30 May 2018

Rotary/IHE Delft Masters Scholarships for Water and Sanitation Professionals 2018/2020

Application Deadline: 15th June 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: All countries with a Rotary club presence

About the Award: Rotary and the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education have teamed up to tackle the world’s water and sanitation crisis by increasing the number of trained professionals to devise, plan, and implement solutions in developing and emerging countries. Through this partnership, The Rotary Foundation will provide grants to Rotary clubs and districts to select and sponsor a limited number of students each year for the Masters Scholarships for Water and Sanitation.
Rotary scholars will benefit from the support they receive through regular contact with sponsoring Rotarians from their home country and the opportunity to interact with Rotarians in the Netherlands. After graduating, scholars’ expertise will be put to work improving water and sanitation conditions in their own community with a project the scholar and sponsoring Rotarians will design and implement together.
In addition, Rotary Foundation alumni are part of an extensive network of fellow Rotary scholarship recipients and Rotarians worldwide. Becoming involved with a local Rotary club and the alumni association allows scholars to stay connected to Rotary’s global community and resources.

Type: Masters, Grants

Eligibility: Students eligible for the Scholarships for Water and Sanitation must be provisionally admitted to one of the following degree programs at UNESCO-IHE (joint programs are not eligible):
  • MSc in Urban Water and Sanitation
  • MSc in Water Management
  • MSc in Water Science and Engineering
Students must also live or work near a Rotary club.

Selection Criteria: Scholars are selected in a competitive process. Candidates are chosen based on their ability to have a significant, positive impact on global water and sanitation issues during their career. Successful applicants will have a strong academic background, significant and relevant professional experience, and demonstrated leadership in the community

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: TRF awards scholarships of approximately €34,000, paid directly to UNESCO-IHE. Funding to cover additional costs (including international travel) related to participation in the academic program will be coordinated by UNESCO-IHE.

How to Apply:
  1. Students admitted to UNESCO-IHE’s eligible programs seek the sponsorship of their local Rotary club or district by submitting a scholar application to the potential sponsor.
  2. The potential sponsor receives and reviews the application and the terms and conditions.
  3. Rotarians interview the scholarship candidate and make a decision about sponsoring the applicant.
  4. The sponsor submits a full application online no later than 15 June of the year that the scholarship candidate’s program begins.
  5. The Rotary Foundation reviews the application.
  6. The Foundation awards a scholarship to a limited number of candidates who demonstrate the strongest potential to make a significant, positive impact on global water and sanitation issues during their career.
  7. The sponsor submits a progress report after the scholar’s first year of the program and a final report when the scholar completes his or her academic program.
Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Rotary, UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education

Dubai Business Associates Programme for Recent University Graduates Worldwide 2018

Application Deadline: 30th June, 2018 (rolling basis, earlier encouraged)

Eligible Countries: International

To Be Taken At (Country): Dubai, UAE

About the Award: Run under the patronage of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the Dubai Business Associates programme has been designed around three fundamental pillars for success: business experience, management training and cultural understanding.
  1. Business Experience: Participants will complete an associates with one of the emirate’s home-grown global leaders in a sector central to its economy, including trade, tourism, finance and logistics. The invaluable experience will provide participants with an understanding of how to operate within an international business environment.
  2. Management Training: Management training is an integral aspect of the programme. Combining practical experience with learning and development modules will provide participants with a better understanding and knowledge of fundamental business concepts and doing business in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia region.
  3. Cultural Understanding: Dubai Business Associates offers a unique opportunity to gain a privileged insight into Dubai’s cultural communities and to develop cross-cultural communication skills. Participants will have access to influential business leaders and opinion formers from across Dubai, the UAE and the rest of the world.
Type: Training, Entrepreneurship

Eligibility: 
  • The Dubai Business Associate programme is open to recent university graduates (as well as those with up to three years of work experience) from all over the world.
  • Proficiency in both verbal and written English is required.
  • A keen interest in international business combined with a curious and inquiring mind is preferred.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: All the associates will be fully funded during the programme, including accommodation, round-trip flights, working visa, comprehensive health insurance and a monthly allowance.

Duration of Programme: Beginning in September, the programme runs for nine months and includes business placements and consulting projects with our Placement Partners.

How to Apply: To apply for DBA, email recruitment@dubaibusinessassociates.ae with:
  • A current CV
  • An essay to a maximum of 500 words explaining your knowledge of Dubai and of the specific DBA partner who you believe can add value to and why
  • A link (e.g. on Wetransfer) to a maximum 90 second video of you explaining why you fit to the distinct learning culture, responsibilities and opportunities of DBA.
Application deadline: June 30th, 2018 (rolling basis, earlier encouraged)

Visit the Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Falcon Management Limited

AMMSI-Phillip Griffiths Prize 2018 for African Mathematicians (USD 6,000 Prize)

Application Deadline: 30th June 2018.

About the Award: The AMMSI-Phillip Griffiths Prize is awarded to an African mathematician, living in Africa, who has made outstanding contribution to mathematics, application of mathematics or promotion of mathematics, as evidenced by research and impact of the work.The Prize has been made possible through a grant to AMMSI by Phillip Griffiths on his winning the Chern Prize in 2014. Nominations are welcomed from any part of the world and should contain the following information:

Type: Award

Eligibility:  Nominations are welcome from any part of the world

Number of Awards: 1

Value of Award: The award comprises a certificate with a citation on the winner’s scientific achievement as well as a cash prize of USD 6,000.

How to Apply:  Nominations should contain the following information:
  1. A letter by the nominator(s) forwarding the nomination and giving the contact details of the nominator(s) and the institutional affiliation, if any.
  2. Full name, email address and mailing address of the person nominated;
  3. Home web-page of the nominee (if any);
  4. The proposed citation (a Concise statement of not more than 250 words detailing the outstanding contribution);
  5. Justification for nomination (The nominator should cite the reasons for considering the candidate to be deserving and include explanations of the impact of the candidate’s work arising from his/her publications and activities) (Maximum four A4 pages);
  6. A brief Curriculum Vitae of the nominee including selected major publications(Maximum four A4 pages); The nomination should be sent via E-mail to the address:                  ammsi.africa@gmail.com 
Visit Award Webpage for details

Award  Provider:  Phillip Griffiths

Freedom of Expression: A Global Threat

Samina Salim

 India, a complex, beautiful and enchanting land, a melting pot of innumerable cultures, religions, ethnicities and traditions. India, a society deeply rooted in tolerance, compassion and forbearance. India, a land where the legends of Akbar’s justice, Shahjahan’s love, Prithvi Raj’s valor, Chanakya’s wisdom, live in every household. India, a land which gave birth to the concept of ahinsa, a land of Kabir and Kalidas, a land of Sufis and Sadhus, the land of Gandhi and Ghaffar, the land of Nehru and Azad, the land of Nanak and Gautum. The list can be endless and the names more empowering. One cannot help but be proud of their secular Indian heritage. Having lived in a tolerant India, the news of the slow rise of fascism and intolerance seem almost incomprehensible yet, the facts are facts. We cannot run away from facts. A recent incident happened too close to home.
I like many other Indians followed the pursuit to higher education and came to the US.  An air of nostalgia breezes through the mind when reminded of the days spent at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) in India. AMU, a public central university in India, was established in 1875 by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, as Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College. It was in 1920 that the college became Aligarh Muslim University, the campus of which is situated in the Aligarh city in the state of Uttar Pradesh (UP). Ever since it’s inception, this University has been a beacon of education, freedom and equality, producing notable alumni, including a former President of India, a former Vice-President of India, several Governors, Chief Ministers, Poets, Writers, Scientists, Sportsmen, Film and TV artists and many others. Recent US News and World Report puts AMU as one of the top public universities in the country, with law, medicine and engineering programs as one of the top in the nation.
On May 2, 2018, a group of thugs disguised as political activists supported by law enforcement officials barged into the University premises with the demands of removing the portrait of a former Indian political figure who later championed the two-state theory and was instrumental in the creation of Pakistan. This portrait was placed in the pre-independence era during the days of British rule, along with the portraits of other life members of the University AMU Students Union galleries. Traditionally, photographs of all life members are placed on the walls of the student union office including that of Gandhi, Nehru, Azad, Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa to name only a few. Whether this portrait should or should not be there, is debatable, and should be debated by the present AMU student general body and due process should deliver the outcome.
The issue is not so much the portrait, as none of the AMU students, present or past think much of the individual in question any way, the point is the following. It is alarming when fascist forces start to break-in the gates of academic institutions with the aim of robbing these institutions of their freedom. Their agenda is not promoting patriotism or strengthening nationalism but their goal is curbing freedom of expression, silencing discussions, hijacking debates, raping harmony, undermining justice and diminishing peace. Can we as a society afford it?

New Malaysian government formed amid internal and global tensions

John Roberts 

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has begun to form the country’s new cabinet, following the historic defeat of Prime Minister Najib Razak’s United Malays National Organisation (UMNO)-dominated Barisan Nasional coalition government (BN) in the May 9 election.
The 92-year-old Mahathir leads the Pakatan Harapan (PH) four-party coalition. The PH received 47.92 percent of the popular vote, winning a clear majority in the 222-member lower house of the parliament. This compares with 33.8 percent for the BN and 16.99 percent for the Islamist Parti Islam se-Malaysia (PAS).
UMNO’s electoral defeat was the outcome of immense discontent over social inequality, entrenched ruling nepotism and corruption, and the suppression of the democratic aspirations of the mass of the population.
Six-decade-old mechanisms to maintain virtual one-party rule in Malaysia failed to deliver victory to UMNO and its coalition, for the first time since the country gained independence in 1963. These included the use of race and religion to divide the electorate, the flagrant channelling of state funds to business cronies, tight control of the media, political control of the courts and massive gerrymandering.
The PH coalition, however, is far from a homogeneous political grouping. It consists of Mahathir’s United Malaysian Indigenous Party (PPBM), which has 13 seats; Anwar Ibrahim’s People’s Justice Party (PKR), with 47; the ethnic Chinese-based Democratic Action Party (DAP) with 42; and Amanah, a breakaway from the Islamist PAS, with 11 seats.
The PH is a disparate collection of ruling-class elements whose interests clashed with UMNO’s predatory rule. The only unifying position they have is the fear that Najib’s brazen corruption, expressed most clearly in the billions of dollars looted from the state-owned investment fund 1MDB, was fuelling the underlying social discontent and threatening the ruling class as whole.
Mahathir was the BN prime minister and UMNO leader from 1981 to 2003. Anwar Ibrahim was his deputy prime minister until they fell out over the economic response to the 1997–1998 Asian financial crisis. At the time, to silence Anwar’s opposition to his policies, Mahathir presided over the frame-up of his deputy on fabricated sodomy charges.
Anwar was arrested in September 1998 and sentenced in 2001 to nine years’ imprisonment. He was not released from solidarity confinement until 2004. New charges were laid against him in 2008 under Najib’s government, which ultimately resulted in his re-imprisonment in 2015.
The ruling coalition is wracked with conflicts over major domestic and international issues. On May 10, Mahathir was supposed to announce 10 of the up to 25 ministers to join himself and Wan Azizah, the PKR leader and deputy prime minister, in the cabinet.
Mahathir was able to name only three: Muhyiddin Yassin (PPBM) as home affairs minister; Lim Guan Eng (DAP) as finance minister; and Mohamad Sabu (Amanah) as defence minister.
On May 13, Mahathir declared that while “deliberation” would take place inside PH, he could appoint the cabinet at his discretion. More than a week later, only 13 ministers from the four parties had been sworn in. Among the positions still not filled was that of foreign minister.
Mahathir quickly established a 12-member “Council of Elders,” stacked with some close political and business associates, operating independently of the parliament. It is drawing up the government’s plans to implement various populist measures that PH pledged to carry out in its first 100 days in office. These include the abolition of the unpopular goods and services tax, an increase in the minimum wage, with an automatic review every two years, and the prosecution of Najib and others over the 1MDB scandal.
Mahathir claimed his return as prime minister would have a transitional character. In a pact worked out in January, Anwar’s PKR agreed to support Mahathir on the condition that Mahathir would move immediately to have the Anwar pardoned and released. After an interim period, Anwar, now 70, would re-enter the parliament and take over the premiership.
King Muhammad V, the head of state, pardoned Anwar on May 16. Anwar told the media upon on his release he was “happy” with the transition period. He said he would give “complete support” to the government “on the understanding that we are committed to the reform agenda, beginning with the judiciary, media and the entire apparatus.”
Both Anwar and Mahathir have declared that their “feud,” which erupted in 1998, is over. But the two represent rival sections of the Malay ruling elite.
In 1997–98, Anwar supported the demands of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the United States that Malaysia dismantle the various means it employed to protect national-based corporations and exclude foreign competition—a decades-long regime denounced by global finance as “crony capitalism.” His PKR continues to advocate the end of economic protectionism.
Mahathir only broke with UMNO after his faction of the party failed to remove Najib. Mahathir and his supporters formed the PPBM in 2016. Far from denouncing protectionism, the PPBM attacked Najib for making too many pro-market concessions, including the agreement to join the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). In demagogic and nationalist fashion, Mahathir said the TPP would see Malaysia “colonised again” by US imperialism.
The PPBM remains committed to the defence of the New Economic Policy, which for decades has served the interests of a thin layer of ethnic Malay capitalists, at the expense of the mass of the population, as well as the ethnic Chinese and Indian business elite.
Mahathir also made it clear that he will seek closer relations with China and align with Beijing’s efforts to counter Washington’s influence in the region. On May 24, he sent Council of Elders member Robert Kuok, Malaysia’s richest man, to the Chinese embassy to discuss cooperation between the two countries. The next day, Mahathir met with Chinese ambassador Bai Tian.
US interests have expressed concern. In a May 11 article, the Pentagon-connected Center for International and Strategic Studies (CSIS) declared that Mahathir’s anti-American track record “creates a risk for bilateral relations.” In contrast, the think tank stressed that Anwar Ibrahim “enjoys deep and warm ties in Washington” and the US had supported him throughout his “travails.”
In reality, the Bush and Obama administrations supported Najib and did nothing to oppose the persecution of Anwar. Nevertheless, the CSIS assessment is that the PKR’s economic outlook pushes it to politically lean toward Washington, and against China.
Beside its military predominance in the region, Washington still has immense economic clout, despite Beijing’s growing trade and investment. The American total stock of foreign direct investment in the southeast Asian economies is $US226 billion—more than China, the European Union and Japan combined.


Differences over foreign policy, fuelled by the intrigues of the US, China and other powers, are likely to mesh with domestic issues and cause ruptures within the fragile coalition. At the same time, the inability of the Malaysian ruling class and its new government to meet the economic and political demands of the working class portends the eruption of massive social struggles.

Rich list shows more Australian billionaires than ever

Oscar Grenfell

This year’s Rich 200 list, released by the Australian Financial Review (AFR) last week, revealed that the ranks of Australia’s billionaires has swelled to 76, up from 60 in 2017. The collective wealth of the richest 200 individuals stands at an unprecedented $283 billion.
The figures underscore the immense growth of social inequality. Amid an increasingly precarious existence for millions of working people, characterised by stagnant or declining wages, a rise in poverty, homelessness and unemployment, the financial elite is making more money than ever.
The bonanza for the ultra-wealthy, which comes at the direct expense of ordinary people, is the continuation of a decades-long process that has intensified since the 2008 global financial crisis. In that year, there were 14 Australian-based billionaires. The number now stands at 33. The majority of Australia’s billionaires live abroad near the major hubs of international finance in the United States and Europe.
Together, the richest 200 people increased their fortunes by an estimated $50 billion over the past 12 months, a rise of 22 percent. Collectively, their bank accounts and stock portfolios grew by more than $1 billion every week.
The speed of financial accumulation has accelerated. The holdings of the richest 200 individuals increased 4 percent faster over the past year than during the previous 12 months.
This is part of a vast transfer of wealth to the corporate elite on a global scale, driven by tax cuts, austerity measures and the intensified exploitation of the working class, enforced by capitalist governments.
An Oxfam report, released in January, found that 82 percent of global wealth created over the previous year had gone to the richest 1 percent of the world’s population. By contrast, the poorest half of humanity, 3.7 billion people, saw no increase in their share. The report noted that internationally, billionaire wealth had risen by an average of 13 percent since 2010, and that every second day, a new billionaire was created.
As in the United States and Europe, the overwhelming majority of the richest individuals in Australia make their money through parasitic industries centred on financial speculation, which create no new wealth in the real economy.
More than a quarter of those on the AFR’s list, 51 individuals, accumulated their fortune through the property market. Harry Triguboff, the second richest Australian, is the country’s largest apartment builder. His wealth has increased from $25 million in 1984 to more than $12.7 billion.
The dramatic influx of financial investment into the property market, encouraged by the pro-business policies of Labor and Liberal-National governments at the state and federal levels, has created a deepening housing crisis.
House prices have soared across the country, with median prices above $1 million in Sydney, the centre of the property bubble. An entire generation is being locked out of home ownership, while millions of workers have exorbitant mortgages that threaten to tip them over the financial cliff.
Figures released by Digital Finance Analytics last year found that a quarter of all mortgaged households, numbering some 820,000, were in “stress.” Around 32,000 were deemed to be in “severe stress,” while 52,000 were at risk of defaulting that month.
Reflecting the rise and rise of finance capital, 20 of the richest individuals made their money through investments and 16 are in the financial services sector. Another 22 are in retail. Eighteen, including 3 of the 10 wealthiest individuals, are in mining and resources. They benefited from a rebound in commodity prices. Tenth on the list is James Packer, the billionaire heir who augmented his family fortune by operating casinos.
The richest individual, for the second year in a row, is Anthony Pratt, who has personal assets of $12.9 billion. Much of his wealth is based on the expansion of his privately-owned Pratt Industries, which operates a cardboard box and recycling business based primarily on the super-exploitation of thousands of low-paid workers in the United States.
In the AFR, Pratt hailed US President Donald Trump’s unprecedented corporate tax cut, to be paid for by the gutting of social spending. The Australian billionaire declared the tax handout would boost Pratt Industries’ profits by $100 million a year.
The article featuring Pratt underscored the aristocratic character of the ultra-wealthy. It reported that Pratt last year took out a $200,000 membership in the 62,500-square-foot Mar-a-Lago luxury resort owned by Trump.
The article noted: “Over a mild spring weekend at the resort, Pratt flits between a house on the estate owned by the President’s son, Eric Trump, and the resort’s communal areas—the main dining room, which is lined with marble from an old castle in Cuba; the living room with its high ceilings and walls adorned with gold-plated motifs ... and the tiled patio terrace that is the centrepiece of the estate.”
Pratt’s Australian company, Visy, is notorious for tax avoidance and brutal attacks on its employees. In 2010, more than 70 striking Visy workers were arrested after the company used police, security guards, helicopters and scab labour to combat a two-week strike over cuts to pay and conditions, and greater use of temporary workers.
The AFR’s editorial proclaimed that the enormous wealth of those on its list proved that “Australia is a land of opportunity for all who strive.” Nothing could be further from the truth.
Over the past three decades, social inequality has skyrocketed. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population controls more wealth than the poorest 70 percent. The richest six individuals, holding around $64 billion, have roughly as much money as the poorest 20 percent of the population.
Around three million people live below the official poverty line. Figures released this month by Launch Housing found that the poverty rate had increased by 3.3 percent from 2014–2016. An additional 613,000 people, including 229,000 children, had been forced below the poverty line.
Other studies have shown that rental unaffordability, homeless, child hunger and other indices of social misery have grown rapidly. Wage growth last year fell to a record low 1.9 percent, below the cost of living increase for working-class households. The corporate share of national gross domestic profit stands at 24 percent, a 10 percentage point increase over four decades.
The social gulf is a product of an assault on the social position of the working class, initiated by the federal Labor governments of prime ministers Bob Hawke and Paul Keating in the 1980s and early 1990s. Since then, every government has moved to lower spending on education, healthcare and other vital social services, while slashing corporate taxes and imposing pro-business policies across the board.
The trade unions, which function as an industrial police force of the corporations and governments, have played the central role in enforcing this agenda, through the suppression of industrial and political struggles by workers.

Amazon, Microsoft and Google compete for Pentagon Cloud warfighter project

Will Morrow

Amazon, Microsoft and Google are competing to secure a multi-billion-dollar Department of Defense contract to build and oversee the US military’s Cloud computing infrastructure, which will be used to control every aspect of the Pentagon’s global operations.
The Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) project will transfer the large number of separate data control centers currently being run by the Pentagon into a centralized Cloud network that will be administered by one of the technology giants. The contract is reported to be worth up to $10 billion over the next decade, potentially making it the Department of Defense’s single largest acquisition ever. The winning bidder is expected to be announced in September.
The company that secures the contract will be completely integrated into all of the US military’s fighting operations. According to Nextgov, Brigadier General David Krumm, the deputy director for requirements for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, described JEDI as a “global fabric” that will connect the headquarters with active combat forces, from an F-35 fighter jet pilot to a Pacific submarine captain to an Army platoon leader. “This is going to make a difference like few things have to get information to our warfighters,” Krumm said.
The Department of Defense hosted an industry conference on the project on March 7 in Arlington, Virginia, attended by technology companies, including representatives from Amazon and Microsoft. Krumm told the audience that JEDI would “change the way that this nation, its soldiers, its sailors, its Marines and its airmen fight and win our nation’s wars.”
The Cloud network will be required to hold data at all security classification levels, meaning security officials with top secret security clearances will be working at the facilities.
On May 16, Bloomberg Government published images of the advertisements produced by Amazon and Microsoft on electronic billboards in the Pentagon railway station about how their companies’ technology could support the military in battle.
Microsoft’s ad featured an image of a special operations soldier and the caption, “The cloud gets actionable insight while the action is still unfolding.” An Amazon Web Services ad included the statement, “Time to launch: months minutes,” to underscore that the cloud infrastructure will help coordinate missile launches.
The JEDI program was first announced in September 2017, a month after Trump’s Defence Secretary James Mattis carried out a tour of Silicon Valley boardrooms. Mattis met with Google’s Founder Sergey Brin and CEO Sundar Pichai, as well as executives at Facebook and Amazon, to discuss further integrating their technologies into the US armed forces.
The Defense One website reported on April 12 that “Brin in particular was eager to showcase how much Google was learning every day about AI and cloud implementation,” citing an anonymous senior Defense Department official. Mattis “returned to Washington, D.C., convinced that the US military had to move much of its data to a commercial cloud provider—not just to manage files, email, and paperwork but to push mission-critical information to front-line operators,” the article noted.
Significantly, the article notes that while Amazon and Microsoft have publicly expressed their desire to secure the contract, Google has “kept its own interest ... out of the press. Company leaders have even hidden the pursuit from its own workers, according to Google employees Defense One reached.”
Google’s integration into the military’s operations has triggered widespread opposition among its employees. A letter published in April written to Google’s CEO Pichai and signed by more than 3,000 Google workers, demanded that the company cease its collaboration with the Pentagon.
The letter was a response to Google admitting in March that it is providing the military with artificial intelligence software that can be used to detect objects in video surveillance footage, under what is called Project Maven. This technology can be directly used to develop automatic targeting for the US drone murder operations in the Middle East and North Africa.
The Defense One article stated that “Maven is more than either Google or the Defense Department has admitted publicly, according to the senior defense official who called it a ‘pathfinder’ project, a starting point for future collaboration between the Pentagon and Google.”
Media reports indicate that the company most likely to secure the JEDI contract is Amazon. The company is considered to have an edge because it is already operating a Cloud network for the US intelligence agencies, under a $600 million contract reached in 2013.
Since September 2016, Amazon has been providing facial recognition technology called Rekognition to police forces and private intelligence contractors. Rekognition is able to process video footage from police body cameras, surveillance cameras and CCTV to “identify persons of interest against a collection of millions of faces in real-time, enabling timely and accurate crime prevention”.
The distinction between the technology corporations and the state has become almost entirely blurred as they become ever-more integrated into the military-intelligence apparatus. This takes place as Washington is working to outpace its major geostrategic rivals, above all China and Russia, in the arena of advanced warfare technology and artificial intelligence, in preparation for a catastrophic war that would inevitably involve the use of nuclear weapons.

Corruption crisis prompts demand for snap elections in Spain

Alejandro López & Paul Mitchell

The National Court last week found 29 top officials linked to Spain’s ruling Popular Party (PP) government guilty of corruption. Those convicted forged documents, took bribes and laundered money siphoned from kickbacks linked to public works contracts. They were sentenced to a total of 351 years in prison.
The court declared that the PP had spawned “an authentic and efficient system of institutional corruption.”
The Gürtel case, as it has become known, is the largest and most pervasive political corruption scandal since the end of the Francoist dictatorship in the mid-1970s.
On Friday, Socialist Party (PSOE) General Secretary Pedro Sánchez announced a no confidence vote aimed at him replacing the PP’s Mariano Rajoy as Spain’s prime minister—with the intent of preventing a general election and exacerbating Spain’s economic and social crisis.
The no confidence vote is due to take place on Friday.
Sánchez, whose party has connived in keeping Rajoy’s minority government in power, appeared before the press to claim the PSOE would “Return [Spain] to political and institutional normality, regenerate democratic life, and set in motion a social agenda that would attend to urgent social issues.”
Such words are cynical. The Gürtel case has been around for years. It is almost a decade since it came to public attention. Most suspects were put on trial in 2016. Throughout this time, the PSOE covered for the PP’s corruption, kept it in power and backed its austerity measures and anti-democratic assault in Catalonia during the independence crisis.
The PSOE’s support of the PP was also covered up by the pseudo-left party, Podemos, which suppresses any independent mobilisation of the working class in its pursuit of a “progressive alliance” with the PSOE. Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias has now offered his party’s unconditional support for the PSOE motion of no confidence.
It was also left to Podemos to make a direct appeal to the right-wing populist Citizens on behalf of Sánchez. Podemos number two and candidate for regional premier in Madrid, Íñigo Errejón, broadcast a video on social networks calling for an end to the PP government, regardless of “political names.” He declared that “Acronyms cannot become a trench from which to reproach us while Spain is still blocked.” He warned Citizens leader Albert Rivera that he will be “co-responsible” for the “blockade” and “shame” if Citizens keeps the PP in power.
Citizens, however, is demanding the PSOE withdraw its no-confidence vote. They do not want to replace Rajoy with Sánchez but want new elections in the hope they will become the main party in Spain. Citizens General Secretary José Manuel Villegas said that “the solution passes through elections, there is no government programme to discuss” with the PSOE.
With the exception of the pro-PP ABC and La Razón, most of the Spanish media has dismissed Sánchez’s grab for power and are calling for snap elections. They are using the Gürtel corruption crisis to prepare the way for a right-wing replacement to the unstable minority PP government, which has seen its share of the vote at the last election in 2016 slump, in the space of just two years, from 35 percent to around 20 percent.
The main right-wing Spanish newspaper El Mundo proclaimed that the country was suffering a “very deep political crisis” that “could lead to the fall of the government.” It demanded Rajoy call an early ballot.
The nominally liberal and pro-PSOE El País, Spain’s largest newspaper, declared there was a “moment of national emergency.” It said an early election would be the “least damaging” option in order to produce a new “stable and coherent government.”
Both newspapers warned, however, about an unstable PSOE government coming to power when the economy was under pressure and having to rely on Podemos and regional nationalist parties in the Basque Country and Catalonia to rule.
El País declared, “making concessions to the secessionists is to cross a red line”.
El Mundo railed against “Catalan and Basque separatists, and the populist anti-system Podemos,” claiming they wanted to “cause a territorial breakup of the state.” They declared that any PSOE government would be a “hostage” to such forces.
Another right-wing publication, El Español, expressed most clearly what all of them are working for, declaring, “The best solution for Spain is an agreement between Sánchez and Rivera. Sanchez should add to his no confidence vote a specific day for elections… And Rivera should support this scenario and allow the socialists access to the Presidency of the Government even for a few months.”
The neo-liberal Citizens has been nurtured by the Spanish press, helping it grow from a small anti-Catalan independence party to threaten the PP and jockey for position as number one in the national polls. Citizens is seen as the force most prepared to use whatever means are necessary to drive through structural reform of the Spanish economy, repress the working class, prevent the breakup of the Spanish state threatened by regional separatism and defend Spain’s geo-political interests.
New elections in Spain would represent the third since December 2015, all of which produced hung parliaments. Such instability is symptomatic of the breakdown of the post-World War Two order and the two-party system, through which the Spanish bourgeoisie has ruled through the PP and PSOE in the post-Franco era.
Growing sections of the ruling class see the Gürtel case as the last straw, which is worsening already explosive class relations. After Greece, Spain is the country in western Europe where the financial crisis and austerity policies have created the greatest devastation. Despite a slight economic upturn based on rock-bottom wages, cheap oil and a weak euro, Spanish capitalism is moribund.
According to a study by Fedea and Accenture, Spain has almost five million people living lives of precariousness, labour poverty and unemployment.
The European Commission, which has backed Spain’s austerity packages, was forced to describe the inequality situation in Spain as “critical… either not improving sufficiently fast or deteriorating further.” It noted that the 20 percent of those on the highest incomes make 6.6 times more than the 20 percent with lowest incomes, placing the country in a bottom group that also includes Bulgaria, Lithuania and Greece.
In contrast, the richest Spaniards—in the top 10 percent—saw their share of household wealth balloon from 44 percent in 2008, the year of the global financial crash, to 53 percent in 2014, according to a report published by the Bank of Spain.
Such conditions are provoking growing social opposition. In 2017, the number of days lost due to work stoppages rose almost 53 percent. El Economista recently warned that “the labour conflicts in the air and rail sectors threaten Spain with a hot summer.”

Naming of technocratic government plunges Italy into crisis of class rule

Alex Lantier

A mounting financial and political crisis is spreading across Europe after Italian President Sergio Mattarella named a technocratic government on Monday, effectively nullifying the March 2018 elections. Financial markets are panicking and protests are being called, as bitter divisions inside the Italian bourgeoisie, particularly over the euro currency, erupt to the surface.
Initially, financial markets sent Italian interest rates lower on Monday, marking their approval of Mattarella’s decision not to allow the right-wing populist Five Star Movement (M5S) and the far-right Lega party to form a government. Yesterday, however, financial markets continued to push interest rates on Italian debt higher, to 1.937 percent for the first time since 2013, and sent the euro falling to below $1.16. It is ever clearer that deep conflicts in the Italian and the whole European ruling class that underlay the euro crisis following the 2008 Wall Street crash have not been resolved.
The market turmoil spread to the United States, where the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 391 points, or 1.58 percent.
On Monday night, designated Prime Minister Carlo Cottarelli indicated that he would oversee a brief technocratic government pledged to austerity and the euro. He said, “My government will be neutral, will ensure prudent management of the state budget and will treat as essential Italy’s participation in the euro.” He also indicated that he would nominate non-partisan state officials as ministers and ask them to sign a pledge not to seek election in the next parliamentary elections.
On Tuesday, however, markets and European bank stocks fell, as it became clearer that Italy is set for a protracted period of government instability and political crisis. The Cottarelli government faces opposition from the M5S and Lega, who hold a majority of seats in parliament, so it is unclear whether it can survive a confidence vote or pass a budget. There are widespread expectations that Mattarella will call new elections in early 2019 or even as soon as early September.
In the meantime, bitter political conflicts are erupting inside the ruling class between supporters of the EU and the euro and their far-right critics inside Italy and across Europe. However, both factions of the ruling class—the defenders of the EU and the euro grouped behind Mattarella, and the M5S, Lega and their far-right allies across Europe—are reactionary and have nothing to offer to workers.
Differences between the two factions are exclusively over monetary and European policy, under conditions in which the entire ruling class is unanimous on militarism and austerity. As he announced his refusal to allow M5S and Lega to form a government, Mattarella stressed that the only reason for his opposition was that the M5S and Lega administration planned to nominate economist Paolo Savona as economy minister.
Savona is hostile to Germany and to the euro, having written that Berlin “planned and created the euro in order to control and exploit other European countries in colonial fashion.” He has called the euro a “German cage” and pressed for other European countries to demand different monetary policies, saying: “There is no Europe, only Germany surrounded by cowards.”
Mattarella said such comments were unacceptable to the banks: “The designation of the economy minister always constitutes an immediate message of confidence or alarm for economic and financial decision-makers. I requested for this ministry a politician … who would not be seen as the supporter of a line that would inevitably provoke Italy’s exit from the euro.” When this turned out not to be possible, Mattarella added, he ended the government talks because, in his view, “Euro membership is of fundamental importance for the perspectives of Italy and its youth.”
Mattarella indicated that he might soon call new elections that could be essentially a referendum on the euro. “If we want to discuss this,” Mattarella said, referring to Italy’s membership in the euro zone, “it should be done openly. I have been informed that some political forces want to rapidly move to new elections. This is a decision I reserve the right to take, based on whatever happens in parliament.”
Powerful factions in the EU are supporting Mattarella. EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, who is Italian, told reporters in Brussels: “I have full trust, as I believe all Italians have, in the Italian institutions, starting with the Italian president. That is the guarantor of the Italian constitution. I am confident that the Italian institutions and the president of the republic will prove to be as always serving the interests of the Italian citizens, which by the way coincides also with the strength of the European Union.”
The positions of Mattarella and Mogherini were echoed by the Democratic Party (PD), the social democratic formation that emerged from the collapse of the Stalinist Italian Communist Party. The PD has called protests for June 1 in support of the institutions—that is, in support of the intervention by Mattarella and the banks to block the formation of a M5S-Lega government.
More provocatively, EU Budget Commissioner Günther Öttinger declared in a Deutsche Welle interview yesterday, “The markets will teach the Italians to vote for the right thing.”
Amid a firestorm of protest in Italy, M5S and Lega officials demanded a retraction from Öttinger, who subsequently apologized after criticism from EU Council President Donald Tusk and EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. The EU Commission issued a formal statement declaring, “Italy’s fate does not lie in the hands of the financial markets.”
While Mattarella stands openly for the diktat of the EU and the banks, M5S and Lega are no less reactionary. Any government they form would be the most right-wing in Italy since the World War II-era fascist regime of Benito Mussolini. They have pledged deep cuts to public spending and mass raids and expulsions of immigrants, provoking mass protests in defense of immigrant rights across Italy in the lead-up to the March 2018 elections.
The only way forward for workers and youth in Italy is the development of a socialist and internationalist movement in opposition to both the PD and other supporters of the EU, and the far-right forces grouped around the M5S-Lega alliance. Mattarella’s anti-democratic intervention into the Italian elections notwithstanding, these far-right forces will prove just as hostile to the working class as the EU and the banks.
Far-right politicians across Europe are now making statements in support of M5S and its alliance with Lega. Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s neo-fascist National Front (FN) and an ally of the Lega, has called Mattarella’s intervention a “coup d’état” by the EU.
Nigel Farage of the pro-Brexit UK Independence Party denounced Mattarella’s intervention and denounced the EU in the EU parliament: “In the last 48 hours, their democracy has been traduced. In the past you have managed to bully the Danes, you bullied the Irish, you bullied the Greeks into submission. I suspect with Italy today you have now bitten off more than you can chew. Bring on more elections and bigger eurosceptic victories.”
There is growing fear in PD circles that Mattarella’s intervention may have handed the victory to Lega, which is now surging in the polls past 25 percent support. On a hidden camera, former PD prime minister Massimo d’Alema declared that if there were new elections after Mattarella’s decision, the M5S-Lega alliance would win a landslide 80 percent of the vote.

29 May 2018

DFID/Wellcome Trust Epidemic Preparedness Grants for Researchers in Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 11th June 2018, 17:00 BST

To Be Taken At (Country): UK, Republic of Ireland,low or middle income countries, Rest of the world

Type: Grants

Eligibility: You can apply to this call if you’re a social scientist employed at a higher education organisation or not-for-profit research institution.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Up to £2 million is available to fund several awards.

Duration of Funding: Up to 2 years

How to Apply: Visit Link below

Visit the Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: The scheme is a joint initiative between the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and Wellcome.

Qingdao Government Scholarship for New International Students (Bachelors, Masters & Doctoral) 2018/2019 – China

Application Deadline: 1st July 2018

Eligible Countries: International

To Be Taken At (Country): China

About the Award: The China University of Petroleum is a university system in China. It consists of two universities: China University of Petroleum, located in Qingdao and Dongying, and China University of Petroleum, located in Beijing.

Type: Undergraduate, Masters, Doctoral

Eligibility:
  • Applicants must be non-Chinese citizens and in good health.
  • Applicants do not have any Chinese government scholarship.
  • Long-term non-degree studies should be two academic semesters at least.
  • The candidate should have a very good command of English language. Therefore, the application should be written in English.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:
  1. Long-term Non-degree Students: A partial tuition waiver: RMB 10000 in total.
  2. Bachelor’s Degree Students: A partial tuition waiver: RMB 20000 in total, first-year partial tuition waiver: RMB 10000, when passing the annual review, students will have a second-year partial tuition waiver: RMB 10000 and students can apply for current student scholarships.
  3. Master’s Degree Students & Doctoral Degree Students: Living allowance: RMB 30000 in total, three-year living allowance: RMB 10000 per year (RMB 1000/month for 10 months every year) and students can apply university scholarships in the meantime.
How to Apply: 
  1. Submit your online application: Register at our International Student Online Application System (https://upc.17gz.org/member/login.do), fill in online application information, upload application documents and submit it.
  2. Announce admission results: Admissions Office will announce the admission and scholarship results within 2 weeks after receiving online applications.
  3. Deliver admission documents: Admissions Office will deliver the admission documents within 2 weeks after the admission and scholarship result announcement. Please provide a post address and contact information to the Admissions Office in prior.
  4. Make a room reservation and deposit payment: Admissions Office will inform scholarship winners of the room reservation and its deposit payment of RMB1000.00. The winners must pay their room deposits to the accommodation reception in due time in order to finalize their admission and scholarship. The accommodation reception will refund the room deposit on checkout. The room deposit will not be refunded if the winners do not register for enrollment and scholarship for any reasons.
  5. Registration in due time: Scholarship winners should register at our university in due time. Otherwise, the winners will be considered giving up the admission and scholarship.
Visit the Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Qingdao Government Scholarship

Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowships for Researchers in Low and Middle Income Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 24th July 2018

Eligible Countries: Low- and middle-income countries. See list below

To be taken at (country): United Kingdom

Eligible Field of Study: Public health

About the Award: This scheme enables researchers from low- and middle-income countries to establish themselves as leading investigators in their scientific field. The scheme aims to support research that will improve public health and tropical medicine at a local, national and global level.

Type: Fellowship, Research

Eligibility: You can apply for the Senior Research Fellowships in Public Health and Tropical Medicine if you’re an established researcher leading your own independent research programme. The programme of work you propose must be innovative and ambitious.
  • You must be a national of a low- or middle-income country.
  • You should have a PhD or a degree in medicine and be qualified to enter higher specialist clinical training. You must also have significant postdoctoral research experience.
  • If you don’t have a PhD or a degree in medicine, we may still consider you if you have a first or a Master’s degree and can show substantial research experience.
You should be able to show:
  • your work is important, original and has impact
  • you have made important contributions to your area of research, eg publications, patents, software development or an impact on health policy or practice
  • you have an international reputation as a research leader in your field
  • you’re committed to developing and mentoring less experienced researchers.
Also
  • You must have an eligible sponsoring organisation in a low- or middle-income country that will administer the fellowship for the full duration of the award.
  • If you’ve been away from research (eg for a career break, maternity leave, or long-term sick leave), we’ll allow for this when we consider your application.
  • This scheme may be of particular interest if you’re an intermediate career fellow (such as an Intermediate Fellow in Public Health and Tropical Medicine) and this fellowship is the next step in your career as a research scientist.
  • We particularly encourage applications from researchers from low- and middle-income countries who want to return to their home countries.
Selection Criteria: Candidate’s application must show:
  • good track record
  • the quality and importance of the research question(s)
  • good approach to solving these questions
  • the suitability of candidate’s research environment.
Number of Awardees: Not stated

Value of Scholarship: Salary and research expenses covered

Duration of Scholarship: 5 years (candidate can apply for renewal after this time)

Eligible African Countries: Algeria, Angola,  Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Dem. Rep. , Congo, Rep., Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Federation Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey , Uganda, Ukraine,  Rep. Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Other Countries: Afghanistan, Albania, American Samoa, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh,  Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Arab Rep., El Salvador, Fiji, The Georgia, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Islamic Rep. Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Korea, Dem Rep., Kosovo, Kyrgyz, Republic Lao PDR, Lebanon, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Fed. Sts., Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mayotte, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea,  Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russian, Samoa, São Tomé and Principe, Serbia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. ,Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Syrian, Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, RB Vietnam,  West Bank and Gaza Yemen,

How to Apply: Candidates for the Senior Research Fellowships must submit their application through the Wellcome Trust Grant Tracker

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Wellcome Trust, UK

Important Notes: Candidates for the Senior Research Fellowships who don’t have PhD or a degree in medicine may still be considered you if they have a first or a Master’s degree and can show substantial research experience. The scheme mmay be very important if candidate is an intermediate career fellow.

Australian government reports whitewash responsibility for toxic foam crisis

Patrick Davies

A federal government expert health panel report earlier this month dismissed the need for compensation for those exposed to toxic foam and other poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
The findings make clear that the Liberal-National government’s aim, in calling the review, was to scuttle calls for property buybacks and financial assistance for residents in high-exposure zones, where property values have plummeted and a health crisis has emerged.
Up to 18 airports and defence bases across the country were investigated after soil and waterway tests near the Williamtown air force base, just north of Newcastle, New South Wales (NSW) in 2012. The chemicals are found in fire-fighting foam, which seeped into drains and waterways.
For decades the Defence Department knew the material was potentially harmful to human health and the environment. As was revealed last year, it ignored warnings as early as 1987 that the foam should be treated as “toxic waste.”
The PFAS crisis has potentially exposed the federal government to hundreds of millions of dollars of liability.
After the contamination was discovered in Williamtown, a management area known as the “red zone” was established. A number of other contaminated sites were identified nationally, including at Oakey in Queensland and Darwin and Katherine in the Northern Territory.
The Expert Health Panel report acknowledged many of the PFAS health risks. It noted that international studies showed “fairly consistent reports” that PFAS exposure could be linked to problems such as higher cholesterol, increased uric acid, reduced kidney function, altered markers of immunological response, impacted thyroid and sex hormone levels, later menarche and earlier menopause, and lower birth weight.
The panel also stated that because of the “weak and inconsistent” evidence, some important health effects could not be ruled out.
A number of international organisations, including the US Environmental Protection Authority and the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry, have warned of possible links between PFAS chemicals and dozens of diseases and cancers.
The panel nevertheless advised the government not to carry out “disease screening” or “health interventions” for “highly exposed groups (except for research purposes).” It recommended research on the potential ties to rare types of cancer.
The report suggested ways for the government to save money on this research. “The best value for money” would be “adding PFAS exposure analysis to existing large cohort studies.”
This set the tone for the report. At every turn, it sought to exploit gaps in scientific knowledge, effectively elevating the government’s budget considerations above the health and safety of those living in highly-exposed areas.
The report has been met with outrage in the affected communities. Oakey resident Mark Hogg told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation: “It’s just another whitewash, a minimalisation of PFAS contamination.”
Many residents have asked why the government’s health department has told them to continue to limit their exposure if the chemicals pose little threat.
In the same week that the panel delivered its report, the NSW state Valuer General told residents living in the Williamtown “red zone” their property prices had dropped by an estimated 15 percent. This includes 183 properties that were added to the red zone last November.
Some residents believe the falls in value may be more severe. Many continue to live in the area because they cannot afford to sell.
Last year, a Newcastle Herald investigation discovered 50 cases of cancer on the sparsely-populated Cabbage Tree Road near the Williamtown air force base.
The cluster area has several drains that carry water runoff from the base. The investigation tallied cancers of residents and former residents over decades, including the rare cancers that have been linked with the chemicals.
Forced to act on the findings, the NSW Health Department carried out its own investigation into the cluster. In February, it released a report claiming there was no evidence of a cluster.
The department came to its conclusion by sampling people who lived up to 20 kilometres away from the management area, and only included cancer incidences between 2005 and 2014. This excluded at least 18 of the 50 cases uncovered by the Herald .
The federal government has tacked an insulting $17.9 million onto its original $55 million funding package for PFAS. The package does not include financial assistance for residents. It has been used to cover bare minimum initiatives, such as providing drinking water and free blood tests. These programs have been poorly managed and delayed.
The health panel report was released the day before the federal government handed down its May budget, promising tax cuts worth billions of dollars to the banks, big business and high-income individuals over the next decade. It also brought forward $500 million of military expenditure, taking the total for 2017-18 to $36.4 billion. Yet, there is no money for the toxic foam victims.
The federal and NSW reports underscore the determination of government authorities to wash their hands of a deepening health emergency, caused by a decades-long cover-up of the risks posed by the foam contamination.
Residents seeking justice confront a political struggle against the entire official political set-up, including the Labor Party opposition, which allowed the contamination to continue while it was in office.