Fellowship Program is provided by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the US Department of State through a grant from the Council of American Overseas Research Centers.
Important Notes: Please note: this competition is open only to West African nationals eligible for non-immigrant visas to the U.S. WARC Travel Grantees must agree in writing to submit to the WARC Library in Dakar two copies of their dissertation/thesis, articles, and all other publications arising from the research funded through this grant. They must also agree to make public presentations on their research to 1) their academic institution, and 2) their local communities and to submit reports on these to WARA.
Please note that late & incomplete applications will not be considered.

Monash University South Africa Scholarship for Undergraduate Students in Africa 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 30th April 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: These scholarships are awarded on the basis of academic merit and are available to South African and international students.
To be taken at (country): South Africa
Eligible Field of Study: All subjects offered by the university
About the Award: Monash scholarships provide learning opportunities for the highest achieving students, as well as those experiencing some form of disadvantage (financial hardship). Scholarships are offered to students to encourage and reward academic excellence in previous studies.
Type: Undergraduate Taught
Eligibility: To be eligible for a Monash South Africa scholarship, candidate must:
  • Be enrolled or have received an offer to enroll as a full-time student at Monash South Africa in an undergraduate course of study leading to a higher education award;
  • Not be a recipient of any other financial support award;
  • Be studying Year 12 or equivalent (South Africa citizen) or be studying in the final year of secondary school or equivalent (international);
  • or Be a current Monash South Africa student and have completed a minimum of one semester of study at Monash South Africa.
Number of Awardees: Not stated
Value of Scholarship: A total of 100% of your annual tuition and residence 4 fees. The award does not cover textbooks, stationery, living expenses or any traveling costs. Payments are in the form of an automated credit note to your tuition fee account after the release of your unit results. No cash is transferred to the students’ personal bank account.
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course
How to Apply: To be eligible for scholarships, candidates must first be accepted into their course at Monash South Africa. Candidates must:
  • Complete the Application for Monash South Africa Scholarship form (pdf, 73kb) – The forms can also be obtained from the Student Services Centre
  • Submit their application, along with any relevant documentation, by 15th November for Semester 1 and 30th April for Semester 2.
Award Provider: Monash University South Africa
Important Notes: Scholarships do not cover other costs such as accommodation, travel and textbooks. Scholarships are renewable each year, provided that students maintain a high academic achievement. At the end of each year, the Bursary and Scholarships Committee will assess students’ performance and determine whether they are eligible to continue to receive the scholarship.

University of British Columbia Four Year Doctoral Fellowship (4YF) for International Students 2018/2019

Application Deadline: No application deadline
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Canada, Permanent Resident, International
To be taken at (country): Canada
Type: Doctoral
Eligibility: Four Year Fellowships may be held by domestic and international students. In general, the fellowships are offered to students beginning their first year of PhD, DMA, or MDPhD studies, but may be offered to continuing students. 4YF funding may be offered for up to four years, but the duration of funding may be less in some circumstances (please refer to the 4YF Guidelines for details). In all cases, funding is subject to satisfactory academic progress.
Students holding the following Tri-Agency awards automatically become 4YF designates: Vanier Scholarships, Doctoral Canada Graduate Scholarships (CGSD), CIHR Doctoral Research Awards, NSERC Doctoral Postgraduate Scholarships (PGSD), and SSHRC Doctoral Fellowships. Doctoral students who obtain Tri-Agency scholarships may be eligible for 4YF tuition coverage and will receive 4YF stipend and tuition support once their external scholarship funding ends, until four years after the external award start date or until the end of their 5th year in Doctoral program, whichever comes first.
Other major external scholarship winners who are selected as 4YF designates may be eligible for 4YF tuition coverage and will receive 4YF stipend and tuition support once their external scholarship funding ends, until four years after the 4YF start date or until the end of their 5th year in Doctoral program, whichever comes first.
Selection Criteria: Selection based on academic excellence, upon the recommendation of the graduate program.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: $18,200 per year plus tuition for up to four years of their Doctoral studies.
How to Apply: To be considered for Four Year Fellowship funding, students submit an application for admission to the appropriate graduate program at UBC.
Award Provider: University of British Columbia

Microsoft Airband Grant Initiative (fund to overcome barriers to affordable internet access) 2018

Application Deadline: 31st January 2018
Eligible Countries: All
About the Award: Internet connectivity is an increasingly critical part of accessing a better education, jobs and health care, and in participating in the 21st century economy. Yet, with more than half of the world’s population lacking internet connectivity, often in rural and other underserved communities, there is still a long road ahead of us.
That’s why we’re pleased to announce that today Microsoft has opened its third annual call for applications to the Microsoft Airband Grant Fund. The grant fund seeks to spark innovation to overcome barriers to affordable internet access, through supporting high-potential, early-stage startups creating innovative new technologies, services and business models. This year Microsoft is taking a keen interest in solutions enabling key verticals such as agriculture, education, healthcare and small business.
The grant fund is an integral part of Microsoft’s Airband initiative, which aims to extend broadband access across the United States and, ultimately, connectivity around the globe. To that end, we are collaborating with internet access and off-grid energy access providers, as well as other private and public-sector entities, on practical, high-impact and scalable approaches to help close the digital divide. The grant fund complements, and feeds into these efforts, as we know that innovation happens at every level – from the largest corporations to an early stage startup with an idea.
Type: Grants, Entrepreneurship
Eligibility: 
  • Grant fund applicants must be early stage internet and energy startups.
  • Applicants must be commercial organizations with at least two full-time employees, have a prototype of a working solution and have preferably paying customers.
  • These solutions ideally combine new cloud services and applications, low-cost forms of internet connectivity, and new payment mechanisms designed for consumers and smaller businesses in underserved markets.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: Grantees receive cash investments, access to technology, business development support, mentoring and great networking opportunities.
How to Apply: Applications may be submitted through midnight Jan. 31, 2018 U.S. Pacific Standard Time.
Award Providers: Microsoft

Austrian Government OeAD Ernst Mach Follow-up Grants for Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 
  • 1st February 2018
  • 1st September, 2018
Eligible Field of Study: Natural Sciences, Technical Sciences, Human Medicine, Health Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, Arts.
About the Award: Applications are open to postdocs who are pursuing research or teaching at a higher education institution/university in a Non-European developing country and who were in receipt of a grant in Austria which was administered by the OeAD-GmbH (formerly ÖAD).
At the time of taking up the grant at least 5 years must have passed since the last scholarship-supported study or research stay in Austria.
Targets
• to promote scientific secondary growth
• to promote scientific cooperation
• to build a sustainable network of academics with relation to Austria
Eligible Countries: See list below
To be taken at (country): Austria
Type: Research Grants PhD
Eligibility:
  • Maximum age: 50 years
  • For the application deadline February 1, 2018: Born on or after February 1, 1968
  • For the application deadline September 1, 2018: Born on or after September 1, 1968
  • Applicants must not have studied/pursued research/pursued academic work in Austria in the last six months before taking up the grant.
  • Grants in this programme can only be applied for every 5 years
Selecion Criteria: During the selection process the following criteria are examined and assessed:
• Purpose of your stay
• Why did you choose the specific target institution in Austria?
• Added value of the stay for the partner countries concerned (establishment and/or continuation of institutional cooperation)
• Prior teaching and research activities
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Grant: 
  • Monthly grant
  • Accident and health insurance If necessary.
  • Accommodation
  • Scholarship holders will receive a travel costs subsidy
Duration of Grant: 1 to 3 months
Eligible Countries: Afghanistan; Algeria; American Samoa; Angola; Antigua and Barbuda; Argentina; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Bangladesh; Belize; Benin; Bhutan; Bolivia; Botswana; Brazil; Burkina FasoBurundi; Cabo Verde; Cambodia; CameroonCentral African RepublicChad; Chile; China; Colombia; Comoros; CongoCongo – Democratic Republic of the; Cook Islands; Costa Rica; Cote D’Ivoire; Cuba; Djibouti; Dominica; Dominican Republic; Ecuador; Egypt; El Salvador; Equatorial GuineaEritreaEthiopia; Fiji; GabonGambia; Georgia; Ghana; Grenada; Guatemala; GuineaGuinea-Bissau; Guyana; Haiti; Honduras; India; Indonesia; Iran – Islamic Republic of; Iraq; Jamaica; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kenya; Kiribati; Korea – Democratic People’s Republic of; Kyrgyzstan; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Lebanon; LesothoLiberiaLibyaMadagascarMalawi; Malaysia; Maldives; Mali; Marshall Islands; MauritaniaMauritius; Mexico; Micronesia – Federated States of; Mongolia; Montserrat; MoroccoMozambique; Myanmar; Namibia; Nauru; Nepal; Nicaragua; NigerNigeria; Niue; Pakistan; Palau; Panama; Papua New Guinea; Paraguay; Peru; Philippines; Rwanda; Saint Helena; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Sao Tome and Principe; SenegalSeychellesSierra Leone; Solomon Islands; SomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Sudan; Sri Lanka; Sudan; Suriname; Swaziland; Syrian Arab Republic; Tajikistan; Tanzania – United Rebublic of; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Togo; Tokelau; Tonga; Tunisia; Turkmenistan; Tuvalu; Uganda; Uruguay; Uzbekistan; Vanuatu; Venezuela; Viet Nam; Wallis and Futuna; West Bank and Gaza Strip; Yemen; ZambiaZimbabwe.
How to Apply: Applications must be submitted at “www.scholarships.at“. Only online at www.scholarships.at. A hardcopy application is NOT possible.
The following documents have to be uploaded together with the online application at www.scholarships.at:
• Consent of the academic partner in Austria
• Scan of your passport (page with the name and photo)
• Proof of employment by the home institution
• Curriculum Vitae
• Scan of university graduation certificate of PhD or doctoral studies
Award Provider: Austrian Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economics – BMWFW
Important Notes: The recipients of grants will get the grant contract (Letter of Award and Letter of Acceptance) from the OeAD-GmbH/ICM. The contract covers the following aspects: Start and end dates of the grant; monthly grant rate; grant payment modalities (including a possible travel cost subsidy); compulsory presence at the place of study; performance record; data protection; repayment requirements.

Mass protests in Peru over pardoning of Fujimori

Cesar Uco

President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski’s (PPK) “humanitarian pardon” of former President Alberto Fujimori, who had been serving a 25-year sentence for crimes against humanity has unleashed a wave of demonstrations.
According to a poll, 78 percent of Peruvians believe that the pardon, which came only three days after Kuczynski survived a Congressional impeachment vote, was the result of a corrupt political deal. Their opinion is bolstered by revelations that on December 11—just four days before Congress by large majority called for the impeachment vote—Fujimori submitted his request for pardon and on December 24, Kuczynski granted it.
During the last week, multiple demonstrations were held against the pardon throughout the country, with as many as 40,000 joining a march in Lima.
In the provinces, the reaction has been similar. One of the most significant marches took place in Ayacucho—the epicenter of the dirty war waged during the 1980s and 1990s against the Maoist guerrilla organization Shining Path. Ayacuchanos, including members of the National Association of Relatives of Peru’s Kidnapped, Detained and Disappeared, marched carrying signs reading: “Peru does not forget, Fujimori never again,” “Down with the pardon! Fujimori must return to prison,” and “With impunity there is no dialogue or reconstruction.”
In Cusco, more than 5,000 protesters marched. The demonstrators doused an effigy of PPK dressed as Uncle Sam (the icon of US imperialism) with gasoline and set it ablaze, along with a giant mockup of the Peruvian constitution. The march was organized by the construction guild and the General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP).
In Puno, protesters shouted: “Urgent, urgent, new elections! Urgent, urgent, new president!”
In Moquegua, hundreds of citizens marched through the streets in rejection of the ex-dictator’s pardon. They asked for Kuczynski’s resignation and new general elections. Several workers’ organizations participated, among them, the CGTP, Sutep, Suter, the Civil Construction Workers Union and others.
In Tacna, around a thousand people formed a Unitary Command of Struggle and marched in the center of the city. Ten labor and human rights organizations supported the mobilization. The protesters called for Kuczynski’s resignation. They mocked the name the government gave the year 2018 (“Year of Reconciliation”), an obvious reference to the illegal pardoning.
In the Amazon city of Iquitos, several guilds, student groups and the so-called “apus” of different native communities participated in the “March against the Fujimorist coup.”
Meanwhile, the CGTP has called a national march for January 21 on the demand for new elections. The aim of the trade union federation is to channel the growing popular anger over government corruption, the Fujimori pardon and the continuing growth of social inequity back into the framework of bourgeois politics.
Some 5,000 supporters of Fujimori and his party (Fuerza Popular)—which is led by his daughter Keiko—held one march supporting the pardon on January 12 in the Campo de Marte park in downtown Lima. They labeled it a “March for Peace and Reconciliation” and marched through several streets of downtown Lima. Fujimori’s son and Keiko’s brother Kenji—who was reportedly the main behind-the-scenes promoter of the pardon—led the pro-pardon march. Thirty buses were used to bring people into the capital for the pro-pardon march.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights is set to meet on February 2 in Costa Rica on the Fujimori pardon, having denied a request by the ex-president’s attorney to appear on his behalf. The main point under discussion will be whether President Kuczynski is complying with the sentences on human rights violations meted out against Fujimori for his role in the massacres carried out in Barrios Altos and La Cantuta in the early 1990s. A pronouncement from the commission is expected one week after it meets in Costa Rica.
The pardon has unleashed an internal crisis within Fuerza Popular (FP), the party that upholds fujimorismo and that has an absolute majority in the nation’s congress. It is known that Keiko, Alberto’s daughter, fears being charged for having received money for her electoral campaign from the Brazilian mega-builder Odebrecht, involved in the sprawling Lava Jato corruption scandal that has implicated politicians throughout the continent in multi-billion-dollar bribery schemes. She also fears that her father’s release will undermine her almost absolute control over the FP.
Her brother Kenji sought his father’s freedom because he himself has presidential aspirations. His opposition to his sister has led to two suspensions from the Fujimorist bloc, one of 60 days and the second, still in force, of 120 days. A third censorship would lead to the expulsion of Kenji from the party.
Having survived impeachment, PPK has announced a new cabinet under the leadership of Prime Minister Mercedes Araoz. Referred to by the president as a “cabinet of reconciliation,” it includes nine ministerial changes. Among the new ministers are two members of the APRA party, both of whom have been expelled from the party.
The ministerial changes were necessary due to mass resignations of ministers and presidential advisors in protest over the pardon. Others refused to serve in the cabinet, an indication of diminishing support for Kuczynski among even his own circle of technocrats and entrepreneurs.
For her part, the representative of the bourgeois left, Veronika Mendoza, made statements revealing her overriding commitment to maintaining national stability in which she spoke of defending “the fatherland.”
The crisis of the Kuczynski is part of a deepening crisis of bourgeois rule in Peru that is increasingly threatening to undermine the country’s political-economic outlook for 2018, creating conditions for a resurgence of class struggle.

UK: Carillion collapse threatens jobs and pensions, exposing plunder of social assets

Julie Hyland

Carillion, Britain’s second largest building company and a major government contractor, went into liquidation Monday.
The jobs and pensions of 20,000 workers it employed in the UK (and a further 23,000 internationally) are at risk, along with those of tens of thousands of subcontractors and small businesses. With its significant involvement in the public sector, key projects have been placed in jeopardy.
Carillion was responsible for delivering 32,000 school meals daily, managing nearly 9,000 school buildings, and providing services for 11,800 hospital beds, 200 operating theatres and 50 prisons.
Its construction arm was responsible for building maintenance at the spy centre, GCHQ, and the British military’s Permanent Joint Headquarters. Key building projects include the £1.4 billion contract (along with partners Kier Group and Eiffage) on the HS2 high-speed rail project, the largest infrastructure contract in Europe, the Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route and the new Royal Liverpool University Hospital.
Carillion entered liquidation after emergency talks with the government over the weekend failed. Its lenders include 18 banks, which were being coordinated by Barclays, Santander, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland and HSBC, and 14 pensions’ funds, of which 13 are in the UK.
The banks had refused to provide £300 million of new funding to the firm without the back-up of taxpayers’ cash. In a repeat of the “too big to fail” mantra of 2008, when the financial institutions were bailed out to the tune of almost £1 trillion, Carillion’s lenders argued the firm was too integral to the public sector to be allowed to fold. They not only sought taxpayer guarantees for the company’s debt, but also to offload pension liabilities onto the state-run Pension Protection Fund.
The company’s shares had crashed by 94 percent, as its market capitalisation collapsed from £2 billion to just £61 million. With a £650 million pension deficit (estimated to actually be in excess of £800 million) and £586.5 million debt (in 2016), the firm was worthless.
The government decided that it was too politically risky to be seen directly stumping up the guarantees demanded by the banks—especially given that the company secretly took measures to protect £4 million bonuses of executives prior to details of the financial crisis breaking.
According to the Daily Mail, pay policy wording was changed earlier last year to make it more difficult for executives to lose their bonuses in the event of a financial crisis. This was after Carillion issued a profit warning in July, the first of three, writing down £375 million on three public-private finance partnerships in the UK, and £470 million overseas.
This led to shares falling by 39 percent and chief executive Richard Howson quitting his post. Howson, who remained with Carillion as chief operating officer, made £1.9 million in cash and share bonuses during his eight-year tenure and took £245,000 bonus in cash and shares and a £346,000 long-term incentive award in 2016.
Then finance chief Richard Adam received £2.6million in additional cash and shares during his 11-year tenure, and a £140,000 bonus and long-term incentive awards of £278,000, before quitting in December 2016.
There are reports of banks shifting Carillion off their balance sheets over the last months in anticipation of its inevitable folding. Workers, however, were left in the dark, and jobs, pensions and essential social provisions hang in the balance.
The government indicated that “some” of the 450 public sector contracts held by Carillion might be taken in-house, while other subcontractors were expected to take over projects. With many of them facing unpaid bills, it remains to be seen how this will work.
Some 28,000 members of Carillion’s pension schemes have been told they must rely on the dwindling government Pension Protection Fund—a subvention for companies to avoid their responsibilities. Those not yet retired will lose at least 10 percent.
The impact was underscored by Defence Minister Gavin Williamson telling Parliament Monday that an emergency Cobra meeting—convened at times of national crisis—would be held to discuss Carillion. This was denied by Downing Street.
Carillion’s fragile state had been known in ruling circles for months. It kept going so long only because the government continued to pump taxpayers’ funds into it, despite the risk. Just one week after Carillion posted its first profit warning on July 10, the Conservative government awarded it two major contacts—the £1.4 billion HS2 joint venture and a £158 million contract to manage catering and accommodation facilities at more than 230 military facilities.
When it posted its second profit warning on September 29, announcing a half-year loss of £1.15 billion, Carillion was rewarded on November 6, with a £62 million contract from Network Rail. Just 11 days afterwards, when the firm issued its third profit warning, it was handed a £12 million school building contract from the Education and Skills Funding Agency.
At the start of this month, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced it was investigating the “timeliness and content” of Carillion’s statements from December 7, 2016 to July 10, 2017.
Political calculations account for the decision to keep handing Carillion money. The company is the embodiment of the privatisation agenda carried out by successive Tory and Labour governments through the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Public-Partner Partnership schemes.
Through such means governments have effectively handed public funds over to private corporations, their lenders, shareholders and CEOs to run essential social provision, on astronomical rates of return. Britain also exported such schemes abroad, to countries such as Canada, India and Eastern Europe.
According to The People Vs PFI website, companies like Carillion effectively functioned as “shop fronts for the big banks, who use PFI as an infrastructure financing mechanism to dump billions of pounds of debt and toxic hedging instruments on the British Taxpayer, who ultimately underwrite the PFI deals.”
It estimates that such deals have incurred a minimum liability for public funds of £240 billion over the next 40 years. PFI/PPP contracts can return an “extreme profit margin,” in some cases as much as 70 percent per annum. While public funds are locked into financing private infrastructure projects at grotesque levels of interest, the corporations themselves are risk free.
Earlier this month, the government handed Richard Branson’s Virgin Trains East Coast (Vtec) nearly £2 billion by allowing it to get out of its contract three years early. In the case of Carillion, its subsidiary Clinicenta was paid £53 million in 2013 by the government to escape its contract to run a National Health Service Treatment Centre in Stevenage, after clinical failings that included three patient deaths. This was just two years after NHS London paid it £8 million to terminate a similar contract due to an inquiry into avoidable deaths.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. Four Seasons Health Care, which provides for 17,000 elderly and vulnerable people, is in trouble. Owned by US investment firm H/2 Capital Partners and private equity group Terra Firma, Four Seasons took over from Southern Cross Healthcare when it collapsed in 2011.
There was huge public shock and anger after the Grenfell Tower inferno, which killed 71 people. In addition to the lack of any safety provision for its working class residents, there was a complete absence of any centralised assistance for the victims—many of who remain in temporary accommodation.
The catastrophe that has developed in the NHS in recent weeks shows that Grenfell was not a “localised” tragedy. The NHS has cancelled non-emergency operations due to a severe funding shortage, in which PFI contracts have played a major role.
Carillion’s collapse underscores the extent to which Britain’s ruling elite has looted and pillaged vital social assets in pursuit of the selfish concerns of their super-rich paymasters.

Threat of trade war looming larger

Nick Beams

An American trade war with China came a step closer with the decision last week by a US trade panel to continue an anti-dumping investigation into Chinese-made aluminium products. The US International Trade Commission determined that “US industry is materially injured by reason of imports of common alloy aluminium sheet from China that are allegedly subsidized and sold in the US at less than fair value.”
The finding was the result of an investigation ordered last November by the US Commerce Department at the direct instigation of the Trump White House. The probe, which was greeted with vigorous opposition from China, marked the first time in 25 years that the Commerce Department launched such an investigation without a direct request from the industry concerned.
As a result of the decision, the Commerce Department will continue its investigation, with an anti-subsidy duty determination to be announced early next month and anti-dumping duty determinations to be brought down in mid-April.
Expressing its strong dissatisfaction with the move, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said China would take all necessary measures to defend the rights of its enterprises.
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who launched the investigation, said President Trump had “made it clear from day one that unfair trade practices will not be tolerated under this administration,” and the decision was “one more step in fulfilling that promise.”
The aluminium investigation is only one of a series of measures initiated by the Trump administration against China. A potentially even bigger conflict looms over the results of a Commerce Department “Section 232” investigation, which allows the imposition of tariffs and other duties on steel imports on the grounds that they are a threat to national security.
The report of the investigation, which was launched in April, was delivered to the White House last Thursday. The president has 90 days to determine what action to take. American steel industry chiefs greeted the news that the report had been delivered with calls for swift action.
American Iron and Steel Institute CEO Tom Gibson said he was hopeful action would be announced sooner than the 90 days allocated. “We are confident,” he said, “that we have made the case that the repeated surges in steel imports in recent years threaten to impair our national security.”
US Steel called for swift and decisive action. “Our nation cannot afford to allow the continued rise of foreign imports that undermine America’s capacity to produce the steel necessary for our country’s national and economic security,” the company said in a statement last Friday.
Another potential conflict with China is looming over a probe into alleged theft of intellectual property rights and cyber espionage due to be delivered on Thursday.
US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer met with Trump at his Florida resort over the weekend to brief him on the anti-China measures and the further talks on the renegotiation of the NAFTA agreement with Mexico and Canada to be held later this month.
Lighthizer is one of the most strident proponents of the “America First” agenda in the Trump administration. Denouncing the policies of Beijing to capture increased global market share in remarks to the influential think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies last September, he said: “The sheer scale of their coordinated efforts to create national champions, to force technology transfer, and to distort markets in China and throughout the world is a threat to the world trading system that is unprecedented.”
His remarks were underscored by the National Security Strategy issued by the Trump administration last month, in which China was declared to be a “strategic competitor” and accused of “economic aggression.” Trump declared that American strategy “for the first time” recognised that “economic security is national security.”
But the US trade war guns are aimed not only at China. Washington is in a major conflict with Canada over the Trump administration’s imposition of tariffs and duties on Bombardier airplanes, Canadian timber and newsprint.
In retaliation, Canada has launched a major case through the World Trade Organisation (WTO) against punitive tariffs the US imposes on other countries it deems to be selling products at unfair prices, the practice known as dumping. The 37-page case was issued on December 20 and made public last week.
In a clear effort to win international support, the Canadian document lists a series of problematic actions taken against China, South Korea, Japan and Germany as well as actions by the US against Italian pasta and steel from Austria, Brazil and South Africa.
In its complaint to the WTO, Canada says the US is illegally using anti-dumping tariffs “in excess of WTO-consistent rates” and has improperly calculated the level of subsidies that form the basis of much of the US complaints. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland has attacked the anti-dumping duties imposed on the country’s softwood lumber producers as “unfair and unwarranted.”
Another area of dispute is what is known as the “Chapter 19” system in NAFTA, allowing Canada to take US anti-dumping measures before an arbitrator. The US wants this provision scrapped and Canada is insisting it be retained.
The Canadian action has brought a threatening response from Lighthizer. Speaking before his weekend meeting with Trump, he said Canada’s WTO move was a “broad and ill-advised attack on the US trade remedies system.”
“Canada’s claims are unfounded and could only lower US confidence that Canada is committed to mutually beneficial trade,” he continued.
The drive by the US administration to step up its “America First” agenda is certain to be a hot topic of discussion, if not publicly then at least behind the scenes, when Trump attends the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland later this month. And it could well bring retaliatory action.
A foretaste of what might be in store was provided last week when US bond markets experienced a significant sell-off on the back of a Bloomberg report that China was considering pulling back on its purchases of US treasuries, partly in response to anti-China trade measures.
The report was denied by Chinese authorities, but Bloomberg cited high-placed and well-informed sources as the basis for its article.
An escalation of trade war could have significant implications for global financial and economic stability. Major global economic institutions have been pointing to the recovery in the world economy in 2017, expressing the hope that it will continue. But all of them cite trade conflict and the growth of protectionism as key “downside risks.” Those risks are clearly on the rise.

US to set up 30,000-strong “border force” in Syria

Peter Symonds

In a provocative step that immediately fuelled tensions with Turkey and Russia, the US announced last weekend the establishment of a 30,000-strong Border Security Force (BSF) in enclaves of Syria under the control of the American proxies fighting to topple the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. The BSF will be dominated by fighters from Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), alongside elements from various Islamist militias.
Having proclaimed the defeat of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Washington has no intention of leaving Syria. It is determined to carve out a swathe of territory from which to prosecute its goal of ousting Assad. The latest move will not only intensify the civil war in Syria but bring the US into direct conflict with Russia and Iran, which back the Assad regime, and Turkey, which regards the YPG as a direct military threat.
Colonel Thomas Veale, a spokesman for the US-led coalition against ISIS, announced that the 15,000 troops of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) would form the core of the new army. “Currently, there are approximately 230 individuals training in the BSF’s inaugural class, with the goal of a final force size of approximately 30,000,” he said.
Testifying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last Thursday, David Satterfield, acting US assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs, revealed that the Trump administration’s aims, beyond the continued suppression of ISIS, involve the consolidation of the SDF in the north and northeast of Syria, and the countering of Iranian influence.
The war against ISIS was only ever a pretext for advancing US plans for regime change in Damascus as the means for combatting Iranian and Russian influence in Syria. Far from destroying ISIS, the US, which maintains 2,000 troops in Syria, and its local proxies ensured the safety of thousands of armed ISIS fighters. According to Russia, these ISIS fighters are being trained and integrated into anti-Assad forces.
Under pressure to explain why US forces are being kept in Syria, Satterfield blurted out: “We are deeply concerned with the activities of Iran, with the ability of Iran to enhance those activities through a greater ability to move matériel into Syria. And I would rather leave the discussion at that point.” In other words, the Trump administration is preparing for a war in Syria to oust Tehran’s ally Assad that could easily spill over into a wider conflict with Iran, and potentially Russia.
At the same time, the US is facing possible Turkish military action that could destroy plans for a pro-American zone in Syria. Turkey, a NATO ally, is deeply concerned about linkages between the YPG and the separatist Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which it brands a terrorist group and has long sought to suppress. Three months ago, Turkish troops crossed the border into Syria near the YPG-controlled Idlib enclave in northern Syria.
Ibrahim Kalin, a spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, accused the US over the weekend of “taking worrying steps to legitimise this organisation [YPG] and make it lasting in the region.” He warned: “It is absolutely not possible for this to be accepted.” Turkey would “continue its fight against any terrorist organisation regardless of its name and shape within and outside its borders.”
Erdogan condemned US support for the YPG, declaring on the weekend: “The US sent 4,900 trucks of weapons in Syria. We know this. This is not what allies do.” At a rally yesterday he reiterated his determination to “vanquish” the Kurdish militia. “We have finished our preparations,” he said. “The operation can start any time.” Erdogan accused the US of “creating a terror army on our border,” adding: “What we have to do is nip this terror army in the bud.”
The Syrian government denounced the planned pro-US border force as a “blatant assault” on the country’s sovereignty. The state-run news agency, SANA, cited a foreign ministry spokesperson as insisting that the army was determined to thwart the US “conspiracy, end the presence of the US, its agents and tools in Syria, establish full control over the entire Syria territory and preserve the country’s sovereignty.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov yesterday accused the US of seeking to split up Syria, saying it “does not want to keep Syria as a state in its current borders.” Washington was helping “the Syrian Democratic Forces to set up some border security zones.”
Lavrov stated: “What it would mean is that vast swathes of territory along the border of Turkey and Iraq would be isolated. It’s to the east of the Euphrates River. There are difficult relations between Kurds and Arabs there. There is a fear they are pursuing a policy to cut Syria into several pieces.”
Vladimir Shmanov, chairman of the Russian State Duma’s defence committee, warned that Russia would respond to the planned Syrian border force. “[It] stands in direct confrontation [with Russia’s interests] and we and our colleagues will certainly undertake certain measures on stabilisation of the situation in Syria,” he said.
The US announcement that it will train and equip a 30,000-strong military force is a desperate attempt to shore up its position in Syria. Diplomatically, it is Moscow, not Washington, that appears to be dictating the terms of negotiations over Syria, with plans for a conference in Sochi later this month to discuss the country’s future.
Militarily, the US-backed anti-Assad militias have suffered one defeat after another, not only because of Russian and Iranian support for the Syrian army, but because of widespread popular hostility, particularly to the reactionary Al Qaeda-linked elements supported by Washington.
The last remaining major Syrian opposition enclave of Idlib has been the focus of a major government offensive since the beginning of year. Into this volatile mix, the US has declared that it intends to stake out a claim by funding, training and arming a large new proxy army, only compounding the danger of a wider war.

Greek workers strike against Syriza’s imposition of EU austerity “multi-bill”

Alex Lantier 

Workers in Greece struck Monday against the Syriza (Coalition of the Radical Left) government and protests erupted in Athens in the evening, as Syriza rammed a 1,300-page “multi-bill” of European Union austerity measures through the Greek parliament. The conservative New Democracy, the social-democratic Democratic Alignment, the nationalist Union of Centrists and the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn voted against the bill in parliament.
Shipping and public transport in Athens were almost entirely halted, amid mass opposition to fresh EU attacks on basic social and democratic rights, including the right to strike. Athens subway, bus and tramway workers and air traffic controllers all took strike action. Schools were closed and hospitals operated on skeleton staffs as doctors joined the strike. Tens of thousands of people marched in two separate trade union protests in the capital.
Clashes erupted between protesters and riot police in Athens after the Greek parliament, led by Syriza deputies, voted 154 to 141 to approve the multi-bill, which slashes family welfare payments, facilitates foreclosures and includes draconian limitations on the right to strike.
Protesters threw Molotov cocktails, pieces of cement and stones, while police retaliated with tear gas and stun grenades.
The eruption of workers’ struggles against Syriza’s attack on the right to strike and the relentless assault on living standards mounted by the EU since the 2008 Wall Street crash marks a new stage in the international class struggle. It explodes the political lie, which the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) has consistently fought, that Syriza is a left-wing or socialist organization. It is a right-wing party, hostile to the workers.
It betrayed its election promises to end EU austerity and now plans to use antidemocratic methods to muzzle workers’ opposition.
This will have far-reaching implications well beyond the borders of Greece, as growing sections of the working class across Europe move into struggle against plans for mass layoffs and attacks on wages and social spending.
Similar petty-bourgeois populist and anti-Marxist parties across Europe that backed Syriza’s election—from Podemos in Spain to the Left Party in Germany, the New Anti-capitalist Party and Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s organization in France, and the Socialist Workers Party in Britain—also stand exposed as enemies of the workers. The growing conflict between the working class and these forces, which pass for the “left” of the European political establishment and are closely linked to the trade unions, will have explosive and ultimately revolutionary consequences.
These events are exposing before millions of workers the increasingly threadbare parliamentary-democratic façade of the EU and the European national governments, which function as a dictatorship of the financial aristocracy to oppress the working class.
The Syriza deputies in the Greek parliament simply rubber-stamped the “multi-bill,” which was no doubt drafted by the EU and the major banks, without even bothering to read it. As Greece’s right-wing daily Kathimerini wrote, with some embarrassment, “hundreds of pages of draft legislation had to be debated over just a few days, and there are legitimate doubts about whether deputies will fully comprehend what they are voting for.”
It was widely reported and Syriza knew very well that the “multi-bill” contains drastic attacks, opposed by the people of Greece and Europe, on basic social and democratic rights. It includes provisions for electronic auctions of foreclosed homes, aimed at keeping residents and neighbors from physically blocking foreclosures; deep cuts to family benefits; and measures designed to block strike action, such as requiring 50 percent of all union members (as opposed to 50 percent of all union members present at a strike vote) to support strike action before it can be taken.
Reuters noted that this is a measure Greece’s “creditors hope would limit the frequency of strikes and improve productivity,” that is, increase the exploitation of the workers.
Speaking in the parliament yesterday, Syriza leader and Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras tried to deny the socially counterrevolutionary character of this agenda. He pledged that this austerity package would be the last raft of cuts dictated by the EU to the Greek people under the terms of successive EU austerity memoranda. Hailing the “end of a long and difficult cycle,” Tsipras said, “We are one step before the end of the program and the final end of the memoranda.” He added, “In the summer, we will...leave behind a tough, unfair and harmful period.”
Denying that the “multi-bill” aims effectively to scrap the right to strike, which is protected in Greece’s constitution, Tsipras continued: “It’s a shameless lie [to claim] that this government is enforcing demands by creditors and industrialists to deregulate the labor market. The right to strike is a sacred conquest of the working class.”
The shameless liar here is Tsipras. His promises in parliament are as worthless as were his election promises to end EU austerity when he came to power three years ago this month. As he spoke in parliament, top EU officials were announcing that they would keep demanding draconian austerity measures in Greece even after the formal end of the EU bailout of the country.
“If there is further debt relief after the end of the program, then it is sensible to reach a further agreement,” Thomas Wieser, an associate of former German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and outgoing head of the European Working Group (EWG), told Kathimerini. This implies that the EU will demand additional devastating social cuts should Greece seek to declare bankruptcy or restructure its unviable €323 billion sovereign debt or again ask the EU for help in servicing its loans.
Syriza’s “multi-bill” is part of an assault on the right to strike and other legal rights carried out over a protracted period by the bourgeoisie across Europe. This includes Britain’s antiunion laws, the imposition of minimum service requirements banning public-sector strikes in large parts of Western Europe, and France’s state of emergency and labor law, which allow for the banning of protests and the imposition of sub-minimum wage salaries.
The protests in Greece are bound up with rising working-class militancy throughout Europe—with German metalworkers and British rail workers taking strike action, growing strike activity in Spain, growing social anger at the French government’s anti-worker agenda, and strikes by workers in Romania and other Eastern European countries. Faced with the escalation of the class struggle, the capitalist class is moving to tear up basic democratic rights.
The Syriza government is a fundamental strategic experience of the international working class as it goes into a period of resurgent class struggle. Struggles cannot proceed under the political and organizational control of the trade union bureaucracy and pseudo-left parties that, as the experience of Syriza abundantly shows, are hostile to the working class. The way forward is through the establishment of organizations of struggle independent of the trade unions that work to coordinate working-class resistance on a European and international scale.
Faced with the treachery and bankruptcy of Syriza, the working class urgently needs its own revolutionary political leadership, fighting for a socialist and internationalist perspective. This means the construction in Greece and every country of sections of the ICFI—the Trotskyist movement, which alone opposed Syriza from the standpoint of the international working class and warned of the treacherous role it would play before it came to power.