About the Award: Up to 48 prize packages will be awarded to innovative and promising locally led enterprises in social and environmental sectors from emerging economies.
This year, in its 14th cycle, two award categories are offered:
SEED Low Carbon Awards:
Open for applicants from: Ghana, India, Indonesia, South Africa, Thailand and Uganda
SEED Climate Adaptation Awards:
Open for applicants from: Botswana, Malawi and Zambia
Type: Contest
Eligibility: Enterprises that fulfil the below criteria are encouraged to apply:
Innovative market-driven enterprise providing solutions to social and environmental problems
Have intention and potential to become financially sustainable
Is in partnership between different stakeholder groups
Is locally founded and locally led
Has potential for scale-up and replication
Is operational and in the early to growth stages
Selection Criteria: Enterprises that fulfil the below criteria are encouraged to apply:
Innovative market-driven enterprise providing solutions to social and environmental problems
Have intention and potential to become financially sustainable
Is in partnership between different stakeholder groups
Is locally founded and locally led
Has potential for scale-up and replication
Is operational and in the early to growth stages
Eligible Countries:
SEED Low Carbon Awards: Ghana, India, Indonesia, South Africa, Thailand and Uganda
SEED Climate Adaptation Awards: Botswana, Malawi and Zambia
Number of Awards: 48
Value of Award: A total of €163,500 funding is offered in the form of grants and matching grants for SEED Award recipients. SEED Award Winners and Runners-up will also participate in the SEED Accelerator and Catalyser programmes, respectively. These programmes are run by local business development organisations and designed to support high-potential enterprises to scale up, optimise their eco-inclusive impacts and financial planning.
In addition, Award recipients will get access to the SEED Enterprise Toolkit for collaboration and hands-on design thinking methods for enterprise development. Winners and Runners-up will join more than 300 SEED Award alumnis and be profiled at the high-level awards ceremony as well as SEED partner events.
How to Apply: Applications are now open on the SEED Platform here
About the Award: The scholarship is aimed producing expertly qualified graduates to advise or to be part of influential policy-making or programme implementing entities in Africa, and to pursue additional research priorities.
Type: PhD
Eligibility: Applications are invited from citizens of all African countries. Female candidates and, in the case of South Africa, those from previously disadvantaged backgrounds, are especially encouraged to apply.
Also candidates must:
Hold a Master’s Degree in a pertinent subject or a first or upper second class degree together with a track record of professional experience in a health or health-related field.
Have demonstrable research experience.
Undertake to register for a PhD dissertation (full time) at the University of KwaZulu–Natal (UKZN).
Make a commitment to remain on the African continent for at least TWO years after graduation.
To be Taken at (Country): South Africa
Value of Award: The value of each scholarship is R540, 000 and will be paid in equal tranches over three years and payments will be conditional on research progress. Successful candidates are required to be based in Durban, South Africa, for the duration of the scholarship, with the exception of the time during which they may undertake field research elsewhere.
Duration of Award: 3years
How to Apply:
A letter of motivation and CV.
An eight to ten-page concept note on one of HEARD’s key thematic research areas: Sexual & Reproductive Health and Rights; Gender Equality and Health; Health Governance and Finance; and Health Systems Strengthening.
Certified copies of both your academic qualifications and your full academic records. If qualifications were obtained from non-English speaking countries please ensure that an official English translation is included.
A certified copy of your ID/passport.
Two letters of reference, at least one of which must be academic. The second can be from an individual of professional standing.
It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
About the Award: The GWP-AIP Youth Leaders Fellowship aims to support and empower young people in driving the transformation required to improve the investment outlook for water security and sustainable sanitation in Africa. Nurturing youth through this expanding internship programs helps to develop the skills and experience needed for both traditional and new jobs. Ultimately, investing in youth will not only transform their lives but will also transform societies, nations, and the continent, helping to break intergenerational poverty, address inequalities, and create a stable, peaceful and prosperous Africa. GWP is, therefore, providing young female and male youth leaders with an opportunity to acquire exceptional skills and competencies that will pave a career path and develop leadership potential through this fellowship.
Selected fellows will be placed in each of the five AIP WACDEP-G pilot countries (Zambia, Uganda, Cameroon, Tunisia, and Benin) and in other countries where the AIP implementation has commenced, as well as in GWP regional offices in Southern, East, West and Central Africa, and the Mediterranean.
During their fellowship, the fellows will receive mentorship, technical support, and training from the respective supervisors. They will learn by supporting the activities of the AIP support program under the guidance of GWP personnel. In addition, the fellows will undergo an induction course aimed at increasing their understanding of AIP, GWP operations, and development approaches and frameworks for analyzing different dimensions of development and management of gender-responsive, climate-resilient development.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: Applicants must meet the following criteria to be eligible for the fellowship:
A Masters degree, at least, in fields such as water, climate, environment and natural resources, gender, and energy studies, or in any discipline that is relevant to GWP work. PhDs are advantageous.
General knowledge and understanding of water resources management.
A solid understanding of international development, gender, water security, environmental management, climate change, and climate change adaptation.
Fluency in English. Additional knowledge of languages such as French and Portuguese are desirable.
A person living in one of the AU members states, and aged 35 years or younger on March 31, 2021.
Eligible Countries: African countries
To be Taken at (Country):
Fellows will be placed in the following duty stations.
Lusaka, Zambia
Entebbe, Uganda
Yaoundé, Cameroon
Tunis, Tunisia
Cotonou, Benin
Pretoria, South Africa – GWP Southern Africa
Entebbe, Uganda – GWP Eastern Africa
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso – GWP West Africa
Yaoundé, Cameroon – GWP Central Africa
Athens, Greece – GWP Mediterranean
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: GWP will provide a small stipend to the fellows. GWP will pay for accommodation and travel expenses, if any project-related travel is required. Fellows are entirely responsible for their own living costs such as groceries and health insurance. However, they will be provided with operational tools, such as a laptop, for use during the period of the fellowship.
Under the direct supervision of the respective AIP support program personnel, the fellows will have the opportunity to be involved in the following:
Support project implementation by contributing to specific deliverables as agreed with the programme/project leaders.
Conduct background studies in the thematic priority areas that will be determined jointly by the specific programme/project leader (supervisor) and the fellow.
Document best practices, lessons learned, and experiences on key thematic areas of AIP and GWP.
Provide monitoring and evaluation support, for example, to the recording and processing of key project activities or events for weekly reporting, and information collection and sharing.
Provide support to meetings, workshops, conferences and trainings organized, and support youth-related initiatives within their country/region.
Provide assistance to the GWP regional and country support functions.
At the end of the fellowship, the fellow will produce the following:
A report on the thematic priority areas that shall be determined jointly by the supervisor and the fellow.
An overall report on the experiences gained, challenges faced, and reflections on areas that need improvement for managing future fellowships. The report should contain reflections and recommendations of possible solutions to the challenges identified.
At the end of the placement, a fellowship certificate will be issued by GWP and its collaborating partners under the AIP, along with an official letter of recommendation.
Duration of Award: The duration of the fellowship will be between six and nine months until December 31, 2021. Due to the Covid-19 restrictions at present, fellows need to be prepared to live close to a GWP office. GWP will pay for internet access, if the fellow needs to work remotely and perform their tasks online.
How to Apply: Interested applicants that meet the above requirements are invited to submit their curriculum vitae with a one-page cover letter not later than 31 March 2021.
Applications are accepted only in English and only through the online platform: here
It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Application Deadline: 14th April 2021 at 11:59 p.m. Addis Ababa time
About the Award: This Fellowship programme aims to provide practical, on-the-job experience to the young professionals in their early and middle career in the academy, public sector or international development in providing them exposure and learning in a multicultural environment of the UN and contribute to the work of ECA. It will also provide the candidates with the opportunity to familiarize with the Commission’s broad programmes and services to member States and subregional bodies in addressing economic and social dimensions of Africa’s development priorities. This should expectedly improve their skills, capacity and intellectual ability.
Eligible Field(s):
Macroeconomic policy, Economic Governance & Public Finance;
Private Sector Development & Finance, including Innovative Finance & Capital Markets;
Poverty, Inequality and social policy;
Gender equality and women empowerment;
Demographic Dynamics for Development;
Innovation and Technology;
Climate Change &Management of Natural Resources, including Green Economy;
Industrialization and Economic Diversification Policies;
Development Planning and Statistics;
Regional Integration; Infrastructure and Trade;
Labor Economics and Employment
Communication and strategic planning, monitoring and evaluation;
Eligibility: This call is open only to nationals of the Economic Commission for Africa member States.
The UN regulations on temporary positions and the following conditions will apply:
The candidate applying for this fellowship programme must be 35 years of age or below, at the time of the application;
The candidate must be a national of a member State of the Economic Commission for Africa;
The candidate must have graduated before 1 March 2019 from either a master’s degree or doctorate degree programme, or equivalent;
The candidate should have interest in one or more of the identified thematic areas;
The selected candidate will work on a predefined project, designed to contribute to specific aspects of the work programme of the mentoring Division, Sub-Regional Office or ECA Centres, and contribute to other activities;
The selected candidate should participate in national, regional or international meetings as assigned for exposure;
The selected candidate should submit and present at a seminar a peer reviewed research paper at the end of the assignment; and
The selected candidate will be part of an alumni association of ECA Fellows and member of practicing international development “community of practice”.
Eligible Countries: ECA Member countries
To be Taken at (Country): Multiple duty stations
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award:
The selected Fellows must be available to travel to the assigned duty station as may be decided by ECA after the selection process;
The selected Fellows will receive a return air ticket between his/her country of residence and the assigned duty station;
The selected Fellows will receive a one-off settling-in grant of USD 3,000 and a monthly stipend of USD 3,000 each for the duration of the fellowship. Note that the final month stipend will only be paid upon submission of:
A peer-reviewed fellowship research paper,
A comprehensive fellowship report, an approved final performance evaluation of the fellow,
A completed fellowship programme evaluation form and
An exit boarding pass or immigration stamp showing that the fellow has departed the duty station and returned back to his/her home country, where both are not the same, at the end of the fellowship programme.
Duration of Award: The fellowship program is for six months but may be extended for a maximum of another six months.
How to Apply: ALL SUBMISSIONS TO BE EMAILED TO: Email Address: RecruitmentPPost@un.org
It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Dowry in marriages is a curse for Indian society that has been haunting for a long time. This is a social curse, which has gone unchecked, though time and again it has tormented the people in general. It has become a routine affair that we come across news-reports on dowry deaths and agony of women, which reflect the evils of the dowry system. It is like a scar on a healthy society.
If you are human and have a heart surely it shivers by going through such ordeals. Ayesha, the young lady dying, recorded a video message before jumping into Sabarmati River. She had been continuously facing harassment for dowry by husband. Whereas Rashika dies in her in-law’s home at posh colony of Kolkata, family revealed that she was facing brutal torturing by in-laws for ransoming dowry, A young Phd Scholar end her life because her in-laws were abusing for continuing studies, Anissa Batra jumped off from her terrace due to dowry (Indian Express, 5March 21).
India has an alarming rate of crime over dowry; either murdered, or compelled to commit suicide. If you take a glance at statics, every 16 minutes there is a rape, one death in each hour and 20 women die in a day. 7000 deaths linked to dowry in 2017 record. Each passing year cases are rising higher, in the year 2001 was 19 per day, in 2016 was 21 per day according to the National Crime Bureau of India.
The reasons behind such evil practices
The Patriarchy: The development in the patriarchal societies has been such that women have become a weaker section of human population. Her functions have been relegated to mere procreation and attending the household chores. The patriarchal culture dilutes freedom and equality of women in all walks of life. Throughout history, violence has been systematically directed towards women in patriarchal societies. Economic and social processes operate directly and indirectly to support a patriarchal social order and family structure.
The Custom: the evil of dowry primarily associated with marriages in Hindu society, but gradually penetrated in other societies such as Muslims, Christians and to some extent also in Sikh community. Despite legal restraints, dowry continues to be a basic component of the marriage system although its form, magnitude and the associated atrocities on the women vary according to the customary norms of the different communities. The available literature on evolution of Indian culture and civilization reveals that although the ancient writers pretended to record their revered admiration for womanhood yet in actual practice women have always been suppressed and exploited by the dominant male members of the society in the name of custom. Degradation of society due to pernicious system of dowry and the unconscionable demands made by greedy and unscrupulous husbands and their relatives, resulting in an alarming number of suicidal and dowry deaths of women.
The Religion: Dowry in India is not limited to any specific religion. It is widespread among Hindus and other religions. Law of Manu insisted that woman must constantly worship her husband as God, Same case in Islam where text says if Allah permit to bow down it would command women to bow down to their husbands. Such religious interpretations consolidate the male domination over society, woman has always been kept in subjugation by her husband because by nature, she is supposed to be weak and meek. The Dowry system has been known to be in existence ever since the inception of the institution of marriage in India and has been in vogue through the ages. Although the word “dowry” was never used while negotiating a marriage, in common practice it meant property which the bride brings to her matrimonial home at the time of marriage. For example, Indian Muslims call dowry as jahez, to justify the practice in terms of jahez-e-fatimi. Islamists classify jahez into two categories: The first comprises some essential articles for the outfit of the bride as well as for conjugal life. The other is made up of valuable goods, clothes, jewelry, an amount of money for the groom’s family, which is settled on after bargaining. The jahez often far exceeds the cost of the baraat and marriage parties. The jahez is separate from cash payment as Mahr or dower that Sharia religious law requires (Abdul Waheed, 2009)
Social Interventions
There are many social movements rallied against Dowry in India. The first wave of feminist movement started in post independent and it gained momentum in 70s. There were many issues raised by women when it became clear that independent India had not provided justice and equality promised to women. One such demand was the end of the dowry system with action to be taken for crimes against women for dowry. Many organisations struggled hard against dowry to be criminalised by law such Progressive Organisation of Women in Hyderabad, Stree Sangharsh, Mahila Dakshata Samiti, Nari Raksha Samiti, Vimochana, Saheli and many more. The rising cases of dowry death and crimes had shaken Indian society that caused aggressive social movements and ultimately realised for legislation of laws.
Legal Intervention
To deal with this evil of the society, the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was passed in 1961 to prohibit the practice of giving or receiving dowry. It was amended in 1984 and 1986 respectively to curb the evil practice of dowry. To further strengthen the anti-dowry law and to stop offences of cruelty by the husband or his relatives against the wife, new provisions were added to the Indian criminal law- section 498A to Indian Penal Code and section 198A to the Criminal Procedure Code in 1983. In 2005, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act was passed, which added an additional layer of protection from dowry harassment. In 2019, Government of India passed legislation for the Muslim Women “Protection of Rights on Marriage Act”. This act declared Triple Talaq illegal and onward any Muslim husband pronounces triple talaq to his wife liable to 3 years imprisonment and fine. The fight against the institution of dowry will have to be carried out simultaneously on several fronts. Though legislation is necessary but it will not put an end to dowry, whatever deterrent punishment may be prescribed for those who demand dowry.
Where the fault lies
Why dowry is still practiced widespread despite so much outrage and criticism. Because society by and large is not realising the gravity of dowry bad consequences. It has lesser sensitivity, less guilt conscience, mild religious condemnation and ineffective legal system that allows operating. In any society, there is a tendency of copying the ruling class lifestyle and Indian society also follows as it has been highlighted by M.N. Srinivas’s concept of “Sanskritization” that tells about the social change phenomena in which lower castes imitate upper caste people’s lifestyle to overcome economic, social or religious disabilities and to raise the social status. In this way dowry crept deeply in their marriage as it was much practiced in upper, middle class Hindus. In contemporary situations dowry becomes a symbol of pride, upper and middle class celebrate marriages full of glamour and materialism and the rest of society see it showcasing their social status. Although, they are not financially capable of, in such conditions dowry demands usually occur. There are large number wedding ceremonies nowadays witnessing huge amounts of expenditure from both the Bride and Groom side compelling the less privileged section to do so. Somehow both parties are responsible for the growth of the dowry system. There is a need for hour affluent class to realise their misdeeds and how their social life impacts larger society negatively.
What is the road ahead?
Dowry is basically a cultural and social problem which cannot be eradicated by law alone. For its eradication, the society will need to fight from the grassroots level. The co-operation of the people can be sought only by creating public opinion. The success of all social legislation depends upon the support of the general public. Social understanding may be created by bringing the evils of dowry to the notice of the people through moral as well as formal education. Youth should be taught the importance of new social values which can be attained only after getting education. The change in the ideas of the people can be brought about by using mass media also. Marriage is a sacramental union, not the business. The sanctity of marriage is lost by dowry demand, the sooner the dowry becomes the thing of the past, the better for our society.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba announced this week that the country’s National Security and Defense Council had approved a strategy that is aimed at retaking Crimea and reintegrating the strategically important peninsula.
Crimea, a peninsula in the Black Sea, was annexed by Russia in March 2014, following a US-backed, far-right coup in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine.
Map of the Black Sea region
Announcing the move on Twitter, Kuleba wrote, “The signal is clear: we don’t just call on the world to help us return Crimea, Ukraine makes its own dedicated and systemic efforts under President [Volodymyr] Zelensky’s leadership.”
As part of its “3 pillars” strategy for retaking Ukraine, Kuleba notably stated that Zelensky’s administration sought “full Ukrainian sovereignty” over not just Crimea but that of the port city of Sevastopol as well, which serves as the home of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet.
Following Kuleba’s comments, Ukrainian President Zelensky announced via Twitter the creation of a Crimean Platform Initiative which the Ukrainian government described as “a new consultative and coordination format initiated by Ukraine to improve the efficiency of the international response to the occupation of Crimea, respond to growing security challenges, step up international pressure on Russia, prevent further human rights violations, protect victims of the occupying power and to achieve the de-occupation of Crimea and its return to Ukraine.”
The first summit of the newly created group is planned to take place in August and Zelensky reported having already spoken with the EU, Canada the United Kingdom and Turkey regarding the group’s creation.
Following the Stalinist dissolution of the Soviet Union, the port of Sevastopol had been leased to Russia by several successive Ukrainian governments. Its potential loss following the US-backed ousting of the President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 was widely seen as one of the primary motivators in Russia annexing the militarily strategic peninsula.
As Kuleba and Kiev are well aware, any attempt to impose its “full sovereignty” over one of the Russian Navy’s most important warm water ports on the Black Sea would result in a full-scale war that threatens the outbreak of a third world war.
On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova denounced Kuleba’s and Zelensky’s comments as a thinly veiled threat of war over Crimea.
“All efforts by Kiev to reclaim Crimea are illegitimate and cannot be interpreted in any other way but a threat of aggression against two Russian [federal] subjects. We reiterate that we will consider participation of any states or organizations in such activities, including the Crimean Platform initiative, as a hostile act against Russia and direct encroachment on its territorial integrity," Zakharova noted.
Kiev’s escalation of the conflict with Russia over Crimea comes under conditions where the country remains mired in a civil war in eastern Ukraine that has now lasted for almost seven years. The war has claimed the lives of over 14,000 people, displaced 1.4 million and left 3.5 million in need of humanitarian assistance. UNICEF recently noted that millions in the war zone still lack access to clean drinking water and some don’t have regular access to any water, even as COVID-19 cases are again rising sharply across the country.
The move of the Ukrainian government follows a series of anti-Russian political crackdowns and military buildups that have exacerbated the threat of a full-scale war. In February, the Zelensky government undemocratically shut down three popular television stations run by pro-Moscow opposition leader and oligarch Viktor Medvedchuk on the grounds of “national security.” Medvedchuk was later sanctioned and Kiev has continued to charge opposition politicians and reporters with “treason” for backing a negotiated settlement with Moscow over the separatist controlled regions of eastern Ukraine.
The crackdown was predictably condemned by the Kremlin which argued that it demonstrated that Kiev was attempting “to solve the problem of [Donbass in Eastern Ukraine] by force.”
International monitors in eastern Ukraine have also recently reported a rapid increase in the number of ceasefire violations by both Ukrainian soldiers and Russian-backed separatists. This year, already 10 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed.
While Zelensky was initially elected in 2019 on the basis of a rejection of the far-right militaristic nationalism espoused by his predecessor Petro Poroshenko, Zelensky is now adopting a potentially even more reckless strategy. Much indicates that he is being supported in this by the United States.
Last week an op-ed in the Washington Post suggested that Zelensky is desperate to receive a phone call from US President Joe Biden but is yet to receive one. The op-ed backed Zelensky’s recent political crackdowns and urged him to move even more aggressively against Russia.
“Mr. Zelensky now has the opportunity to forge a partnership with Mr. Biden that could decisively advance Ukraine’s attempt to break free from Russia and join the democratic West. He should seize on it,” the paper’s editorial board urged.
Speaking to Politico, a former US official close to the Biden administration was quoted as saying, “There is merit to having Zelensky sit and wait his turn for a call. He is not struggling with all his might to fight corruption. In fact, pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine have gained immense power since Zelensky took over. So there needs to be tough love with Zelensky when that one-on-one conversation does happen.”
Ukraine is highly dependent on military aid and backing from the US in its confrontation with Russia. On Monday, the Pentagon announced a $125 million military aid package for Ukraine, the first distribution of aid to Ukraine under the Biden administration.
There is still $150 million left in the allocated 2021 Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funding appropriated by Congress. However, this money will not be released until the Defense and State departments jointly certify that there has been “sufficient progress” made by Kiev on “military reform” efforts.
While Biden has yet to speak with Zelensky, on the seventh anniversary of Russia’s annexation of Crimea the White House released a statement backing Ukraine in the dispute stating, “The United States does not and will never recognize Russia’s purported annexation of the peninsula and we will stand with Ukraine against Russia’s aggressive acts.”
In its reckless military escalation, the Zelensky government is also driven by a deep social and political crisis in Ukraine itself. Its political support has fallen sharply as the country’s economy and health care system have been devastated by COVID-19, with no significant vaccination effort in sight. There is a real danger that the Ukrainian ruling class, driven by a deepening domestic crisis, is trying to divert these internal tensions outward, resulting in a war that would threaten the lives of millions.
Prosecutors filed a case Wednesday at Turkey’s Constitutional Court to ban the Kurdish-nationalist People’s Democratic Party (HDP). The same day, HDP deputy Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu’s parliamentary mandate was stripped over statements he made on social media. These draconian attacks on democratic rights, targeting a party that won nearly 6 million votes in the last election, provoked protests in cities across Turkey.
People's Democratic Party lawmaker Omer Faruk Gergerlioglu, center, reacts after the parliament stripped him of his mandate, in Ankara, Turkey, March 17, 2021. (AP Photo)
Support is collapsing for President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) and its far-right ally, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), as they implement a “herd immunity” strategy on the COVID-19 pandemic. With 3 million cases and 30,000 dead, even according to highly-manipulated official figures, the AKP has fallen to 36 percent in recent polls, and the MHP to only 8 percent. On March 2, Erdoğan pledged “extensive work regarding changing political party and election regulations” in response.
The AKP and the MHP both called to ban the HDP. In early March, MHP chairman Devlet Bahçeli declared:, “If Turkey is a state of law, the closure of the HDP is urgent, vital, a must.” AKP parliamentary group deputy chair Cahit Özkan claimed that Turkey’s entire population was demanding the banning of the HDP. He said, “Eighty-three million people [in Turkey] desire the closure of this party both politically at the ballot boxes and legally within the constitutional order.”
Prosecutors also demanded 684 people related to the HDP be banned from politics. They allege that these individuals are linked to the KCK (Kurdistan Communities Union), an umbrella group including the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Democratic Union Party (PYD) in Syria, and the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) in Iran. The PKK is banned in Turkey as a terrorist organization.
Prosecutors state: “Like parties previously closed down by the Constitutional Court, the HDP is completely under the control of the PKK/KCK, and it has been revealed that it is a so-called legal offshoot of the PKK.”
Yesterday, in coordinated raids in Istanbul, Turkish police arrested 10 leading members of the HDP as well as Human Rights Association (IHD) co-chairman Ozturk Turkdogan.
HDP leaders Pervin Buldan and Mithat Sancar condemned the state’s move to ban their party as a “coup” against “the people’s will.” Buldan said, “My call to all forces of democracy is the following: Whatever is done to us today will be done to you tomorrow. Standing up against it together is a responsibility of us all.” She called to “teach the AKP a lesson at the ballot box as soon as possible.”
The International Committee of the Fourth International is irreconcilably opposed to these attacks on fundamental democratic rights. Its opposition to Erdoğan’s police-state measures targeting the rights of Kurdish people and of the HDP does not, however, signify any lessening of its opposition to the bankrupt politics of Kurdish nationalism. This bankruptcy is now glaringly exposed. The HDP has tacitly backed not only the Kurdish militias’ alliance with US imperialism, but also the “herd immunity” policy of the ruling class in Turkey, as across Europe and America.
The “forces of democracy” to which the HDP appeals include the imperialist powers and a coalition of Turkish bourgeois opposition parties led by the Republican People’s Party (CHP). These include the CHP, the far-right Good Party, and two AKP split-offs: the Future Party of former AKP Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and the Democracy and Progress Party (DEVA) of former AKP Economy Minister Ali Babacan.
While the European Union (EU) stated their “deep concerns,” the newly-installed Biden administration in Washington also criticized Erdoğan’s policy. US State Department spokesman Ned Price said Washington is “monitoring the initiation of efforts to dissolve the People’s Democratic Party [HDP], a decision that would unduly subvert the will of Turkish voters, further undermining democracy in Turkey.”
Babacan, Davutoğlu and CHP leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu all condemned the case against the HDP. Kılıçdaroğlu stated, “Developments have shown once again that there is no democracy in this country.”
The HDP’s pseudo-left sister parties in Europe also called on their governments to defend “democracy” in Turkey. The German Left Party called on Chancellor Angela Merkel to “take the diplomatic initiative and put pressure on the Erdoğan government to stop attacks on the opposition in Turkey,” while the French Stalinist Communist Party demanded France and the EU impose sanctions on the Erdoğan regime and support “forces of democracy.”
All these forces have in fact established a record as proven enemies of democratic rights and of the working class in Turkey and the Middle East.
The Turkish bourgeois opposition parties’ statements against the persecution of the HDP are shot through with hypocrisy. While Davutoğlu and Babacan were henchmen of Erdoğan for years in his drive to build a police state, the CHP voted an AKP constitutional amendment removing HDP deputies’ parliamentary immunity. As a result, several HDP leaders, including Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ, have languished in jail since 2016.
As for the imperialist governments and their pseudo-left accomplices, they have supported the US-led war drive in the Middle East initiated with the Gulf War and the Stalinist dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Their war drive not only devastated the Middle East, inflaming ethnic conflicts and attacks on democratic rights, but undermined workers’ wages and health care in their own countries. As a result, over 1 million people in America and Europe are dead of COVID-19.
Last month, Biden launched a missile strike on Syria, killing 17 people, to signal that Washington intends to continue the imperialist rape of the Middle East even as hundreds of thousands of its own citizens die due to its herd immunity policy on COVID-19.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the imperialist war drive in the Middle East have exposed the bankruptcy of capitalism and the inability of any nationalist perspective to resolve the great problems posed to humanity today, which are international. The only force with a progressive solution to these problems is the international working class, mobilized on a socialist basis against war and for a scientifically-based, global medical response to the pandemic.
The various factions of the bourgeoisie in Turkey are all indissolubly tied to imperialism. Erdoğan responded to Biden’s missile strike by issuing a pathetic appeal to Washington and the EU for support, titled “The West should help Turkey end Syria’s civil war.” He asks Biden to renew a struggle for “democracy, liberty and human rights” by militarily backing his government in the dirty war in Syria.
Boasting of having created “safe zones” and stopped “irregular migration” to Europe, by bombing Syria and building concentration camps for millions of refugees, Erdoğan asked in return that Washington and the EU not support the Kurdish nationalists. He wrote, “Primarily, we expect the West to adopt a clear position against the YPG, the PKK’s Syrian branch.”
The People’s Protection Units (YPG) are the PYD’s armed wing and the central force in the US- and European-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) militia.
The Biden administration has however so far refused to discuss Erdoğan’s requests, and instead made clear that it will continue to support Kurdish forces in Syria. A State Department statement issued at the end of January, just after Biden took office, said, “The United States remains in close coordination with local partners in northeast Syria, including the SDF.”
Ever since Washington and its European imperialist allies began employing Kurdish forces as their main proxies in Syria, the Erdoğan government began targeting the HDP, fearing an attempt to establish a separate Kurdish state inside Turkey’s present borders. In 2016 HDP deputies’ parliamentary immunity was removed. Since then, over 15,000 people have been detained and 6,000 arrested for being HDP members or supporters. Last June, HDP deputies Leyla Güven and Musa Farisoğulları were stripped of their parliamentary mandates.
Amid expectations of renewed imperialist aggression in the Middle East under the new Biden administration, Erdoğan is again escalating this reactionary policy, targeting the HDP.
Amid rapidly rising infection rates in the occupied West Bank that have overwhelmed its limited health care system, hospitals have been forced to turn away COVID-19 patients, prompting the Palestinian Authority to impose a five-day partial lockdown that began on Monday.
UNRWA health staff member assists a Palestine refugee patient at the Am'ari Health Centre, West Bank. (Credit: UNRWA)
The West Bank, with a population of 3.1 million Palestinians, has recorded more than 146,000 cases and 1,667 deaths since March 2020, likely an underestimate given the lack of testing facilities. Daily new infections have surpassed 2,000 for some weeks, largely due to newer and more deadly variants of the disease.
The World Bank said that with more than 21 percent of tests proving positive in the West Bank and 29 percent in Gaza, the pandemic is out of control. Last weekend, there were 20,733 active cases in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, while the number of seriously ill patients in the West Bank had risen to 170, of whom 48 were on ventilators.
Comparing the situation with the first and second waves of the pandemic, a Palestinian Authority (PA) health official said that today “the picture is much more serious and dangerous, and the atmosphere is that there’s no control over anything.”
The PA’s Health Minister Mai al-Kaileh told the PA’s official Wafa news agency that hospital occupancy rates had reached a staggering 110 percent last week, while Ramallah, al-Bireh, Jericho and the Jerusalem suburbs had reached 115 percent. She said that occupancy rates in intensive care units were high, with nearly half of critical COVID-19 patients reliant on respirators.
Local media is replete with stories of people being turned away from hospitals or having to sleep on mattresses in hospital hallways or storage rooms, while others are sleeping on chairs. A Palestinian nurse in Bethlehem described the situation in hospitals as “hellish,” saying the situation is “so much worse than anyone can imagine.” She told the Mondoweiss website, “We are turning people away, very sick people, because we have nowhere to put them. At this point it’s like we were waiting for people to die just so that someone else can take their bed or their ventilator.”
Middle East Eye cited the case of Issa Saafi who had taken his mother, suffering from COVID symptoms and a heart attack, to Ramallah’s public hospital. A video of the visibly distressed Issa speaking to a local Palestinian news station about what happened to his mother went viral on Palestinian social media last week. He explained that with nowhere else to put her, staff wheeled her to a storage room. He said, “When we were there, we saw about four nurses treating 80 patients. They couldn’t keep up with anyone. On just that first day when I was sitting in the hospital, I saw three people die from COVID-19 in front of me. It was devastating to watch. The hospitals can’t keep up. The doctors can’t keep up. The doctors kept telling us they are doing their best, but they can’t do anything more for us.”
But while the virus is killing Palestinians at alarming rates, there is little prospect they will get vaccinated anytime soon.
Responsibility for the horrendous situation in the West Bank lies with Israel, the occupying power. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government has refused to supply the Palestinians with vaccine. This is a flagrant violation of Israel’s responsibilities under the 1949 Geneva Convention for the health of the Palestinians living in the areas it controls, including the obligation to ensure medical supplies and preventative measures “to combat the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics.”
Furthermore, while Israel agreed under the Oslo Accords to co-operate on issues involving health care and epidemics, it in practice reneged on its obligations to the extent that the Palestinians have long endured problems importing medical equipment. Israel’s opaque security permit system makes it difficult for those in need of life-saving medical care to seek treatment in Israel or abroad.
Health Minister Yuli Edelstein arrogantly declared, “It is our interest, not our legal obligation, but it is our interest to make sure that Palestinians get the vaccine, that we don’t have COVID-19 spreading.” He said, “First of all we can also look into the so-called Oslo agreements, where it says loud and clear that Palestinians have to take care of their own health.”
This has left the PA dependent upon the World Health Organisation’s COVAX program that has been subject to repeated delays, although it has now begun to receive 12,000 doses of Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine for medical workers, including 2,000 for health care professionals in Gaza. But several hundred doses of the vaccine were given to PA ministers, their staff, PA officials and their families, Palestinian media figures close to the PA and 200 to the Jordanian royal household, provoking enormous popular anger against the Palestinian elite.
It was only after Israel came under intense international pressure, including from the UN, that it agreed to send a paltry 5,000 doses for Palestinian health care workers as a “humanitarian” gesture and began vaccinating Palestinians who work in the settlements and in Israel, with some 105,000 Palestinian workers vaccinated to date, to stop the virus spreading within Israel itself.
Israel’s criminal policy towards the Palestinians is all the more obscene given that Netanyahu has made the vaccination drive the centre piece of his campaign for re-election on March 23, the fourth election in two years. Netanyahu aims to vaccinate the entire population over the age of 16 by the end of April. According to Health Ministry figures released earlier this week, Israel has given the first vaccine shot to 5,200,395 people, of whom 4,291,116 (46 percent of the population) have also had the second.
To achieve this, Netanyahu paid premium prices for the vaccine and—in breach of privacy laws—handed over the anonymized but detailed data collected by Israel’s health care network over to Pfizer. According to the Health Ministry, Israel has paid $788 million so far for the vaccines and expects to pay a similar amount for more doses in the future. This suggests that Israel has paid more than the $23.5 per Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine dose ($47 per person) reported by the Kan public broadcaster in January, which was higher than the amount that Pfizer had initially said the shots would cost and higher than either the US or the European Union (EU) is paying for the vaccine.
According to the Israeli Democracy Institute (IDI), Israel has bought 24 million doses, enough to vaccinate 12 million people, i.e., the entire population of Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories above the age of 16 and still leaving a surplus!
In February, Ha’aretz reported that hundreds of doses were being thrown away every day due to Israelis cancelling or failing to turn up for their appointments, fueling Palestinian anger against Israel. At the same time, Netanyahu sought to use this surplus to give to 19 countries, including Guatemala, Honduras and the Czech Republic that had increased their diplomatic presence in Jerusalem, saying “I think it buys goodwill,” until forced to halt the transfer pending the outcome of a legal challenge in the courts.
This inequitable, irrational and utterly criminal distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine is an indictment not just of Israel, but the imperialist powers and the Arab bourgeoisie that have backed Israel’s suppression of the Palestinians and paved the way for this catastrophe.
It confirms yet again that the global allocation of human resources under capitalism is an abject failure. Despite the wonderful achievement of producing safe and effective vaccines against the disease in less than twelve months, their distribution is subject to the diktat of the markets and the narrow and selfish interests of competing national elites that serve only to prolong the pandemic and social and economic suffering.
At the end of February, the Socialist Party (PSOE)-Podemos government unveiled a new plan for an €11 billion bailout package for Spain’s corporations. The government will begin disbursing the funds within 40 days, Finance Minister María Jesús Montero announced last Thursday.
Spain's Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez (PSOE), second left, walks next to Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias, second right, and First Deputy Prime Minister Carmen Calvo, left, at the Moncloa Palace in Madrid, Spain, Tuesday, Jan. 14 2020. (Image Credit: AP Photo/Manu Fernandez)
The bailout, approved by a Cabinet meeting last Friday, is geared to the tourism sector, as well as restaurants, bars and cultural venues, according to PSOE Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. Last year was the worst year for tourism in Spain since the 1970s, with tourist revenue falling more than 75 percent compared to 2019. Spain’s economy shrank 11 percent overall in 2020.
The new proposal is only the latest in a series of bailouts, but it is the first to provide direct aid to companies, instead of state-backed loans. The Spanish state has so far underwritten around €120 billion in loans to big business, handing approximately €51 billion to the transport and hospitality sector and around €24 billion to manufacturing.
The handing out of billions of euros of free money to Spanish corporations gives the lie to the absurd claim that “there is no money” to fund a shelter-at-home policy across the country. Workers have been forced to continue working in unsafe offices, factories and other workplaces amid a raging pandemic to ensure the continued funneling of profits into the coffers of the bourgeoisie.
Children, teachers and other education workers have likewise been herded back into overcrowded and unsanitary classrooms so parents could to go to work, providing a perfect breeding ground for the coronavirus. Spain has recorded over 3.2 million coronavirus cases, the eighth-highest total in the world.
The new bailout plan includes three separate funds. The first is a €3 billion programme to restructure Spanish corporate debt, to be administered by the state-owned bank Instituto de Crédito Oficial (ICO). Companies will be able to solicit funding from the ICO until the end of 2021, which can include participatory loans and debt relief, all backed up to 80 percent by the state.
A further €1 billion will be handed to medium-sized companies in capital injections as part of the second fund, which will be overseen by state-owned financing company COFIDES. Aimed at preventing insolvency, this so-called “recapitalisation” plan would see the Spanish state potentially taking a temporary stake in the bailed-out businesses in exchange for a variety of different government-guaranteed loans.
This bailout will follow the same pattern as the €10 billion fund the PSOE-Podemos government set up last July to rescue companies considered “strategically important.” This €10 billion rescue plan is overseen by the state-owned holding company SEPI (State Society of Industrial Participation), whose first act was to hand airline Air Europa €475 million in loans last November.
Since then, SEPI has distributed hundreds of millions of euros to large companies such as construction engineering firm Duro Felguera (€120 million in loans) and long-haul airline Plus Ultra (€52 million), with a further bailout deal of up to €550 million likely to be secured by steel manufacturer Celsa within the month.
The final strand of the €11-billion bailout plan will see €7 billion transferred to “small and medium-sized enterprises” (SMEs) and self-employed workers in the form of non-refundable direct aid, administered by Spain’s 17 autonomous regional governments. The funds must be spent on “fixed costs” or debt reduction, such as paying for rent or bills and paying suppliers or employees.
The Balearic Islands and the Canary Islands, whose economies are largely reliant on the seasonal influx of holiday-makers, will receive €2 billion of this fund. These two regions have been among the hardest hit by the slump in tourism revenues due to pandemic-related international travel restrictions. The Balearics saw a drop in gross domestic product of 27 percent in 2020, while the Canary Islands saw their regional income fall by around 20 percent, according to Bank of Spain data.
While the PSOE-Podemos government claims that the bailout programme is intended primarily to assist self-employed workers and SMEs, larger businesses will receive the lion’s share of the bailout. Self-employed workers will only be able to claim a maximum of either €3,000 or €4,000, depending on which taxation system they are under, a pitiful sum which will do little to help the hundreds of thousands of workers who have lost almost all of their income due to the pandemic.
Larger companies, however, can claim up to €200,000 depending on the size of their business and the scale of their pandemic losses. Companies and self-employed workers must be able to prove that their business has suffered losses of more than 30 percent in 2020 as compared to 2019. “Micro-SMEs” and the self-employed can claim up to 40 percent of their losses in relief, and larger companies can claim up to 20 percent.
In an attempt to give the legislation a progressive gloss, the PSOE-Podemos government also included a clause imposing the pathetic “conditions” that businesses do not raise executive pay, that they are up to date with their tax filings and that they do not operate in tax havens. The bailout funds will also be contingent on companies remaining in operation until at least June 2022.
The initial bailout plan had included €2 billion in direct aid to companies, rather than the €7 billion proposed in the final plan. Only after a tactical dispute with the pseudo-left Podemos party—which demanded €8 billion in direct handouts—did the PSOE government raise this amount to €5 billion and then to the current €7 billion.
Podemos’ squabble with the PSOE over exactly how much of the €11 billion fund should be directly transferred to companies is an exposure of their pro-capitalist, anti-working-class orientation. They have no objection to funneling billions of euros into the pockets of Spain’s business owners, desiring only that they get a greater say in exactly how it be disbursed.
Last November, Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias entered into a similar spat with the PSOE over his party’s initial exclusion from a commission overseeing the distribution of European Union bailout funds to the super-rich. Soon after, the government included Iglesias on the commission .
While billions have been handed to the bourgeoisie, nearly 1 million workers have lost their jobs since the start of the pandemic, bringing total unemployment up to over 4 million—the highest figure since 2013. A further 900,000 people remain furloughed under the government’s ERTE scheme, and may never regain their previous jobs.
Meanwhile, the median salary in Spain has plummeted, falling by 3.1 percent to €1,641 a month at the start of March. This is the largest annual decrease in at least 50 years. More than a quarter (27.4 percent) of children in Spain is at risk of poverty, Prime Minister Sánchez admitted last month, or 2.3 million individuals.
Instead of making funding available to allow workers to stay at home on full pay and providing the necessary investment into health care infrastructure and personnel, the PSOE-Podemos government has pursued a herd immunity policy in all but name. Even as cases and deaths rocketed at the start of the year, the nominally “left” government refused to implement lifesaving lockdowns, leaving it up to regional authorities to decide on limited measures.
This criminal inaction has led to the deaths of over 100,000 people in Spain as a result of the pandemic. Many of these lives would undoubtedly have been saved if the enormous sums handed to big business had instead been used to fund a scientifically informed programme of lockdowns and other vital public health measures.
Official data published last month on the federal government’s COVID-19 Superannuation Early Release Scheme provides an insight into the growing financial and social distress confronting working class families across the country.
The scheme allowed individuals or sole traders who had suffered financial hardship of at least 20 percent due to loss of hours or jobs, to access up to $10,000 from their superannuation retirement savings in the 2019–2020 financial year. A second round of the scheme, from July 1 to December 31, permitted people to apply to withdraw a further $10,000.
The welfare queue outside a Centrelink office in Sydney, March, 2020 [Photo: WSWS]
Overall, 3.46 million people withdrew $36.4 billion from super funds to help with everyday payments such as mortgages, bills, healthcare costs and car payments, receiving an average of $7,638. That is more than a quarter of the workforce.
Of that total, 1.4 million made two withdrawals. Most people who withdrew twice took out more on their second application than on their first, averaging $8,268.
Many, especially younger workers, were left with little or no retirement funds. According to the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) data for the June and September quarters, super accounts with remaining balances of less than $1,000 accounted for about 25 percent of payments.
Approximately 163,000 account balances were completely depleted, with the majority of those people under the age of 25. Those aged between 20 and 30 accounted for 61 percent of all the COVID emergency withdrawals, and 31 percent of young people who accessed the scheme emptied their accounts completely.
Many of those accessing their retirement funds were from low-paid and casualised employment in the retail and hospitality sectors. According to a 2018 parliamentary report, approximately 79 percent of all hospitality workers were in casual employment, even before the pandemic.
A major retail industry fund, the Retail Employees Superannuation Trust (REST), saw 21,364 accounts entirely closed by December 2. APRA reported that 460,529 out of the 1.7 million REST fund members had accessed the early release scheme, withdrawing nearly $3.3 billion of REST’s total of $55.5 billion.
Hostplus, a super fund set up for hospitality workers, which oversees $44 billion, saw 426,015 members withdraw just over $3 billion.
The worst is yet to come. Millions of workers have been trying to keep their heads above water through the federal government’s JobKeeper wage subsidy and JobSeeker coronavirus supplement payments, which expire on March 28.
As of January, some 1.5 million workers were still relying on the JobKeeper program and 1.3 million were receiving JobSeeker payments. This means that millions of workers will be thrown into poverty when these programs expire and JobSeeker is cut to $44 per day.
The pandemic has accelerated the underlying social crisis. According to Australian Taxation Office, another 59,900 applications were made to access superannuation on compassionate grounds in 2019-20—a 10 percent annual increase.
About 33,700 of these were approved in full or in part, worth $513.5 million, in order to pay for medical treatments such as IVF, weight-loss surgery and dentistry. The money could also be used to pay for palliative care, home renovations for the disabled, funeral costs or to avoid a home foreclosure.
From its establishment in 1993 by the Keating Labor government, backed by the trade unions, the compulsory superannuation system has forced workers to pay for their own retirements, thereby slashing the government’s aged pension bill and creating a massive slush fund for investors on the financial markets.
Today, joint employer-union industry funds manage accounts worth about $3 trillion, making them some of the country’s largest investors. This gives the union bureaucrats, who sit on the super fund boards, a direct material interest in driving up the extraction of profits from the labour power of workers, who are also forced to contribute to the funds whether they like it or not.
According to a Treasury report released last October, there is enough money accumulated in the superannuation system to buy every company listed on the Australian stockmarket, one and a half times over.
The salaries of super fund CEOs stand in stark contrast to workers’ wages, contributing to the growing gulf between the financial elite and the working class. According to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, industry superannuation fund chief executives are paid between $588,000 and $1.1 million yearly.
The CEO of the largest industry fund, AustralianSuper, received a package of $1,111,234. AustralianSuper is owned by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) and an employer peak body, the Australian Industry Group.
At Hostplus, CEO David Elia had a base package of $899,045 plus $221,979 in short-term bonuses. REST CEO Vicki Doyle received payments of up to $826,0000, including an annual bonus of $158,976.
