29 May 2018

Documents reveal the vast influence of Koch brothers in US universities and public schools

Harvey Simpkins 

Last month, the George Mason University protest group “UnKoch My Campus” released documents to the public through a Freedom of Information Act request detailing how the Charles Koch Foundation and the Federalist Society, groups dedicated to the promotion of ultra-conservative “free market” public policy and ideas, maintain control over the appointment of law school and economics professors at the college, a public university in northern Virginia, as part of a nationwide campaign to promote ultra-right politics.
The ideological activities of Charles and David Koch, with a combined net worth of $96.6 billion, extend to universities, colleges and even high schools. Taking advantage of the deficits caused by the decades-long bipartisan assault on public funding for both K-12 and university education, groups like the Koch brothers, the Walton Family Foundation and the Gates Foundation use their grotesque wealth, squeezed from the working class, in an attempt to inculcate young people with libertarian and other right-wing, pro-capitalist ideologies.
In 2016, George Mason University (GMU) received the largest donation in its history, a $30 million gift to its law school. $10 million came from the Koch Foundation and $20 million from the BH Fund, whose president is Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society. The BH Fund’s secretary and treasurer is Jonathan Bunch, vice president and director of external relations at the Federalist Society, a right-wing organization that lobbies for the appointment of ultra-right judges.
Leo played an instrumental role in getting Federalist Society member and far-right Justice Neil Gorsuch a seat on the US Supreme Court in early 2017, suggesting nominees to the Trump administration and meeting personally with the president. Top donors to the society include Koch Industries, David Koch, and the Charles Koch Foundation. Through the BH Fund, the Federalist Society is intimately involved in faculty hiring, gaining admittance for prospective right-wing law students, and suggesting law graduates to clerk for right-wing judges.
Numerous emails between the Federalist Society’s Leo and GMU law school dean Henry Butler show that the society played a role in hiring new professors. In October 2015, for example, Leo emailed Butler about a potential adjunct professor. A few minutes later, Butler replied, “We’re on it.” Other hiring suggestions from Leo came in May 2016 and November 2016.
The released documents also reveal that GMU officials, including University President Ángel Cabrera, law school dean Butler, and University Provost S. David Wu misled faculty about the nature of the Koch brothers/Federalist Society gift. Shortly after the law school donation was made, Butler circulated a memo to law school faculty claiming that “there are no conditions tied to this gift other than creating scholarship programs.” On April 6, 2016, at a faculty senate meeting, Wu similarly stated that the donation came with “no strings attached, and the scholarship decisions are made by GMU. The entire $30M is for scholarships for students and nothing else.”
On April 27, just days before the release of the documents by “UnKoch My Campus,” Cabrera claimed, absurdly: “[s]ince I arrived at Mason in 2012, I have made it a priority to have all gift agreements clearly uphold our commitment to academic independence. As I have stated before, gifts may be earmarked for programs, scholarships or faculty support, but donors may not determine what is taught, what student is funded, or what professor is hired. If these terms are not acceptable to donors, the gifts are kindly declined.”
The direct influence on hiring of professors by right-wing forces is even more explicit on GMU’s undergraduate campus. From 2003 to 2011, a number of agreements for hiring professors were entered into with the university that allow donors to determine who is selected for the jobs. In a 2007 agreement, for example, the Koch Foundation, along with another donor, each provided $1.25 million to fund a professorship in the economics department. The agreement provided for a five-member selection committee which would determine, by majority vote, who to hire. Two of the five members of the committee were determined by the donors.
Additionally, donors for the professorships also potentially had a direct role in determining whether professors hired through these agreements could keep their jobs, pending a specially-appointed advisory board’s “determination (based on the individual’s performance or otherwise) that the professor filling the Professorship is no longer qualified” to remain at the university.
Cabrera acknowledged that the “gift agreements … raise questions concerning donor influence in academic matters … [T]hese agreements fall short of the standards of academic independence I expect any gift to meet.” He also conceded that the agreements granted “donors some participation in faculty selection and evaluation.”
In the wake of the revelations, the GMU faculty senate passed a motion calling for the release of donor agreements for public review within 30 days of formal enactment. Bethany Letiecq, a faculty senator, told reporters “We want all gift agreements to be made public so we can discern the full extent of the academic violations that have been occurring here … It’s now abundantly clear that the administration of Mason, in partnership with the Mercatus Center and private donors, violated principles of academic freedom, academic control and ceded faculty governance to private donors.”
Letiecq was also justifiably bothered by the potential power exerted by donors over hiring and firing of professors, stating, “These are all gross violations of academic freedom. Faculty hiring and faculty retention are not the business of donors, in any way, shape or form.”
Koch brothers influence at George Mason extends far beyond the financial backing, hiring and firing of professors. According to the Fairfax County Times, the Koch Foundation has donated over $95 million to the University since 2005. The Kochs provided millions of dollars to GMU in the mid-1980s to set up what is now known as the Mercatus Center (Mercatus means market in Latin), which plays a large role in setting Congressional legislative policy. Over the years, at least $30 million of the Kochs’ donations have gone directly to this Center. Charles Koch and several Koch Industries associates sit on the Center’s Board of Directors.
The Koch brothers influence does not stop at George Mason. Over the past few decades, the Charles Koch Foundation has given over $200 million to hundreds of US colleges and universities, usually targeted at economics departments. In 2012, the Kochs spread more than $12.7 million among 163 colleges and universities. A year later, their foundations spent another $19.3 million, spread across 210 college campuses in 46 states and the District of Columbia. In 2014, the Koch Foundation donated $25 million to the United Negro College Fund.
In addition to GMU, the Koch brothers exert substantial control over the economics department at Florida State University (FSU), giving millions to the department since at least 2007.
In a November 2007 memorandum, revealed through a prior FOIA request, Bruce Benson, then-FSU’s economics department chairman, explained to fellow economics department faculty that the Koch brothers would not just “give us money to hire anyone we want and fund any graduate student that we choose. There are constraints.” He added, “Koch cannot tell a university who to hire, but they are going to try to make sure, through contractual terms and monitoring, that people hired are [to] be consistent with ‘donor Intent.’…We cannot expect them to be willing to give us free rein to hire anyone we might want…If we are not willing to hire [libertarian economics] faculty, they are not willing to fund us ” (emphasis added).
In Arizona, twenty percent of new funding for universities will go to two Koch-backed “economic freedom” schools (at Arizona State University and the University of Arizona). While providing millions to fund Koch brothers’ initiatives, the state government has slashed K-12 school funding by more than $1 billion since 2008, with the state currently ranking 48th in per-pupil spending. In April, educators went on strike throughout Arizona to oppose such conditions.
The Koch brothers’ influence also extends to the high school level. Charles Koch funded EDvantage, an online curriculum for high school teachers that criticizes government spending and promotes so-called free market economic principles. EDvantage provides economic “lessons,” including explaining why the Environmental Protection Agency is bad for the environment; why sweatshops are good for third-world workers; and how the minimum wage leads to unemployment.
Another Koch brothers’ venture into the mis-education of youth is the “Youth Entrepreneurs” (YE) program. As with EDvantage, YE’s curriculum promotes libertarian notions, such as the conception that the minimum wage hurts workers and slows economic growth; that public assistance harms the poor; while fostering such ruling class ideas as low corporate taxes and little government regulation.
The goal of the YE program, according to publicly available emails from a Google group set up by high school students who were part of a 2009 pilot program, is to turn young people into “liberty-advancing agents” while inoculating students against left-wing ideas by assigning them to read passages from free-market economists like Friedrich Hayek. “We hope to develop students’ appreciation of liberty by improving free-market education,” the Koch associates wrote during the program’s initial planning stages. “Ultimately, we hope this will change the behavior of students who will apply these principles later on in life.”
The YE program is now in schools in Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, California, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina. The program will begin in Montana next school year.
The Koch brothers’ growing influence over education is a byproduct of the deliberate and conscious defunding of public education by the Democratic and Republican parties over the last few decades. With growing inequality comes the increasing dominance of the wealthy over all aspects of social life, including the funding of education. As the example of the Koch brothers shows, the ruling class is using its ill-gotten wealth to promote in high school and university students the bankrupt ideas that have led to the unending crises of the capitalist system.

Italy: IMF economist to form technocratic government

Peter Schwarz

The attempt to form a government in Italy of the Five Star (M5S) protest movement and the far-right Lega has failed, for the present. Giuseppe Conte, who was commissioned by President Sergio Mattarella to form the government after being proposed by the two parties, returned his mandate on Sunday evening after just four days.
The reason for Conte’s withdrawal is Mattarella’s refusal to appoint the 81-year-old Paolo Savona as minister of finance and economic affairs. The president had accepted all of the other ministerial proposals, but he rejected Savona on the grounds he planned the exit of Italy from the euro currency.
Mattarella said he was committed to protecting savers in Italy, pointing to the heightened risk premium on Italian government securities and the losses on the stock exchanges with which the financial markets had responded to the prospect of a eurosceptic government. After Conte’s withdrawal, volatility on the financial markets receded.
Savona is a figure of the Italian establishment. The retired economics professor sat on the board of various banks and companies, was the director-general of the employers’ association and industry minister under Carlo Azeglio Ciampi. But he now considers Italian accession to the European Union (EU) a “historical mistake” and the euro a “German cage” in which the Italian economy is trapped.
On Monday, Mattarella commissioned a man to form the government who stands for the exact opposite. Carlo Cottarelli is a fervent supporter of the euro and European austerity. After his appointment, the 64-year-old promised that a government formed by him would pursue a pro-European course. Italy’s participation in the euro zone was of “fundamental importance,” he said. “A government under my leadership would guarantee a prudent approach to the budget,” he added.
Cottarelli worked for the Italian National Bank in the 1980s and then spent over 25 years at sernior posts with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In 2013, he was “savings commissioner” in the Democratic Party (PD) government of Enrico Letta and drew up a drastic austerity plan for the state apparatus.
Now Cottarelli is to form a so-called technocratic government of non-party experts, which will adopt a budget and prepare for elections in spring of 2019. However, he needs a parliamentary majority for this, which he is unlikely to receive. So far, only the ruling PD has agreed to support a transitional government under Cottarelli’s leadership. It is therefore likely that new elections will take place in early autumn of this year.
Both the Lega and Five Star had refused to propose an alternative to Savona, as is customary in Italy, where the president has veto power over every minister. Instead, they are exploiting Mattarella’s intervention in behalf of the financial markets, which was welcomed in Brussels, Berlin and Paris, to make a right-wing populist and nationalist appeal.
Five Star boss Luigi Di Maio spoke of a problem for democracy and threatened Mattarella with impeachment.
Matteo Salvini, leader of the Lega, called the former IMF official Cottarelli “a representative of those powers...to whose dictates Italy should bow.” The Lega would not let itself be blackmailed, he declared, adding that in Italy, the Italians decided, not the Germans.
Salvini said it was now necessary to “go to Rome,” an allusion to the 1922 march on Rome by the fascist forces of Benito Mussolini.
For Salvini’s Lega, new elections in the immediate future could be opportune. It did surprisingly well in the parliamentary elections in March, winning 17 percent of the vote, and became the third strongest party behind M5S (33 percent) and the social democratic PD (19 percent). Since then, it has overtaken the PD in the polls and stands at 24 percent, while the Five Star Movement is stagnating and the PD continues to lose support.
The international financial press assumes that the Lega and Five Star will emerge stronger as a result of the current crisis. For example, the Financial Times wrote: “The big danger for Mattarella is that the Five Star and the Lega could emerge even stronger from a new election, as they would probably strongly insist in the election campaign that they were denied the right to rule.”
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung commented, “Now the populists bitterly accuse the president of undermining democracy and freedom in Italy and conjure up a ‘conflict between the people and the palazzo.’ Their followers are already posting poisonous messages against Mattarella on the Internet. He is even threatened with impeachment. The election campaign has begun, and it is likely to be much more aggressive than the last one.”
The Belgian newspaper De Tijd stated, “There is a danger that the principled attitude of President Sergio Mattarella has not prevented the disaster, but only made it bigger. Those who thought the euro crisis had been overcome may have to do their homework again. The hot summer in the south of Europe has begun.”
The Lega and M5S are exploiting popular outrage over the EU’s austerity policy, which has led, since the 2008 financial crisis, to mass poverty and youth unemployment of more than 30 percent in Italy. But, as the World Socialist Web Site wrote on May 23, “in the conflict between the working class and capital, the Lega and M5S stand firmly on the side of the latter.” They are merely pursuing a more aggressive nationalist course than previous Italian governments, which were always loyal to the EU.
The joint government programme of the M5S and the Lega provided for massive tax cuts for the rich and the elimination of tens of thousands of civil service jobs, while the social reforms announced, which met with outrage in European capitals, turned out to be a scam.
The two parties signaled to the banks that they accepted their terms. They had already dropped the demand for a euro exit before Mattarella charged them with forming a government. And Prime Minister-designate Conte met with central bank chief Ignazio Visco to reassure him of his loyalty before submitting his ministerial list to Mattarella.


What distinguishes the Lega, and to a lesser extent M5S, is their unbridled agitation against refugees. Their government programme provided for the internment and deportation of hundreds of thousands of refugees. This witchhunting serves to arouse chauvinist hysteria, strengthen fascist forces, increase the powers of the state apparatus and attack the democratic and social rights of the entire working class. There was no criticism of this in European capitals or media because this policy has become the consensus policy of the European bourgeoisie.

28 May 2018

Government of Japan Internship Program for Developing Countries (Fully-funded + 4,000 yen per day) 2018

Application Deadline: 30th June 2018


Eligible Countries: Developing countries (OECD/DAC-listed countries)

To be taken at (country): Japan. Private-sector companies, industry associations, and non-profit corporations in Japan. Host companies are determined after matching by the Program Office and subsequent approval by the Screening Committee.

About the Award: The Internship involves:
  • Formulating an internship plan (roles/goals, etc. of an intern) in consultation with the Internship manager
  • □Participating in group training, follow-up training, and wrap up presentation
  • □Undertaking the internship full-time during the internship period(international students living in Japan must ensure this is balanced with academic work)
  • □Undertaking management of their own safety and health as thoroughly as possible, including gathering emergency information for Japan, as well as communication, reporting, and consultation with the Program Office and the host company
  • □Submitting a variety of documents, notifications, reports, evaluation reports, etc. before coming to Japan, as well as during and after the internship period
  • □Appropriate Behavior demonstrating awareness as a beneficiary of public funds received from the Japanese government
Type: Internship

Eligibility: Young foreign nationals of developing countries (2016 participants in this Program are not eligible to participate)
Applicants satisfying all the following requirements are eligible.
  • Agreeing with the spirit of this program, and through the internship promoting internationalization of Japanese companies, developing the overseas business of Japanese companies, and working together to construct networks with overseas universities etc.
  • Holding citizenship of an eligible country or region.
  • Proficiency in Japanese language (JLPT level N3 or higher) or proficiency in English.
  • As a rule, applicants should be at least 20 years of age and no older than 40 as at June 30, 2017.
  • Applicants must able to submit a school or university enrolment or graduation certificate as well as a letter of recommendation from an affiliated university or institution etc.
  • Able to undertake both the internship and Pre-Training full-time at the host company. (International students must also able to balance these against their studies)
  • Other requirements meeting any individual conditions stipulated by the host company.
  • Applicant must not have participated in this Program in 2016.
Number of Awards: 120 interns (around 40 will be international students in Japan)

Value of Program: 
  • Allowance: 4,000 yen per day for living expenses. This amount is payable per day for the entire duration of the internship (except for international students living in Japan, who will be paid for active days only)
  • Round-trip economy class air ticket, travel insurance (international students in Japan not eligible)
  • Internship insurance
  • Transportation and accommodation expenses including training program fee when participating in training
Duration of Program: 
International students in Japan:
  • A・B: Around 3 months from August to Tuesday, December 4
Overseas foreign nationals:
  • C: Entering Japan on Sunday, September 2 & departing Tuesday, November 20
  • D: Entering Japan on Monday, September 10 & departing Thursday November 29
  • E: Entering Japan on Tuesday, September 18 & departing Friday, December 7
  • F: Entering Japan on Tuesday, September 25 & departing Thursday, December 13
  • G: Entering Japan on Monday, October 1 & departing Tuesday, December 18
  • H: Entering Japan on Monday, October 8 & departing Friday, December 21
*The Program Office will determine whether participants will follow schedule C, D, E, F, G or H.

How to Apply: 
  • Registration is accepted online via the registration form on the Program Website.
  • Selection is conducted through document screening, primary interview (native language/English/Japanese), and secondary interview (Japanese/English).
  • As part of the selection process, various certificates (university qualifications, language skills, etc.), letters of recommendation, photographs, documents required for the visa, etc. are to be submitted individually.
Visit Program Webpage for details

Award Provider: Government of Japan

Important Notes: This program offers work experience, not actual employment. It aims to provide interns with workplace skills and know-how. Please note it is not a substitute for casual or part-time employment etc.

Austrian Govenment Research Grants for International Students 2018/2019 (Undergraduate, Masters & PhD)

Application Deadline: 1st September 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: All (except Austria)

To be taken at (country): Austria

Fields of Study: Natural Sciences, Technical Sciences, Human Medicine, Health Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, Arts

About Scholarship: Foundation of the Republic of Austria is offering scholarships for international students (except Austrians). Applicants who are descendants of forced laborers (regardless of their country of origin) or people coming from countries that have suffered exceptionally from the Nazi regime, especially from the recruitment of forced laborers. Scholarships are awarded to pursue research on their diploma or master thesis or their dissertation at scientific research institutions in Austria.

Type: grants, research, undergraduates, graduates, postgraduates

Eligibility: Eligible for application are
  • descendents of forced labourers (regardless of their country of origin)
  • or people coming from countries that have suffered exceptionally from the Nazi regime, especially from the recruitment of forced labourers.
  • Applicants must not have studied/pursued research/pursued academic work in Austria in the last six months before taking up the grant.
Selection Criteria: Students meeting the above mentioned criteria can apply to pursue research
  • on their bachelor thesis
  • on their diploma or master thesis
  • or their dissertation.
No scholarships are awarded for Bachelor, Master or Doctoral/PhD studies pursued in Austria, summer courses, language courses, clinical traineeships or internships. The scholarship grant is for research.

Age limit:
Doctoral students: 40 years (born on or after March 1, 1978)
for other students: 35 years (born on or after March 1, 1983)


Number of Scholarships: not specified

Value of Scholarship:
  1. monthly scholarship instalment: 1.050 EUR
  2. Health insurance: OeAD scholarship holders need to have health insurance that is accepted by the Austrian authorities for the duration of their stay in Austria. The OeAD can help with taking out such insurance. The monthly costs can vary, at the moment you should calculate 55 to 200 EUR (depending on your age, scholarship category and state of health). The costs for the insurance have to be covered from the scholarship.
  3. Accomodation: It is possible for OeAD scholarship holders to book accomodation (dormitory or apartment) with the OeAD Housing Office.The monthly costs are 220 to 470 EUR (depending on the level of comfort requested by the scholarship holder). The scholarship holder has to pay an administrative fee of 18 EUR/month to the OeAD Housing Office for the provision of accommodation. The costs for the accommodation have to be covered from the scholarship.
  4. Travel Costs: Applicants from countries which are neither members of the EU nor members of EFTA, EEA or OECD can be granted a travel allowance. The lump sum depends on the country of origin.
Duration of Scholarship: 1 – 4 months

How to Apply: The following documents have to be uploaded for the Online Application on www.scholarships.at/:
  • fully completed Online Application form “Application for a Scholarship of the Scholarship Foundation of the Republic of Austria” including a CV and a project plan, describing the plans and completed preparatory work for the research stay in Austria
  • two letters of recommendation from university lecturers. For these letters of recommendation no specific form is required; they have to contain the letterhead, date and signature of the person recommending the applicant and the stamp of the university / department and must be no older than six months at the time of application
  • confirmation of supervision by a supervisor at the chosen Austrian university, university of applied sciences or research institution
  • scanned passport (showing the name and picture of the applicant)
  • university graduation certificate of your diploma, master, PhD or doctoral studies at a university outside Austria resp. proof of enrollment at a study programme at a university outside Austria
  • confirmation, that proves your participation in a study programme (Bachelor, Master/Diploma or PhD) at your home university
  • for descendants of forced labourers: processing number or photocopy of the letter of information or other relevant proofs
Visit scholarship webpage for details to apply

Sponsors: OeAD-GmbH on behalf of and financed by the Scholarship Foundation of the Republic of Austria

Government of Korea K-Startup Grand Challenge for Entrepreneurs 2018

Application Deadline: 14th June 2018

Eligible Countries: All

To be taken at (country): Startup Campus in Pangyo Techno Valley, 14 minutes south of Gangnam, South Korea.

About the Award: The Korean government is working to transform the country’s economy for another century of success, ultimately raising employment, the GDP and Korea’s place in the world. In order to do this, the government is supporting talented entrepreneurs and promising startups to turn Korea and Pangyo Techno Valley into a global startup hub in Asia. The top ranked 50 teams selected by the accelerators will be invited to stay in Korea to participate a four-month accelerating program in Pangyo, located south of Seoul. At the end of the accelerating program, the government will host a Demo Day to select the top 25 startups from the program. They will get additional financial incentives, and if they establish their businesses in Korea, they will get additional support from the government.

Type: Entrepreneurship

Selection Criteria: The selection panel will give priority to startups working on disruption in the following criteria, but they will also consider startups with brilliant ideas in any sector:

Number of Awards: 4

Value of Program:
  • The top 40 startups selected will be eligible to receive a total of $22,727 each in funding for settlement in Korea
    based on their performances at the ‘Demo Day’ and according to the Settlement Evaluation.
  • All 80 startups in the program wil each receive about $11,136 (12,250,000 KRW) to cover living expenses in equal installments over 3½ months.
  • State-of-the-Art R&D Labs: Prototyping and testing facilities, expert support.
  • Brand New Startup Campus: Global Startup Campus is purposely built 14 minutes from Gangnam and next to Korea’s tech giants.
  • Expert Support: Experts from some of the world’s top tech companies with experience taking companies global.
  • Corporate Partnerships: Meet Korea’s top tech companies with expertise ranging from smartphones to software to semiconductors.
  • Break into Asia: Korea is safe, developed and two-hour flight away from over 1 billion potential customers.
  • Grant for Top 25 Startups: The top 25 startups selected at the final Demo Day will be eligible for an additional $27,000 (32,000,000 KRW) grant in equal installments over six months if they establish a legal entity in Korea.
  • Grants for Top 4 Startups:
    • Top Prize: $100,000 (120,000,000 KRW)
    • Second Prize: $40,000 (48,000,000 KRW)
    • Second Runner-up: $20,000 (24,000,000 KRW)
    • Third Runner-up: $6,000 (7,200,000 KRW)
  • Additional Investments The five accelerators will make equity investments in the most promising startups. Startups will have access to other VC’s and investors who may choose to invest.
How to Apply: Apply here

Visit Programme Webpage for details

Award Provider: Ministry of Science, Industry and Planning, National  IT Industry Promotion Agency

India’s Public Banks Are Its Lifeline: Privitisation Will Ruin Them

Moin Qazi

The world’s investment leader, Warren Buffett, once said, “It’s only when the tide goes out that you realise who has been swimming naked”. When the banking system hit the rocks and the tide turned, the naked were caught disrobed.
Similarly, sometimes it takes a pitch-black economy to reveal who and what in the financial firmament really shines. It is only when darkness falls that one can see the stars twinkle. The moonlight coming from the otherwise bleak sky of the financial world, has been made possible thanks to honest taxpayers, who are transfusing precious blood to the currently bleeding banks.
The current crisis in the Indian banking sector led to calls for privatisation of public sector banks (PSB). However, the private sector is no paragon of great virtue. Moreover the faithful supplicants of privatization are ill-informed of the real issues. The huge crowds that throng public banks and put up with various inconveniences indicate the enormous faith that the public has in these banks. The challenge today doesn’t involve providing ultra-sophisticated banking to the 10% upper crust. Instead, the true challenge is to provide basic financial services to India’s 90%, who may not be the source of great revenue to banks. Almost all government pensioners bank exclusively with public banks.
We should never forget the cutting edge role public banks have played in financial inclusion. These banks have been the backbone of socio-economic agenda for the government. In any particular rural area, the role of a PSB is not confined only to banking. It also encompasses a more holistic developmental agenda.
PSBs are the one-stop shop for all financial needs of the local rural populace, including insurance, financial literacy, remittance and receipt of welfare subsidies and grants, amongst others. The government’s socio-economic programmes have to use the banking conduit for movement of funds. Those who talk of privatisation should visit the remote branches of public banks, where managers live at great risk to personal lives, and are mentoring the local population, not just in financial literacy, but, also technical, business and agricultural literacy.
It was public banks that revolutionised rural India in the social banking era of the 1970s. The expansion of bank branches in rural areas was particularly noteworthy. The figure rose from 8,261 in the year 1969 to a whopping 65,521 in the year 2000. The share of households accessing institutional credit rose from 32% to 61.2% between 1971 and 1981.
It was this emphasis on those excluded from the formal financial stream that led to a slew of measures in the field of finance, and drove so many bankers into the arena of the battle against poverty. It is tragic that even as the country is grappling with massive problems confronting its struggling masses, the ignoble billionaires now have regular rides to the public trough.
Politicians are equally guilty of undermining the integrity of banks. They stacked the decks with populist sops using banks as spigots for burnishing their election credentials. This was apart from the huge loans they have forced banks to shovel to their buddies. In India, the proportion of dodgy loans, involving the borrower not making interest payments or repaying any principal, has surged to   the highest among the world’s largest economies. The question is—why should ordinary people bear the burden of the fat cats, who keep indulging their desires by dipping into public savings? These free loaders are gleefully and remorselessly winnowing scarce bank capital. The government has to goose these banks with spruced up balanced sheets to make them lend again. Ironically, instead of being chastised, they are lauded as captains of the industry and adorn glorious positions in industry associations.
India’s pile of soured loans, whose value degrades like an unstable isotope, is a classic example of how powerful and politically influential tycoons undermine the rules to secure credit and then default on it. The thudding losses posted by banks and the desperate attempts by government to detoxify balance sheets show how difficult it is for the rescue plans to deliver.  When borrowers become insolvent, their loans are added to an existing mountain of debt. Each time it happens, banks have to make heavy write-downs, plowing the dud loans like rotten potatoes, ultimately choking the credit line. To keep these banks going, the government has to regularly keep injecting capital into them.
Most big defaulters have the money to employ legal experts who can play the judicial system—it is here where the law flounders. India has some of the most draconian laws in books which are ineffective against powerful dodgers. We keep producing new laws when the existing ones are adequate and just need more teeth to obtain results. We show such promptness in condemning waivers for poor farmers, but, we lack the courage to tame the big fishes because they have enormous clout.
Banks are known to become aggressive in turning mortgage defaulters to the streets. Scores of indebted farmers are tying the noose out of sheer humiliation. Then there is a class of salaried people who rarely default, but, are chased down for their small unpaid bursaries. The bankers seem to be totally helpless when it comes to malfeasant promoters of big businesses. The stink of their scams has leached its poison into the entire financial system.
Scammers and swindlers have outfoxed a system which no longer appears impregnable. The bank’s safeguard systems are buttressed by state institutions, such as regulators, bankruptcy procedures and courts .But what finally underpins the security of the whole ecosystem is trust. When institutions such as banks, which are supposed to embody trust, are shown to be brittle, it leads to concerns of how fragile the economy is. This failure has shown just how deeply lacerated the core of our economic life has become. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) now no longer appears to be the financial seer and therapist that   was lionized for   insulating the domestic economy from the financial turmoil of 2008.
Scams are a product of a deadly concoction of greed and immorality. However, abuse of the financial system has been made possible because of the system’s weaknesses. In an age which heralds technology as the silver bullet, we should not overlook the most important source of competitive advantage—the people. Compliance and controls are weak the world over. They are, to a large extent, dependent on people running it.   A process is only as good as the people managing it. The most agile auditors will also have to struggle to stop managers, who are determined to hide their dirty laundry from view.
The reason for protecting the borrower against the creditor is that the much-reviled moneylender looms large in our collective psyche. The scenario now is totally different. Big borrowers are not like helpless farmers and the lender today is not the cruel sahukar but, the public bank. When these large businessmen default, they rob each one of us taxpayers. In several cases, precious and scarce bank funds are being used to finance the opulent lifestyles of the rich.
The turmoil has prompted calls for improvising risk management models, which seem to have created an illusory sense of security. However, models and machines cannot act as a surrogate for human expertise. Money management is no more a genteel world. Bankers will now have to bring in hard-boiled traders’ instincts to make it safe and secure. In a prophetic warning, way back in 1913, John Maynard Keynes wrote in Indian Currency and Finance: “In a country so dangerous for banking as India, (it) should be conducted on the safest possible principles”. Our departure from the time honoured metrics has come at a heavy cost.
The Indian financial sector is at crossroads now, and its leaders will now have to use their financial alchemy to overcome its most challenging moment. Perhaps, it is one of those occasions where Rudyard Kipling’s advice can be the best guide: “If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you, but make allowance for their doubting too.”
It will not be out of place to quote the former RBI governor Raghuram Rajan, from his Homer Jones Memorial Lecture, delivered at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri on April 15, 2009. “A crisis offers us a rare window of opportunity to implement reforms-it is a terrible thing to waste. The temptation will be to overregulate, as we have done in the past. This creates its own perverse dynamic… Perhaps rather than swinging maniacally between too much and too little regulation, it would be better to think of cycle-proof regulation. ”

President Trump signs executive orders attacking federal employees

Nick Barrickman

President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders Friday making it easier for federal agencies to discipline and fire employees. The unilateral moves follow the president’s vows during the 2016 election to “reduce the federal workforce through attrition” and otherwise shrink the number of government employees to their lowest level in decades.
The orders will give federal managers the power to fire workers alleged to be “struggling” in their performance after “improvement periods” lasting up to a single month. Previously, workers in such a status were given from 60 to 120 days to improve, depending on the agency.
The orders will likewise force government unions to negotiate labor contracts with departments at a faster rate, tie layoffs to performance instead of seniority, charge unions rent for using federal office space, and limit the amount of official time an employee can spend attending to union-related affairs.
“These executive orders make it easier for agencies to remove poor-performing employees and ensure that taxpayer dollars are more efficiently used,” stated White House Director of the Domestic Policy Council Andrew Bremberg. Far from the bureaucratic behemoth that conservatives have painted it as, civilian employment within the federal workforce, numbering 2.7 million, has dropped to levels lower than during the 1960s as a result of multiple bipartisan cutbacks over the past quarter century.
The executive orders build upon legislation enacted last June. The Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act, passed by Congress in response to numerous scandals at the Department of Veterans Affairs, has led to over 1,600 staff firings, mainly of food service, nursing and housekeeping workers, in the past 11 months, according to statistics from the American Federation of Government Employees union.
Such policies reflect measures enacted at the state level, including in Indiana, where then-Governor Mike Pence tied employee pay to performance. Far from getting the government to behave more efficiently, the current executive orders will have the effect of continuing the assault on federal workers and draining resources from public agencies already starved of funding.
Trump’s legislative efforts were preceded by the Obama administration’s 2014 Veterans Choice Act, which limited the amount of time an employee could have to appeal a wrongful firing. According to the Economix blog of the New York Times, the Obama administration set a record for the number of government employees laid off during the its first three years.
The attack on federal employees occur as Trump has enacted measures to repeal regulations on major Wall Street finance houses that barred risky speculation which contributed to the 2008 financial collapse, increase rent for low-income families receiving federal aid, and restrict funding to clinics that perform abortions. In each case, the Trump administration has gone after segments of the US population that are the most vulnerable in order to whip up support from the more socially backward layers of his supporters.
“This is more than union busting—it’s democracy busting,” declared AFGE President J. David Cox, Sr. “These executive orders are a direct assault on the legal rights and protections that Congress has specifically guaranteed to the 2 million public-sector employees across the country who work for the federal government.” Despite Cox’s fake-militant rhetoric, the AFGE, the largest federal employee union, has collaborated with both Democratic and Republican administrations, accepting hiring and pay freezes for its members.
The latest efforts to squeeze federal employees come as the Trump administration continues to build up the military, the intelligence agencies and other repressive arms of the federal government. While denouncing federal workers in general, Trump has voiced a far different appraisal of the fascistic thugs who make up the bulk of the workforce of the border security and immigration agencies.
Trump’s most recent federal budget includes an increase in funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement of over $600 million. Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union released a detailed report showing the widespread abuses of underage immigrants held in detainment camps by Customs and Border Patrol agents.
Previously, civilian federal employee wages rose in general parity with military pay. That ended in 2011, when the Obama administration enacted a civilian pay freeze which did not affect the military. Trump re-instituted the pay freeze upon entering office last year.
In February, the Trump administration signed into a law a spending budget of over $700 billion for the fiscal years of 2018 and 2019. Such largesse caused Military.com to remark at the time, “It’s the biggest year-over-year windfall since the budget soared by 26.6 percent, from $345 billion in 2002 to $437 billion the year after, when the nation was fighting in Afghanistan, invading Iraq and expanding national defense after the 9/11 attacks.”

Workers’ unrest in the Netherlands

Harm Waling

Elementary school teachers are to strike May 30 in the southern provinces of the Netherlands, as part of a wave of working class struggles that brought the number of strike actions in the small country to 32 in 2017, the highest number since 1989.
According to the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics (CBS), a record number of 147,000 workers participated in the strikes in 2017. A year before, there were 25 strike actions but these involved only 11,000 workers, far fewer.
The number of working days lost to strikes soared from 19,000 in 2016 to 306,000 for 2017. Significantly, strike actions have become more frequent each year since 2011, except for a small decline in 2016. CBS states on its web site that in 8 out of 10 cases the strikes were initiated and ended by the central trade unions, mostly over conflicts about the Collective Labour Agreement (CAO). Almost 20 percent of the strikes were initiated solely over wage issues.
The role of the central trade unions FNV and CNV has been very much the same as in the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States and elsewhere, which is always one of suppressing workers’ unrest and “toning down” of strike actions. The unions consider nationwide strikes too “disruptive,” and argue strongly for regional, one-day strikes and sometimes for “protest marches,” which are little more than street parades.
The political influence of the unions, represented by the social-democratic labour party PvdA, is all but depleted, as PvdA saw its parliamentary seat-count drop dramatically in last year’s national election. The Dutch “Polder Model,” which consists of continuous negotiations between government, employers and trade unions, has been very successful in suppressing popular unrest, but as CBS statistics show, the Dutch working class is beginning to resist.
Teachers in Dutch elementary schools held several national strike actions in 2017, demanding improved school funding, which has been cut drastically over recent years, and for higher wages and a reduction in workload. Specifically, elementary school teachers demand equal pay compared to their colleagues teaching in high school and the creation of more support jobs such as classroom assistants and administrative workers.
Full tuition funding for college students is being converted into student loans, so graduates start their adult professional lives already carrying enormous debts.
The teachers union tries to dampen down strike action and argues for regional strikes, and the government says there is not enough money to meet the demands. In reality, school funding has been cut dramatically for the past decade due to austerity measures, funneling the money to large banks and corporations through bail-outs and tax cuts. The abolition of the dividend tax in the Netherlands is one of the most recent examples of government hand-outs to the already rich and to international finance capital.
According to Dutch labour law, a trade union can be set up by as few as two people. They have to be co-workers and have their statutes validated by a solicitor. Dutch elementary school teachers have made use of this and founded their own, single-use trade union, taking matters into their own hands and organising the strike actions via social media.
It is because of this action alone that the government was forced to raise the education budget by approximately €700 million. But this is not nearly enough to repair the damage caused by austerity measures and does little to nothing to relieve the pressure on educators. In contrast, the Dutch military saw its budget increase by €1.5 billion to build up towards the military spending level of 2 percent of GDP demanded by NATO.
The teachers’ strikes are still ongoing. Regional strikes resemble a relay race, with the southern provinces taking their turn to strike on May 30. During the national strikes, the national media reported on the standpoints of both the employers and the trade union. It also mentioned some responses from teachers explaining how badly they need proper education funding. Public support was hardly given a voice in the media, while hostile statements from parents could be read in any newspaper article on the subject. During the regional strike actions the national media turned deafeningly silent.
Bus and train drivers working for privatised public transport companies have been negotiating with employers via the unions for equal pay compared to their colleagues working for the national railway company NS. A train driver working for NS earns up to 10 percent more than his or her colleague working for the private company Arriva.
More importantly, workers also demand loosening of the tight duty rosters. In some cases, bus drivers work nine-hour shifts, driving for four hours straight until they have a 15-minute break. If drivers fall behind schedule due to heavy traffic, they see their break-time reduced and in some cases there is not enough time left to even go to the toilet.
In order to gain public transport concessions, private companies have to compete ever more aggressively, squeezing every last drop of labour power and money out of their workers. In 2017, regional bus drivers held “public-friendly” actions, allowing people to travel for free. A court ruling prohibited this, characterizing the refusal to collect fares as “stealing from the company.”
In early January 2018, in a stunt to generate attention to their plight, bus drivers had cars with trailers carrying portable toilets driving behind the bus. When negotiations and the publicity stunts failed, and “public-friendly” actions were prohibited, workers went on national strike on April 30 and May 1.
More than 80 percent of regional public transport (bus and train routes in the provinces) was shut down with only some bus routes operating to keep airports and hospitals accessible. An article on the web site of Dutch newspaper Algemeen Dagblad stated that the employers organisation VWOV filed a lawsuit demanding strike action be prohibited, accusing the unions of making unjust use of the right to strike, but the judge ruled in favour of the workers. According to the court, the workers’ right to strike in this case was more important than the “damage and hindrance” a national strike would cause.
Again the trade unions cowardly backed down from national strikes, considering it too “disruptive” and turned towards regional relay-strikes. FNV negotiator Paula Verhoef said on the television programme Nieuwsuur: “We do realise [the strikes] are inconvenient for passengers, so there will not be another national strike, but we will pressure regionally.”
Media reports concentrated on unsupportive reactions: Students have trouble attending college or exams, people can’t go to work, and grandparents can’t visit their grandchildren. The comments section of the popular Dutch news site NU.nl shows a good number of such reactions, but there are also many comments of solidarity. Some bus drivers commented with their personal experiences. One of them stated that if he’s 10 or maybe 12 minutes delayed due to heavy traffic, he only has 3 to 5 minutes left for a quick sandwich, coffee, cigarette perhaps and/or restroom visit.

Ireland votes to repeal anti-abortion amendment

Steve James

Ireland voted by a wide margin on Friday to repeal the reactionary Eighth Amendment to the Irish Constitution and legalise abortion on demand. The unexpectedly decisive outcome is a blow to the authority of the Catholic Church. It will strengthen demands for anti-abortion laws to be relaxed or repealed in Northern Ireland.
The vote immediately triggered a crisis in British ruling circles. The Democratic Unionist Party, which holds the most seats in the Northern Ireland Assembly and props up Prime Minister Theresa May’s Conservative government with its 10 MPs at Westminster, opposes any change in Northern Ireland’s anti-abortion laws.
The vote took place only after repeated twists and turns by both the ruling Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, the largest opposition party. The Oireachtas, the Irish parliament, is expected to legislate the repeal of the Eighth Amendment before the end of the year.
At that point, women in Ireland within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy will finally be able to exercise the basic democratic right to abortion. Between 12 and 24 weeks, abortions will be allowed only in cases involving serious risk to the woman.
Currently, women face up to 14 years in jail for having an abortion, and thousands every year make the emotionally gruelling trip to Britain for termination.
In all, 2,153,613 votes were cast with, 1,429,981 (66.4 percent) in favour of repeal and 723,632 (33.6 percent) against. Turnout was 64.1 percent.
Of the 40 constituencies, 39 voted for repeal. Constituencies around Dublin recorded “yes” margins of well over 70 percent. The highest repeal vote was in Dublin Bay South (78.5 percent). Only rural Donegal voted against repealing the amendment, and then only by 51.9 to 48.1 percent. The next closest vote was in Cavan-Monaghan, where 44.5 percent opposed repeal against 55.5 percent in favour.
Support for repeal appears to have been particularly pronounced amongst young people. One exit poll reported up to 87 percent of 18-24 year olds in favour. Among women under the age of 25, 90 percent voted in favour.
The number of young people registering to vote was reported by the National Youth Council of Ireland to be “unprecedented.” Most of the 125,000 new registrations are thought to have been youthful voters. The referendum itself only emerged after years of intense campaigns, protests and strikes demanding abortion rights, in which young people were heavily involved.
The result signals a shift to the left among broad sections of the Irish population. It is connected to protests internationally, involving millions of workers and young people, against intolerable conditions of life and in opposition to the right-wing, anti-democratic trajectory of the official political set-up.
In the United States, over one million students demonstrated against gun violence and mass shootings in March of this year. Student protests erupted in France last month against anti-democratic higher education “reforms” and in support of rail workers who are striking against French President Emmanuel Macron’s policy of social attacks and privatisation.
While support for repeal was highest amongst youth, according to exit polls, it was supported by all age groups apart from those over 65. It is a significantly more decisive result than a 2015 referendum in which 62 percent of voters on a 60 percent turnout supported the right to same-sex marriage.
Among the powerful interventions leading to the repeal vote was the stance taken by the parents of Savita Halappanavar, who died in 2012 because she was denied an abortion. Halappanavar died in a Galway hospital of septicaemia from complications arising from her pregnancy. She had repeatedly requested an abortion, which could have saved her life. The 31-year-old Indian woman was told by staff at University Hospital Galway that to procure an abortion was impossible as “this was a Catholic country.”
Following Friday’s vote, Halappanavar’s father, Andanappa Yalagi, speaking from India, told the Guardian, “We’ve got justice for Savita and what happened to her will not happen to any other family now. I have no words to express my gratitude to the people of Ireland at this historic moment.”
The result is a disaster for the Church. Support for the Church in a country scarred by generations of abusive treatment at the hands of priests and bishops is in sharp decline. Such is the collapse that Catholic organisations, which played a decisive role in the right-wing campaign that led to the Eighth Amendment in 1983, declined this time around to comment at all for fear of increasing the sentiment against them.
According to the Sunday Business Post, the Catholic Communications Office was not even invited to provide a bishop or priest for one of national TV channel RTE’s debates.
Commentary on the result was characteristically vindictive. The Catholic primate of all-Ireland, Archbishop Eamon Martin, complained, “We have elevated the right to personal choice above the fundamental right to life itself.” He bemoaned the fact that "this country is now on the brink of legislating for a liberal abortion regime.”
The bishop of Limerick, Dr. Brendan Leahy, called the outcome “deeply regrettable and chilling for those of us who voted ‘no.’” He continued, “It is a vote, of course, that does not change our position.” The pope has thus far declined to comment.
The so-called “Brexit effect” did not materialise in the vote. A number of recent polls had suggested that although the repeal side was always ahead, distrust of the Dublin political establishment was leading, particularly in rural areas, to a right-wing populist groundswell of opposition to repeal. Writing in the Spectator, journalist Pádraig Belton suggested that “a fiercely-fought referendum battle has instead weaponised every single divide that was lurking latent in Irish society: rural versus urban, young versus old, rich against poor.” But rural Ireland also voted for repeal.
The clear outcome portends major class conflicts. The Irish bourgeoisie is attempting to manage the decline of the Church, an institution on which it has relied for the entire existence of the Irish state, and which has served for many decades to suppress the class struggle.
By selecting openly gay Leo Varadkar as Taoiseach last year to replace Enda Kenny, the ruling Fine Gael signaled that it was turning away from the Church toward a strategy of relying instead on layers of the wealthy, socially liberal, pro-capitalist upper-middle class as a social prop.
Prior to taking office, Varadkar supported the last four tax-cutting government budgets. As acting minister for health, he cut €12 million from mental health spending. As minister for social protection, Varadkar attacked the most vulnerable in society under the guise of clamping down on welfare fraud. In office, he has championed the role of Ireland as a low-tax investment haven within the European Union amid the turmoil and instability triggered by the British decision to quit the bloc.

26 May 2018

Netaji Subhas/ICAR International Fellowships for Agriculture Scholars 2018/2019 – India

Application Deadline: 15th June, 2018

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Select Agriculture Universities in India and abroad listed here and here

About the Award: The NS-ICARIFs are available for pursuing doctoral degree in agriculture and allied sciences, in the identified priority areas, to the (i) Indian candidates for study abroad in the identified overseas Universities/Institutions having strong research and teaching capabilities and (ii) to overseas candidates for study in the Indian Agricultural Universities (AUs) in the ICAR-AUs system.

Eligible Fields of Study: Crop Sciences, Horticulture, Biotechnology and nanotechnology, Animal Sciences, Natural Resource Management, Agricultural Engineering and Fisheries.

Type: Fellowship, PhD (Doctoral Degree in Agriculture and Allied Sciences)

Eligibility: 
  • Master’s degree in agriculture/allied sciences with an Overall Grade Point Average (OGPA) 6.60 out of 10.0 or 65% marks or equivalent will be the eligibility requirement for the NS-ICAR IFs.
  • The fresh candidates should not be more than 35 years of age on the last date prescribed for receipt of applications. The upper age limit for In-service candidates will be 40 years on the last date for receipt of applications.
  • Age on the closing date for receipt of applications will be considered for eligibility. 
  • Also, date of completion of qualifying degree will be the date of completion of both course and thesis work as declared by the university. Netaji Subhas- ICAR IF would be available for both, fresh and in-service candidates. However, the fresh candidates should have completed their qualifying degree not more than two years before the specified date in the year of admission. The in-service candidates from India should be employed in the ICAR-AU system.
  • The Council will identify and announce the priority areas of research and the list of institutions for admission, one year in advance, for availing the Netaji Subhas- ICAR IFs.
Number of Awardees: Thirty(30) fellowships

Value of Scholarship: The fellow will be entitled to the following:
  • To-and-fro, economy class air ticket for international travel, by the shortest route, from the airport, nearest to the residence/ work place of the candidate to the airport, nearest to the destination University in respect of both Indian and Overseas candidates (Air tickets to be provided by the Council).
  • The fellows will be entitled for economy-class-travel cost reimbursement from port of arrival in India to the destination University in India and back.
  • Indian Rupee 40,000 per month
  • The fellowship amount for the first six months, as first installment, will be released by the Council to the fellow through government notified/ approved bank to be deposited in the bank account of the fellow on receiving his/ her acceptance for the fellowship and admission letter received from the host University.
  • Thereafter, the amount of fellowship will be released to the fellow, every six months, after receiving the academic progress report from the fellow duly certified by the concerned advisor/ supervisor/ head of institution.
  • The fellow will meet all other costs including medical insurance etc. from the above fellowship or from his/ her own resources.
  • During the tenure of fellowship, an in-service fellow may continue to receive his/her salary, types of leave and benefits etc. from the parent organization as per rules.
Duration of Scholarship: Three (3) years

How to Apply: Candidates should fill the Application form. Filled in application along with supporting documents should be submitted (one hard copy by post and one soft copy by e-mail) to:
The Assistant Director General (EQR), Education Division, ICAR,
Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan II, Pusa,
New Delhi-110012
Email:  adgeqricar@gmail.com


Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)

Important Notes: The other frontier areas in agriculture and allied sciences may also be appropriately considered.

International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) PhD Scholarship for Developing Countries (Fully-funded to Italy) 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 14th June 2018 at 13:00 CET.

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): Italy

About the Award: An interdisciplinary doctoral programme offered in collaboration between ICTP, the University of Trieste and Italy’s National Institute of Oceanography and Applied Geophysics is now accepting applications for its November 2018 start.
The PhD programme in Earth Sciences, Fluid Dynamics and Mathematics. Interactions and Methods (ESFM) promotes the preparation of students through the investigation of the scientific themes developed by the research groups belonging to the departments and the research institutions directly involved in the programme, as well as through international collaborations with qualified foreign institutes that provide students with the opportunity to attend training programs abroad.
The programme is taught in English. This year, there are 10 fully funded three-year scholarships to support attendance. In addition, applicants from certain developing countries may have the payment of the admission exam fee waived.

Type: Research, PhD

Eligibility: Eligible candidates must hold an academic qualification, which can be considered to be equivalent – in terms of duration, level and disciplinary field –  to the Italian degree which allows to undertake Ph.D. studies in Italy. The candidate must hold the degree by September 30, 2018 (or by October 31, 2018 in case of an Italian degree).
  • The program is taught in English.
  • Research is carried out in cutting-edge facilities, on the main university campus, at the local Area Science Park and at national and international laboratories, in collaboration with Italian and international research institutions.
  • Scholarships are open to students graduated in foreign universities.
  • The scholarship -funded by ICTP- is reserved to candidates from countries not belonging to the list of “High-income economies” (according to the World Bank criteria).
Number of Awards: 10

Value of Award: All transportation, meals and accommodation expenses for the participating scholars will be covered.

Duration of Program: 3 years

How to Apply: Application information

Visit Programme Webpage for details

Award Provider: International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP)