28 Jun 2018

African Union-Government of Korea Short Term Training Programme for African Policymakers and Government Workers 2018

Application Deadline: 20th July 2018.

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): Cheonan & Seongnam, South Korea

About the Award: A short-term training course of 2 weeks in ‘Trade Facilitation through Modernization of Administration in Customs’ will be offered from 2nd – 15th September 2018 in Cheonan and Seongnam, South Korea. The Language of Instruction will be in English. The Course Information is attached for more details.

Type: Training

Eligibility: 
  • To be eligible, a candidate must provide a support letter signed by a Minister from her/his country or by an Executive Secretary of the respective REC.
  • The training is intended to policymakers, diplomats, director-level government officials and technical staff from AU Member States and Regional Economic Communities (RECs).
  • Candidates from Member States where the Republic of Korea has diplomatic or Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) presence are encouraged to apply.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Program: The CIAT Program provides participants with opportunities to gain first-hand knowledge of Korea’s development experience. The programs are designed to enable participants to apply what they have learned for the development of their home countries.

Duration of Program: 2 weeks (2nd – 15th September 2018)

How to Apply: Applications must be submitted to HRST Department of the AU Commission with a cover letter stating motivation for applying and be accompanied with the following:
  1. Curriculum Vitae including education and work experience;
  2. Certified copies of Passport or national Identity Card indicating citizenship;
  3. Reference Letter signed by a Minister or Executive Secretary of a REC.
Application documents must be sent by post to the address below.
Department of Human Resources, Science and Technology African Union Commission
P.O. Box 3243, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia


Visit Program Webpage for details

Award Provider: Government of South Korea.

Bayer Foundation Fellowship Programme for International Students 2018 – Germany

Application Deadline: 18th July, 2018.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Germany

About the Award: The Fellowship Program consists of five scholarship programs that offer tailored financial support. Important requirements for the support: The project to be supported must be innovative and international. Scholarships are granted to students and young professionals (up to two years after graduation) from Germany wishing to realize a study or research project abroad or to foreign students/young professionals pursuing a project in Germany.
The Bayer Science & Education Foundation supports students and young professionals that would like to study or work outside of their home country with the Bayer Foundation Fellowship Program, which consists of five scholarships.
  1. Life Sciences: Students and young professionals in the fields of biology, molecular biology, bioengineering, bioinformatics, chemistry, biochemistry, pharmaceuticals and computational life sciences can apply for the Otto Bayer Scholarship.
  2. Medicine: Students and young professionals in the fields of human and veterinary medicine, medical science, medical engineering, public health and health economics can apply for the Carl Duisberg Scholarship.
  3. Agro Sciences: Students and young professionals in the fields of agro sciences, digital farming, agronomy, crop sciences, green biotechnology, environmental sciences and sustainability can apply for the Jeff Schell Scholarship.
  4. Biology and Chemistry Educators: Student teachers in biology and chemistry (up to Master’s degree level) can apply for the Kurt Hansen Scholarship. Here, the focus is on study projects, internships, summer courses as well as supplemental courses of study.
  5. Apprentices: Apprentices and young professionals in non-academic professions can apply for the Hermann Strenger Scholarship. Here, foreign assignments like projects, internships, supplemental courses or on-the-job assignments in the following fields are in focus:
    • Careers in healthcare
    • Technical or scientific occupations
    • Business administration
Type: Fellowship, Research

Eligibility:All applicants should have a high level of commitment, dedication and an innovative project plan. Scholarships are granted to students and young professionals (up to two years after graduation) from Germany wishing to realize a study or research project abroad or to foreign students/young professionals pursuing a project in Germany.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The financing generally covers the cost of living, travel expenses and project costs. Each applicant is asked to set up an individual cost schedule to be approved by the Foundation Council.

Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course

How to Apply: The following application documents are required for the Otto Bayer ScholarshipCarl Duisberg ScholarshipJeff Schell Scholarship and Kurt Hansen Scholarship:
  • Confirmation letter from the foreign host institute/university on the planned project from September 2018 to August 2019
  • A description of the project (duration of 2-12 months) with financial plan within the timeline of September 2018 to August 2019. The project can consist of special study courses, laboratory assignments, research projects, summer classes, internships, Master’s or PhD programs.
  • Most recent transcripts
  • Any additional documents that would enhance the application
  • Job application photo (no photo of your passport, please)
For the Hermann Strenger Scholarship, applicants must submit the following:
  • Confirmation letter from the foreign host institute/university on the planned project from September 2018 to August 2019
  • Most recent transcripts with good to excellent grades
  • A description of the project (duration of 2-12 months) with financial plan. The project can consist of
    special study courses, laboratory assignments, research projects, summer classes or internships
  • Job application photo (no photo of your passport, please)
Apply Here

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Bayer Fellowship Program

Atlas Corps Fellowship for Emerging Global Leaders to Serve in USA 2018

Application Deadline: 15th August 2018

Eligible Countries: International (except citizens of the United States)

To be taken at (country): United States of America (USA)

About the Award: Atlas Corps is an overseas fellowship for the world’s best social change leaders. Our mission is to address critical social issues by developing leaders, strengthening organizations, and promoting innovation through an overseas fellowship of skilled social sector professionals. For those serving in the United States, we will be bringing in new classes every 2 to 4 months. Fellows serve full-time at Host Organizations, develop leadership skills, and learn best practices through the Atlas Corps Global Leadership Lab professional development series and networking opportunities with other Fellows who are talented professionals from around the world. This prestigious fellowship includes health insurance, enrollment in the Atlas Corps Global Leadership Lab, flight and visa costs, and a living stipend to cover basic expenses (groceries, local transportation, and shared housing).

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: 
  • Two or more years of professional experience
  • Bachelor’s degree or equivalent
  • English proficiency (oral, writing, reading)
  • Age 35 or younger
  • Apply to serve in a country other than where you are from
  • Commitment to return to your home country after the 12-18 month Fellowship
  • Commitment to living on a basic stipend that only covers groceries, shared housing, and local transportation to and from the Host Organization
Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Fellowship: As volunteers, Fellows receive a modest living stipend intended to cover only shared housing, food and local public transportation. The stipend is not intended to cover expenses you may have in your home country; eating out at restaurants; buying new clothes; or emergencies. While Fellows are able to keep their basic expenses (food, shared housing and local transportation) within the allotted stipend, many choose to bring additionalfunds for personal items, such as clothing, or travel and entertainment. We recommend Fellows have a little money saved for emergencies. The amount of additional funds required will depend entirely on your personal spending habits. Monthly budgets vary from city to city, but the monthly living budget for a Fellow in Washington, DC, is as follows:
  • Rent & Utilities: $800
  • Transportation: $200
  • Food and other small necessities: $460
  • Total $1,460/month
Atlas Corps provides documentation to secure a J-1, Exchange Visitor visa (trainee designation).

Duration of Fellowship: The Atlas Corps Fellowship typically lasts 12-18 months.

How to Apply: The application is a multi-step process.
  1. Online Application – Part 1: You will need to create a login and you can save your responses so you can return to the application at any time. In Part 1 of the application (known as the “short form”), you provide contact information and complete the initial eligibility test, and if you pass the eligibility test, you’ll complete additional background questions and one short essay.NOTE: In order to sponsor candidates to come to the United States for one year as a Fellow, we require detailed information about each applicant. Please answer each question honestly and thoroughly. If you are found to be dishonest in the application, you will NOT be accepted as a Fellow and you will be sent home if you have been accepted.
  2. Online Application – Part 2 (by invitation only): Atlas Corps will review Part 1 applications and invite eligible candidates to complete Part 2 of the application (known as the “long form”), which includes additional questions about your skills and interests and several short essay questions. You will also be required to submit contact information for at least two references who know you in a professional capacity and will write a letter of recommendation about your skills and experiences as well as your potential for success as an Atlas Corps Fellow. You will need to send your requests for letter of recommendation directly through the application system. Your recommenders will receive an email that asks for a recommendation. More detailed instructions can be found in the online application form.
  3. Atlas Corps Review and Interview Process (by invitation only): Atlas Corps will review Part 2 applications and select top candidates to interview via Skype with the Atlas Corps Selection Board, including Atlas Corps staff and nonprofit sector, government, and business leaders from multiple countries.
  4. Host Organization Review Process (by invitation only): Candidates who pass the Atlas Corps interview stage will be designated as Semi-Finalists, which means they are eligible to be reviewed by potential Host Organizations . Atlas Corps determines which of our Semi-Finalists may be a good fit for specific positions at potential Host Organizations based on their interests and skill set and the organization’s needs, and forwards those applications to the organizations.
  5. Host Organization Interview Process (by invitation only): Host Organizations conduct Skype video interviews with selected Semi- Finalists.
  6. Selection and Visa Process: Host Organizations will make their final recommendations to Atlas Corps, and Atlas Corps will notify the selected candidates. After being selected, Fellows will go to the U.S. Embassy in their respective countries to apply for a J-1 visa. Atlas Corps will provide support in obtaining this visa.
  7. Semi-Finalists who are not selected by a Host Organization will be notified and may be given the option to keep their application on file for consideration for the next class of the Fellowship.
For more information, go through the FAQs

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Atlas Corps

UPPA East African Photography Award for Photographers from East African Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 1st August, 2018

Eligible Countries: Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda

To be taken at (country): Uganda

About the Award: The latest edition to the Uganda Press Photo Award, the East African Photography Award is officially open for submissions to EA citizens from Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania & Uganda. Participate by submitting your best images.

East African Photography Award: Any noteworthy subjects may be used as a theme for a story entry, but images submitted should show a clear narrative that is improved, not diluted by the inclusion of multiple images.

Offered Since: 2018

Type: Contest/Award

Eligibility: 
  • The Ugandan Press Photo Award will accept published and unpublished photographs.
  • The contest is restricted to citizens of Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda and Ethiopia, 18 years of age or older.
  • All entries must have been taken between August 1st 2016 and August 1st 2018, and must be submitted by August 1st This will be confirmed via EXIF data.
  • Each entrant can submit up to 2 stories. For each story a minimum of 10, and a maximum of 20 photographs should be submitted.
Selection Criteria: 
  • Only photographs in digital form will be accepted. There should be no watermarks, identifying marks or names of authors written on the photographs.
  • Each photograph has to be saved as highest quality jpg, at 300 dpi, minimum 3000 pixels on the longer side.
  • Photos that have been digitally altered beyond standard optimization will not be accepted. Only minimal adjustments are allowed. The organizers reserve the right to ask for unedited images.
  • All photographs should include a caption (short description of who, what, where, when, why. Not more than 50 words per photograph. Include when and where the photograph was first published.) in the EXIF data/metadata.
Number of Awardees: The jury will select 1st, 2nd, and 3rd

Value of Competition: 
  • Prizes will be awarded for each place.
  • Winning entries will be printed and will form part of an exhibition.
How to Apply: Upload and Submit your photos here

Visit Competition Webpage for details

Award Provider: Foreign Correspondents’ Association of Uganda (FCAU),  Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation (FES)

Syriza and EU plan decades of austerity measures and privatizations

Katerina Selin

At a meeting of euro finance ministers on June 21, the EU states came to an agreement on the formal withdrawal of Greece from the so-called “rescue programs” of the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Central Bank (ECB)—otherwise known as the Troika.
Since 2010, Greece has signed three credit programmes, known as the “Memorandum of Understanding,” which were linked to drastic austerity measures and an unprecedented wave of privatization. This has resulted in an economic depression and a devastating social crisis the likes of which no other European country has experienced in peacetime.
Only a week before the latest euro group meeting, the government of the pseudo-left Syriza (“Coalition of the Radical Left”) adopted another comprehensive austerity package to fulfil the requirements of international lenders.
After the long session in Luxemburg, which went into the evening hours on Thursday, the EU Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs Pierre Moscovici declared an “historic moment” and announced pompously: “The Greek crisis is over as of this evening.” Greek finance minister Euclid Tsakalotos (Syriza) also spoke of the “end of the Greek crisis.”
Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission and one of the chief architects of the austerity mandates, tweeted cynically: “I applaud the Greeks for their resilience and their support for Europe. Their efforts have not been in vain.”
On the same day, the EU Commission posted a promotional video on Twitter which was rightly considered by Twitter commenters to be a mockery of the Greek population. In Orwellian newspeak the video enthused about a growing economy and claimed “a new chapter for Greece” had begun. Thanks to the “reforms” and the “support of EU partners”—meaning brutal austerity measures and silencing by EU diktat—the country had become “more able to compete.”
Greek Prime Minister and Syriza party leader Alexis Tsipras sounded the same note when he gave a talk the next day during a government ceremony at the Zappeion building in Athens. Amid the frenetic applause of fellow party members and coalition partners from the ultra-right Anel (Independent Greeks), he blustered that “our country is opening up a new chapter” and passing into a period in which “social justice,” “democracy,” and “stability and dignity” will replace austerity and uncertainty. “Greece will return entirely to the Greeks,” declared Tsipras, emphasizing his close unity with the ultra-right Anel leader Panos Kammenos.
The grotesque spectacle in the Zappeion, which has aroused nothing but contempt among Greek workers, has its own logic. Syriza and the European bourgeoisie are celebrating eight years of social counterrevolution carried out in the interests of the international financial oligarchy. They have run an entire society into the ground in order to pay out billions to the banks and corporations. This attack on the Greek working class is part of a worldwide redistribution of social wealth from below to the top which has taken place since the start of the financial crisis in 2008.
According to information provided by the EU Commission, 450 individual measures were implemented under the aegis of Syriza in the last three years alone, including innumerable pension cuts, wage cuts, layoffs, tax increases and cutbacks to social, educational and health care sectors.
Greece has gone through a catastrophic recession which has seen a 25 percent contraction of its economic output. One in five are unemployed. According to new polls published by the Greek statistical service Elstat on June 22, during the calendar year 2016 in Greece 34.8 percent of the population was threatened with poverty or social marginalization. Among those who did not hold Greek citizenship, the number rose to 62.9 percent.
More than 21 percent of Greeks suffer from material deprivation. Compared with other EU states, that puts the country in second place, behind Bulgaria. Almost half of all low-income households have indicated they have insufficient heating; 78 percent of them are not able to shoulder unexpected expenses of 475 euros. More than half of all households—and 80 percent of poorer families—cannot afford a one-week vacation.
This is the legacy of three years of Syriza and more than 8 years of austerity policies.
Syriza’s claim that the formal withdrawal from the EU “rescue parachute” means the end of austerity policies is an obvious lie. The key elements of the Memorandum policies will remain in place even after the third program is discontinued in August—they will only be repackaged. What is now being touted as the completion of the Memorandum will actually mark a continuation of austerity diktats throughout the coming decades:
• Greece has committed to primary budget surpluses through 2060 (!), which will be squeezed out of the working class through a harsh austerity plan. An annual surplus target of 3.5 percent of GDP is to be maintained through 2022 and, following that, 2.2 percent annually, mainly to serve debt repayment.
• According to the EU Commission, Greece will remain under strict supervision until at least 75 percent of its debt has been repaid. Compliance with austerity requirements decided upon in the previous Memorandum and as part of the new agreement will be monitored by lenders every three months.
• The interest and repayment deadline for 96 billion euros in loans from the second Memorandum will be extended by 10 years—from 2023 to 2033. Because inflation will cause the value of the funds to decline with time, the deferment of debt effectively amounts to a reduction of the debt burden. But given the enormous mountain of debt involved, this is only a drop in the bucket. In the course of the entire “rescue program,” which was supposed to lead to debt reduction, it actually shot up from 129 percent of GDP in 2009 to 180 percent today. This vicious circle will continue.
• The EU is granting Greece a financial tranche of 15 billion euros, which is intended to serve as a safety buffer so that the country can survive 22 months without fresh money from financial markets. This financial reserve originates from the third aid package of 86 billion which still has not been fully disbursed. There were initial differences regarding the amount of the financial buffer between German finance minister Olaf Scholz (SPD), who seamlessly carried on the strict EU austerity course of his predecessor, Wolfgang Schäuble, and his counterparts.
• Under strict conditions, Greece will receive a payment of around a billion euros from Central Bank profits. These are the annual profits which the national central banks of the EU rake in from Greek government bonds. What is being presented here as a generous gift was already promised to Greece in November 2012 but never paid.
The agreed-upon measures, hailed by Syriza as debt relief, serve first and foremost to create trust in the financial markets and attract investors to Greece. The goal is for the country to raise money in capital markets instead of receiving loans from the European Stability Mechanism.
The almost 274 billion euros in loan payments which Greece has received since 2010 have flowed primarily into the banks and debt repayment. The day before the Euro Group meeting it was disclosed that the German government has profited greatly from the plundering of Greece: The Federal Bank of Germany has raked in around 2.9 billion euros in profits since 2010, above all from the acquisition of Greek government bonds as part of the Securities Markets Programme of the ECB.
At the same time, major international companies are profiting from massive privatization, deregulation of the labour market, cuts in wages, the elimination of benefits and restrictions on the right to strike.
Should Greece be unable to pay back one or more debt instalments, lenders may seize the privatization authority and sell Greek state property worth up to 25 billion euros.
In addition to this, the parliament adopted in 2016 a set of measures which not only allowed for the formation of a trust fund but also included a “mechanism of budgetary adjustment” called “Koftis” in Greece: If Greece does not meet the terms of its austerity plan, cuts will be automatically enforced, including to wages and pensions.

EU citizens must register, carry ID cards, in post-Brexit Britain

Steve James

The UK’s Home Office has announced that European Union (EU) citizens currently living in Britain and intent on remaining will be required to register with the Home Office during the “transition” phase of Britain’s exit from the EU.
As many as 3.8 million people are likely to be impacted. Those registering will be allocated a number. Failure to register will mean, post-Brexit, EU citizens, many of whom have lived in Britain for years and decades, face losing access to healthcare, schools, public funds and pensions.
Arrangements across the EU’s remaining 27 countries for the 900,000 or so British citizens living in the EU are not yet clear. That makes a total of 4.7 million people in Europe whose citizenship rights are cynically being used as bargaining chips in the bitter and intractable disputes between the EU and the British government over Brexit. Irish citizens in Britain are not affected.
According to a Home Office document “EU Settlement Scheme: Statement of Intent,” EU citizens and family members resident in Britain for five years or more on December 31, 2020, will be eligible to register for “settled status.” Those resident for a shorter period will be granted “pre-settled status.” The government says that EU citizens falling into either category during the short transitional phase of Brexit will be granted access to social services and be able to work.
Recently appointed Home Secretary Sajid Javid introduced the scheme as based on an agreement with the “EU guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens living in the UK and of UK nationals living in the EU.”
The scheme, announced June 21, will require a complex and intrusive additional layer of Home Office immigration bureaucracy to administer. To this end, 1,500 staff are being recruited. Presented by Javid as being “as simple as possible for the great majority of EU citizens,” the new scheme, even if it remains in its current form, threatens to pitch millions into a bureaucratic quagmire of instability and uncertainty overseen by the Home Office.
British citizens in Europe will surely face similar pressures, refracted through the peculiarities of their country of residence, every one of which is seeking one way or another to further witch-hunt immigrants.
In addition, the current proposal is based on what is only a draft “Withdrawal Agreement” between the EU and the British government and is therefore subject to the turmoil caused by the vicious faction fight within the British ruling class over Brexit and foreign policy. The document makes no mention of the fate of either EU citizens in Britain or British citizens in the EU in the event of a “hard” or “no deal” Brexit. Neither does it consider the immigration barriers being erected in both directions after the transition period.
Most disturbing is that, even as the Home Office scheme currently stands, EU citizens will be required to carry identity cards, which have never been enforced in Britain.
While online processes are supposed to be in place by next year, large numbers of applicants will be required to send their EU member state passports to the British Home Office. Even if operated smoothly, this will create vast amounts of stress. Inevitably, passports will be lost, threatening a devastating loss of rights and status, with employers, landlords and even hospitals increasingly demanding proof of immigration status.
Despite the growth of Internet and smart phone use, a significant number of people, particularly older people, do not have easy or regular Internet access or any familiarity with its use. Inevitably, the most vulnerable people will suffer the greatest disruption.
A study by think tank Transition Advice Fund on similar mass registration processes worldwide suggested that anything between 1 and 50 percent of the target group might not register at all. The report noted that if a mere 5 percent of EU citizens in Britain fail to register, some 170,000 people, again likely to be the most vulnerable, will be “left without status.”
Secondly, the government will attempt to verify individuals’ residency records by scrutinising their tax and social security records.
Presented as a smooth and automated process, this will be nothing of the sort, as anyone with experience of both Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the Department of Work and Pensions will testify. While processing might, assuming no major IT failures or data corruptions, be straightforward for those with consistent and unbroken records, for a great many EU workers in Britain, particularly those from Eastern Europe, dependent on casual, temporary or cash in hand work, all sorts of queries, gaps and anomalies will be thrown up.
Others may have no tax records at all. In these cases, the Home Office will require further documentary proof to be provided to verify consistent residence. Thus, the Home Office document suggests the scheme’s administrators might accept, “A dated and signed letter from a registered care home confirming the period of residence in the home” or “an addressed invoice from an accredited organisation for school, college or university fees for education requiring physical attendance in the UK, which includes the name of the student, and accompanying evidence of payment,” might also be acceptable.
Decisions on the fate of individuals will be left to the discretion of a Home Office case worker.
Thirdly, the Home Office will run criminal checks on the millions of applicants. Anyone guilty of a serious crime, defined merely as carrying a jail sentence of 12 months or more or deemed a security threat, can be denied “settled” or “pre-settled” status and will face deportation.
Cost of registration will be £65 per adult and £32 for children. The Guardianreported that under the “hostile environment” created by successive British governments against immigrants, the Home Office can charge £3,250 for someone seeking indefinite leave for an adult dependent relative to remain in Britain and £1,330 for an adult seeking naturalisation. But even £65 per person in a large family on low income amounts to an additional and entirely unnecessary burden.
The creation of two new categories of residents also makes future discrimination and threats to residency rights inevitable.
Earlier this year, the British authorities were exposed as having targeted members of the “Windrush” generation, mostly West Indian workers encouraged to move to Britain in the 1950s to make up for labour shortages. Many were denied free healthcare and benefits, lost jobs and suffered arrest and deportation as a result of the same “hostile environment.” Tens of thousands of former migrants from other Commonwealth countries are also thought to have been threatened with deportation. In 2016, nearly 40,000 people were removed from the UK or recorded as “departing voluntarily.”
The same Home Office now hoping to establish systems to trawl through the tax, employment and criminal records of millions of European citizens was exposed this April as having deliberately destroyed thousands of embarkation cards for Windrush generation migrants. This was despite staff members warning that these cards were frequently the only available record of an individual’s entirely legal arrival in Britain.

Far-right candidate elected as Colombia becomes NATO “global partner”

Andrea Lobo

Colombia’s far-right Democratic Center candidate, Iván Duque, won the presidency with 54 percent of the vote against the 42 percent for Gustavo Petro of the Progressive Movement in a second-round election on June 17.
The political vacuum generated by the alignment of the official “left,” led by Petro, with the militaristic and austerity-driven policies of the outgoing Juan Manuel Santos administration has been exploited by the extreme right.
The largest parties in the Senate are now the Democratic Center and Radical Change, both closely tied with far-right paramilitary groups used by the landed and financial aristocracies to terrorize the peasantry. The coming to power of Duque parallels the rise of far-right forces in Europe and the United States, posing a stark warning for workers in Colombia and internationally about the continued shift of bourgeois rule toward increasingly dictatorial and militaristic governments.
Despite speculation by sections of the national and international corporate press that Duque will moderate his stance once in office, the ruling class as a whole will continue to shift to the right. Its only response to growing social opposition and a deepening economic downturn has been to escalate social austerity, corporate tax cuts, attacks on democratic rights, and domestic and regional militarization.
Colombia is the closest military ally of the United States in the region, and it was announced last month that it will not only become a “global partner” of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), but will also join the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which has continued to demand further corporate tax cuts and austerity from Bogotá.
Popular opposition to the ruling establishment characterized the elections. It was the first time since 1853 that neither the traditional Conservative nor Liberal parties and their respective coalitions have come to power or even made it to the second round. After leading two “National Unity” administrations under incumbent President Juan Manuel Santos, the Liberal Party received just 2 percent of the vote, while the coalition favored by the Conservative Party won just 7 percent. Popular anger toward Santos grew after he pushed through the 2016 peace accord with the now-demobilized Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrilla movement after it was rejected in a popular referendum .
Duque graduated from American University in Washington, D.C., where he worked until 2014 at the Inter-American Development Bank. He was then summoned by the right-wing ex-president Álvaro Uribe to become a Senator, which allowed him to quickly come into the political spotlight with a fascistic, law-and-order rhetoric comparable to the Duterte regime in the Philippines. His campaign proposed the death penalty for rape and child murder, along with pro-business tax measures, the elimination of financial and other regulations, and a military and police build-up.
In his victory speech, Duque promised “corrections” to the “peace” accord with the FARC, insisting that “it must be a peace that above all allows the guerrilla combatants their demobilization, disarmament and effective reinsertion.” The leader of the FARC, Rodrigo Londoño, tweeted on June 17: “It’s a moment of greatness and reconciliation, we respect the decision of the majorities and congratulate the new president.”
Petro, a former leader of the M-19 Castroite guerrilla movement that turned itself into a bourgeois political party in the late 1980s, requested the backing of the Liberal candidate, Humberto de la Calle, in the second round. As the mayor of the capital, Bogotá, and then as a legislator, Petro had closely backed the Santos administration since 2010 and supported his second-round bid in 2014, joining ranks at the time with the Conservatives’ endorsement of Santos.
Previously, Santos was Uribe’s defense minister and oversaw a policy that encouraged thousands of extrajudicial executions and detentions of impoverished peasants and workers as part of an escalation of the US-sponsored war on “drugs” and “terrorism” under Plan Colombia. And more recently, Santos’s “Peace Colombia” with the FARC guerrillas, which has been energetically backed by the Obama and Trump administrations, paved the way for Colombia to join NATO, integrating it ever more closely with the bloody maelstrom of the US and European imperialism’s neocolonial repartition of the planet.
Petro’s “critical” support for Santos, represented an embrace of the latter’s attacks against living standards and hypocritical and empty promises of peace. Now, claiming the title of leader of the opposition in Congress, Petro will seek to unite the official “left,” including the Green Alliance, the Democratic Pole, the Patriotic Union, and the Indigenous and Social Alternative Movement (MAIS), while containing its criticisms within an increasingly right-wing framework.
Santos’s policies were also closely associated with clearing the path—firstly through the escalation of state violence and then through “peace”—for the intensified mining and oil extractionist model promoted by Santos’s Conservative finance minister, Mauricio Cárdenas, a darling of Wall Street.
This bet on what Wall Street speculators call “vulnerable” markets was formalized in a pro-business program that cuts taxes for corporations and gives tax refunds for fossil fuel and mining investments. The Colombian economy already suffered a sharp deceleration as oil and other commodity prices fell when the Chinese economy slowed down in 2014, and now the increase in interest rates in the capitalist centers and a trade war between the US, China and the European Union are on their way to upset previous forecasts with inflation and an economic downturn.
The 2017 tax “reform” cut corporate taxes from 40 percent to 33 percent. Meanwhile, a jump in the regressive value-added tax from 16 to 19 percent is already hurting retail consumption—i.e., has measurably impoverished the masses.
Official figures indicate that 67.2 percent of the population are either under the poverty line or “vulnerable” to falling beneath it. Moreover, worries are rising about “worsening of structural and long-term poverty,” as Louvain University professor Jorge Iván González wrote earlier this year for La Razón. He explains that growing land and income inequality, devaluation and an addiction to profits from mineral and oil extraction are “destroying industrial and agricultural production.”
His column notes that 71 percent of agricultural workers and peasants own 3 percent of registered land, while 0.2 percent of landowners, whose predatory interests Uribismo and Duque most directly represent, control 60 percent of the land. Colombia is the second most unequal country in Latin America, a region where the top 10 percent own 68 percent of wealth, while the bottom 50 percent control just 3.5 percent, according to a recent Oxfam study.
The entire official political spectrum in Colombia and the region, from the far right to the Morenoite pseudo-left—which called for a “critical” vote for Petro—reflects the interests of different sectors within the richest 10 percent of society. The “left” layers of the upper-middle class are already fearfully denouncing Duque’s political “insensitivity” toward growing social tensions; however, their “opposition” will be limited to the extent that their padded stock portfolios and bank accounts continue to grow from escalated social attacks against the working and impoverished masses.
The policies pursued by the political establishment to carve out a larger share of wealth for the ruling elites meant that 95 percent of all new wealth generated during 2017 in the region—that is, excluding the profits siphoned off by the imperialist financiers in New York and London—was hoarded by the top 10 percent. The more than 300 million Latin Americans of the bottom half, according to the same Oxfam report, lost more than $22 billion in assets.

Citing tariffs, Harley-Davidson to move US production to Europe

Jacob Crosse

In a financial report sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, Harley-Davidson announced that it would be, “implementing a plan to shift production of motorcycles for EU destinations from the U.S. to its international facilities to avoid the tariff burden.” This decision, Harley-Davidson said, is in response to increased retaliatory tariffs announced by the European Union this past Friday against €2.8 billion worth of American products.
In the regulatory report the company further stated that, “motorcycles exported from the U.S. have increased from 6 percent to 31 percent. Harley-Davidson expects these tariffs will result in an incremental cost of approximately $2,200 per average motorcycle exported from the U.S. to the EU.” The EU tariffs were in response to the Trump Administration’s imports on steel and aluminum.
Citing this increased cost, Harley-Davidson will cut an unspecified number of jobs in the United States while shifting some of its manufacturing and assembling to low wage countries in the E.U. The company further stated that it didn’t want to shift this, “tremendous cost increase,” on to its “dealers or retail customers.”
Harley is relying more and more on sales in overseas markets to maintain profits as US sales slow. It recently announced plans to close its Kansas City, Missouri plant and merge it with one in York, Pennsylvania.
The news that Harley-Davidson planned to shift production out of the US evoked worried statements from some Republican legislators, who urged the Trump administration to take a more targeted approach in regard to the use of tariffs.
On the part of Harley-Davidson the tariffs are a convenient excuse to implement a long held strategic plan to increase shareholder profits by eliminating jobs. As recently reported, the closing of the Kansas City plant coincides with an increase in production at the company's Thailand based assembly plant.
Harley finished their statement noting that the, “ramping up production in international plants will require incremental investment and could take at least 9 to 18 months to be fully complete,” and that “increasing international production to alleviate the EU tariff burden is not the company’s preference, but represents the only sustainable option to make its motorcycles accessible to customers in the EU and maintain a viable business in Europe.”
The motorcycle company has a long history of circumventing tariffs by shifting production to, “new markets” in order to maintain a “viable business.” In the 1920s, the last time capitalism faced a similar historical crisis, Harley-Davidson shifted production to Asia and built the first modern motorcycle factory in Shinagawa, Tokyo, Japan in the face of tariffs from the United Kingdom.
Eventually rebranded to the Rikuo Internal Combustion Company, this factory was used to mass produce motorcycles for the Japanese Imperial Army and their police force during World War II.
Robert Martinez Jr., International President of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which “represents” workers at the four US based Harley plants, responded with typical chauvinist bombast to the planned shift in production. “Will Harley use any excuse to ship jobs overseas? Does Harley even understand what ‘Made in America means?’”
Meanwhile, President Trump excoriated the global corporation for not being sufficiently, “America First,” blasting the management for being the, “first to wave the White Flag,” on Twitter.
Trump continued his attack on the company the following morning, warning, “they will be taxed like never before.” The turnaround was striking, since last year Trump had invited Harley executives to the White House where he praised them for “building things in America.”
While trade union bureaucrats such as Martinez Jr. used Harley-Davidson’s announced job cuts to further divide the working class from the their class brothers and sisters internationally, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker advocated for “free markets,” the elimination of “tit for tat” tariffs, while also appealing for “foreign investment.”
Restructured or negotiated exploitative trade agreements, written to guarantee favorable conditions for this or that national capitalist class, will not stop the development of ever greater economic crisis and war. The tariffs imposed by Trump on its erstwhile European allies are the product of deep going contradictions in the capitalist system and the long-term economic decline of the US. The development of trade war is being accompanied by the unleashing of unrestrained militarism in both the US and Europe.


To oppose these developments the working class needs a unified international strategy. The enemies of American workers are not overseas, but in the United States, where a rapacious class of billionaires headed by the gangster Trump and his Democratic Party accomplices holds power. To oppose this cabal the working class needs to mobilize its political strength through the building of its own independent political movement based on a socialist program.

Australia: Toys ‘R’ Us closure to destroy 700 jobs

Terry Cook

Toys ‘R’ Us, the largest toy chain in Australia, confirmed last Wednesday it will close its 44 stores, along with its head office and distribution centre in Sydney, putting more than 700 people out of work. The company’s online ordering system was wound up on June 22.
The shutdown is being enforced by the trade unions. The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association, which claims to represent retail workers, has issued no statement on the job cuts, signalling its support for the closure, and its contempt for the company’s employees.
Toys ‘R’ Us, which began Australian operations in 1993, was placed in voluntary administration last May amid a deepening financial crisis. The company continued to trade while attempts were made to find a buyer. All expressions of interest, including from private equity firms Allegro and Anchorage, were withdrawn and no new ones emerged.
The closure could also see hundreds of customers left out of pocket. Administrators McGrathNicol told prepaid gift cardholders to use the vouchers by July 5, specifying that shoppers must also spend a cash equivalent. Lay-bys will be met until July 5, but only if stock is available.
Many of the Toys ‘R’ Us workers are young people employed as low-paid casuals to maximise workplace flexibility and boost company profits. They now face a precarious future, having been flung out of work in an ever-tightening job market.
A recent survey by research company Roy Morgan refuted the claims of the federal Liberal-National government that it is creating thousands of jobs every month. The survey showed unemployment at 9.8 percent, meaning that over 1.3 million workers are without a job. A further 1.25 million, or 9.3 percent of the workforce, are under-employed, working part-time and seeking more hours.
The retail sector continues to struggle, amid falling consumer confidence caused by stagnant or declining wages and a soaring cost of living.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), national retail sales were flat in March and April. The National Australia Bank’s cashless retail sales index, measuring the value of electronic transactions processed through the bank, fell by 0.6 percent in April. This month, clothing, footwear and personal accessory sales growth dropped to 1.71 percent on a year-on-year basis, down from 3.76 percent growth in May, which was primarily driven by substantial discounting.
This year alone, fashion retailer Gap closed its Australian outlets, destroying around 50 full-time and 150 casual positions. Global fashion retailer Esprit also ended its Australian and New Zealand operations, closing 60 outlets at the cost of 350 jobs.
Other closures over the past two years, which have resulted in thousands of job losses, have included retailers Marcs, David Lawrence, Herringbone, Rhodes & Beckett and children’s clothing chain Pumpkin Patch.
Toys ‘R’ Us accounted for 10 percent of the $2 billion annual Australian toy market. The company, however, was operating at a loss. In the 12 months to January 28, 2017, it posted a $7.6 million operating loss and a $9 million loss the previous year.
Financial reports filed in June 2016 by Toys ‘R’ Us Australia said its future depended on financial support from its American parent company, warning that if support was “withdrawn or not continued there is significant uncertainty whether the company and the consolidated entity will be able to continue as going concerns.”
In early March, the US parent company announced it would liquidate its 1,700 stores worldwide, including its 735 American stores, destroying 33,000 jobs. The company was previously the world’s largest retailer of toys and games, accounting for around 15 percent of the market. Its collapse was the third-largest retail bankruptcy in history.
While the growth of online sales and increased competition contributed to the demise of Toys ‘R’ Us, its fate sheds light on the parasitic role played by private equity firms in liquidations across retail and other major sectors.
Founded in 1948, the American-based Toys ‘R’ Us was acquired in 2005 by Bain Capital Partners LLC, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) and property company Vornado Realty Trust in a $6.6 billion leveraged buyout. The three firms only contributed $1.7 billion of their own funds. They borrowed the remainder and saddled the company with a mountain of debt. Toys ‘R’ Us also had to pay around $600 million in fees to the consortium that purchased it.
John Vaz, a corporate finance academic at Australia’s Monash University, commented: “You may have $1 million, you borrow another $3 million and you control a company worth $4 million. The company that has been bought has to pay off the debt used to buy it.” He added: “Private equity are not there for the long term, so they want an exit strategy to pay off the debt and collect the gain.”
The same destructive process has produced closures and downsizings across Australia’s retail sector. In 2016, electronics retailer Dick Smith, which had been bought by Anchorage Capital Partners, a private equity firm, closed hundreds of outlets at the cost of 3,300 jobs. While the workers were thrown on the scrapheap, Anchorage walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars.
Payless Shoes likewise closed 132 stores across the country in 2016, axing 730 jobs. Its US parent company filed for bankruptcy this year, along with another 50 US retailing companies, many of which are private equity-owned enterprises and have global reach, including in Australia.


In every instance, the trade unions, working with big business and the Labor Party, have enforced the closures and cutbacks demanded by finance capital, suppressing opposition from workers to the destruction of their jobs, wages and conditions.

Argentine workers stage massive general strike against Macri’s austerity policies

Rafael Azul

Following months of inaction against the sackings as well as attacks on wages and living conditions, the General Confederation of Labor (CGT), allied with the three wings of the Peronist Party, organized a 24-hour work stoppage. By all accounts, there was a broad level of participation in this one-day protest, virtually paralyzing the country.
At issue are the economic policies of the right-wing government of President Mauricio Macri. This is the third CGT-organized protest strike since April 2017 and by far the one with the most popular support. Monday’s strike paralyzed schools, transportation, banking and other services.
The strike, called two weeks ago by the CGT bureaucracy, was supposedly meant to “send a message” of working class opposition to austerity policies by the Macri administration, in the context of accelerating consumer price inflation that is driving many Argentine workers into poverty. Instead, it revealed workers’ underlying anger, resistance and willingness to fight.
The “message” for the Argentine unions is that the working class is getting out of control. The unions are offering a new round of negotiations with Macri over wages and labor reforms. Denying the government accusation that their demands are “politically motivated” by the Peronist parties, union leaders declared themselves non-political and warned of an impending social catastrophe.
Joining the CGT were smaller union federations: the CTA (Argentine Workers Central) and the Autonomous CTA, bank workers, health workers, education workers and court employees. With more than 3,000 unions, and 3.1 million members (40 percent of the labor force), Argentina is the most highly unionized country in the Americas. Its unions, split into competing federations, are also very likely among the most conservative. During more than a year, between December 2015 and April 2017, the CGT and other unions observed a truce with the Macri government. Having ended the truce with the first protest general strike, they limited and isolated workers’ struggles as much as they could. None of the CGT’s conciliatory tactics appear to have changed.
The role of its aging bureaucracy—most of the CGT and CTA leaders have been in power for more than 25 years—notorious for its corruption and horse-trading strategy, is to dissipate working class opposition to the policies of the ruling oligarchy.
In line with the class-collaborationist policies of the union bureaucracies, no mobilizations, marches or rallies were scheduled on Monday.
Workers were asked to stay home. Those marches, rallies and mass pickets that did take place in Buenos Aires and several other cities were called by left groups and dissident factions within the unions.
Prominent among the organizers were pseudo-socialist groups, such as the Morenist Socialist Workers Party (PTS) and Izquierda Socialista (IS), and the Partido Obrero (PO). Their demand was a 12-hour extension of the one-day strike in order to organize a mass rally at Buenos Aires’ government house in Plaza de Mayo. They were joined by thousands of workers who were already on strike. Among the most numerous participants were teachers and public-sector workers.
Protests took place in every major city in Argentina.
At these demonstrations, there was a heavy and intimidating police presence, with dogs and water cannon at the ready to repress the protesters.
On June 8, President Macri reached an agreement the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) Christine Lagarde granting Argentina a $15 billion installment on a $50 billion rescue package. Lagarde praised Macri for moving swiftly, in the context of international financial volatility, to counter the capital flight that had weakened the Argentine peso and exacerbated the nation’s ongoing debt crisis. The agreement with the IMF received a strong endorsement from US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.
As part of the IMF agreement, Macri pledged to abandon his go-slow austerity measures, including budget cuts, attacks on pensions and wages, and large increases in public utility charges to consumers, in favor of a more aggressive assault on wages and living standards. The big fear of the Argentine establishment is a repeat of the revolutionary upsurge that brought down the government in 2001 and 2002, in the midst of financial collapse and economic depression.
For this, Macri and the Argentine bourgeoisie are counting on the CGT and the other unions. Last week, in negotiations with the union bureaucracies, Macri agreed to a 5 percent wage supplement over the 15 percent agreed to by many of the unions. These increases are insufficient when the most optimistic observers expect inflation rates of 25 percent or more.
The financial collapse now threatens the bureaucracy. The very high level of participation in this strike, compared to previous ones, is itself a sign of the increasing resistance of the Argentine working class.
At noon on the day of the strike, the CGT leadership gave a press conference in Buenos Aires. CGT leader Juan Carlos Schmid called on the government to engage in a round of discussions with the unions, including union participation in new labor reform legislation. The government has “another opportunity” to sit at the table, declared Schmid.
Sergio Palazzo, leader of the bank workers’ union ( Asociación Bancaria ), after declaring his astonishment at the scope of the strike, voiced his hope that the government would respond and meet with the bureaucracy: “ Ojalá (God willing) the government will understand the anger that its policies generate,” declared Palazzo. “If it does not take note of this strike, social conflict will increase,” he warned.
Pretending to be blind to the scale of the strike, Economics Minister Rogelio Frigerio blamed the broad participation on a “lack of public transit.”
Government officials denounced the strike; Macri declared that it “did not help at all.” Elisa Carrío, a leader of Macri’s Cambiemos bloc, denounced Argentine workers for not being ambitious and productive enough, likening them to “corrupt chickens content with eating worms on the ground.”

Erdogan wins Turkish elections with reduced majority

Halil Celik 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan won the presidential election on Sunday with 52.3 percent of the vote. Earlier predictions that he might fall short of an absolute majority and face a second-round runoff against the leading opposition candidate did not materialise.
His main rival, Muharrem Ince, from the Republican People’s Party (CHP), received 30.7 percent of the vote. Selahattin Demirtas, the imprisoned leader of the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP), obtained 8.3 percent. Meral Aksener of the far-right Good Party garnered 7.4 percent of the vote.
In the parliamentary election, Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) registered considerable losses. Compared to the last election in November 2015, its support fell from 49.5 percent to 42.4 percent. It secured 293 out of 600 seats in the Turkish parliament. However, it maintains control due to its coalition with the fascistic Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which won 50 seats. The People’s Alliance of the AKP and the MHP gained a total of 53.7 percent of the vote.
The main opposition party, the CHP, has won 146 seats. With 22.7 percent of the vote, it received 2.6 percent less than in 2015. The far-right Good Party, the CHP’s main ally in the Nation Alliance, gained 44 seats and 10 percent of the vote. The CHP-led Nation Alliance as a whole received roughly a third of the vote.
The HDP clearly surpassed the 10 percent threshold for parliamentary representation. With 67 seats and 11.6 percent of the vote, it is the third largest party in the Turkish parliament, with more delegates than the two far-right nationalist parties, the MHP and the Good Party.
The HDP’s improved result is mainly due to its success in Kurdish areas, where it is the strongest party and where Demirtas received the most presidential votes, along with its support from pseudo-left, liberal and social democratic non-HDP voters who backed it in an effort to block an AKP majority in parliament. Had the HDP fallen short of the 10 percent electoral threshold, the AKP would have received an extra 50-60 seats because it is the only other party with strong support in the Kurdish-populated south-eastern areas of the country.
The election reflects a growing polarisation of the country. The urban areas bordering the Aegean Sea, including the metropolises of Istanbul and Izmir, as well as a section of Ankara, the capital, voted for the CHP, the south-eastern areas voted for the HDP, and the entire rest of the country showed a clear majority for the AKP.
The elections were originally scheduled for November 2019. However, amid an escalating war drive in the Middle East and an economic collapse that has seen a sharp fall of the Turkish lira against the US dollar and the euro, Erdogan decided to call a snap election in anticipation of growing opposition against his government. He also calculated that he could capitalise on nationalist sentiment amid ongoing military operations against Kurdish militias in Syria and Iraq.
With the June 24 election, the new constitution approved in an April 2017 referendum will come into force. It establishes a presidential regime giving Erdogan more powers than are granted to the US and French presidents, effectively entrenching one-man rule with no serious checks and balances. Erdogan will simultaneously be head of state and official leader of the AKP. He will nominate cabinet ministers, the chief of staff, the principals of the universities and some of the highest judges.
There was no shortage of voting irregularities. These, however, were not on a scale to alter the result. Following initial warnings of possible electoral fraud, largely provoked by the huge discrepancy between reports on the results by the Anadolu news agency and figures obtained by the opposition parties, the latter accepted the results as fair. Prior to the elections, the Nation Alliance had formed the “Fair Election Platform,” which included the HDP and some trade unions, to “prevent possible electoral corruption.”
The electoral success of Erdogan and his AKP is mainly due to the bankruptcy and anti-working-class character of the opposition. Despite Erdogan’s alliance with the fascistic MHP, an escalating crackdown on the opposition and a compliant media, the AKP suffered a substantial decline in its vote.
Since a failed coup on July 15, 2016, Turkey has been under a state of emergency. Some 150,000 public servants and soldiers have been dismissed from their jobs and more than 50,000 people have been imprisoned. Hundreds of critical journalists and academics have been jailed or forced into exile.
The June 24 elections have revealed the growing distrust and anger of workers against the establishment parties. While the AKP lost votes, its pro-NATO, pro-European-Union opponents could not offer any solution to the deepening economic and political crisis of Turkish capitalism other than to escalate Erdogan’s militarist and anti-working-class agenda, peddled by Ince with pseudo-democratic populist appeals.
The June 24 election has also exposed the pro-imperialist and anti-working-class character of the pseudo-left groups, which worked to channel growing opposition behind the CHP and HDP. They did their utmost to line up working-class opposition behind the CHP-led Nation Alliance and the HDP. There is no doubt that the same pseudo-left groups that have tried to divert the working class and the youth behind the bourgeois opposition will respond with extreme hostility to workers who challenge capitalist rule.
The June 24 elections have major implications for the working class not only in Turkey, but in the Middle East as a whole.
In its statement published in advance of the elections, the Socialist Equality Group of Turkey wrote:
“As Turkey is engulfed in the imperialist-led war drive and the economic crisis in the Middle East, the decisive question is the political perspective for the working class. The bloodshed in Iraq and Syria and war threats to Iran, the AKP’s threats to ‘eradicate’ the PKK leadership that fuel the civil war in Kurdish areas of Turkey, and the capital outflow driving the collapse of the lira rule out a stable and peaceful development. Enormous shocks and crises lie ahead, in which the working class will intervene.”
It is not the factions of the ruling class, supported by the petty-bourgeois opponents of Erdogan, but the Turkish working class, in close cooperation with Middle Eastern, American and European workers, that will fight against the drive toward imperialist war and its devastating economic and social consequences, including the authoritarian forms of rule prevailing in Turkey.
While the European and other imperialist powers would clearly have favoured a victory by the bourgeois opposition, they immediately began to seek a new arrangement with Erdogan.
In a speech to his followers late Sunday, Erdogan insured them that there would be no retreat from his drive to transform Turkey into a “reputable, honourable and influential country in all areas in the world.” His main rival, the CHP’s Ince, conceded defeat only on Monday, warning that the Turkish presidential system under Erdogan was “very dangerous.”
Also on Monday, the Turkish Industry & Business Association (TUSIAD), representing the country’s main conglomerates, released a statement calling for reconciliation and reform, including “a rational economic program and financial discipline,” i.e., further austerity measures and intensified exploitation of the working class. The TUSIAD also stressed the necessity for an “acceleration of the process of adaptation to the European Union.”
At his daily press briefing in Brussels, European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas expressed the hope that “Turkey will remain a committed partner for the European Union on major issues of common interest such as migration, security, regional stability and the fight against terrorism.”
Speaking at a news conference in Berlin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s spokesman Steffen Seibert said the chancellor was “looking forward to continuing a constructive, beneficial working relationship between the German and Turkish governments.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin, Indonesian President Joko Widodo and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan congratulated Erdogan for his electoral success.