7 Mar 2022

Concerns over impact of Russian sanctions on global financial system

Nick Beams


Concerns are starting to be raised in financial media circles and by economic analysts about the effects on the global financial system of the sweeping sanctions imposed on Russia both immediately and in the longer term.

Combined action by the US and the EU have excluded seven major Russian banks from the Swift international financial messaging system. Banks involved in the oil market were excluded from the ban, but moves are now being considered to cut off Russian exports.

An image of a stock aggregator (Credit: QuoteInspector.com)

Even more significant than the Swift measure is the ban on foreign currency transactions by the Russian central bank. It has been prevented from using a large portion of its foreign currency reserves, estimated to total $630 billion, to prop up the rouble and country’s financial system.

While the central bank nominally owns its reserves, they are held in large measure as digital entries in the accounts of other banks. These accounts have now been frozen, effectively expropriated.

An article in the Financial Times noted: “This digitalisation separates ownership and control of FX (foreign exchange) reserves. Russia owns them but Western issuers and computerised holders of these assets control access to them. … From a source of economic strength during peacetime, FX reserves turned into the source of a crash during war.”

While the measures against Russia are not unique—the US has used them against other smaller countries in the past—they have never been deployed on such a scale. Russia, with a GDP of around $1.7 trillion, is the world’s 12th largest economy and a member of the G20.

So far, the world financial system has not been adversely affected—US Fed chair Jerome Powell said last week markets were “functioning well.” But it is still early days and there are concerns about flow-on effects.

An article in the Wall Street Journal made the point that the sanctions could remove a direct source of short-term funding for Western banks and spread fear among them. It could make them “hesitant to lend to one another because they don’t know who might have exposure to Russia.”

In a recent note to clients, Credit Suisse analyst Zoltan Pozsar estimated that the Bank of Russia and private sector Russian entities together have loaned about $200 billion in the foreign-exchange swaps. Another $100 billion of Russian money is deposited in banks outside the country. A total of $300 billion was a significant amount and enough to influence funding.

Pozsar said linkages in the financial “pipes” could generate unexpected shocks by jamming the flow of money, as with the collapse of the US investment bank Lehman in 2008.

The collapse of the $3 billion US hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management in September 1998 is also being remembered. It had to be bailed out by the New York Reserve because its demise, the result of wrong bets on the rouble, threatened to provoke a crisis for the entire US financial system.

FT columnist Gillian Tett recently wrote there was “concern that some emerging market funds will dump non-Russian assets to cover losses on frozen Russian holdings,” amid talk that some overleveraged hedge funds had been wrongfooted and “memories of the 1998 collapse of Long-Term Capital Management are being revived.”

Economic historian Adam Tooze has commented that Russian reserve accumulation, derived from its oil and gas sales, is a source of funding in Western markets and “part of complex chains of transactions that may now be put in jeopardy by the sanctions.”

Longer-term concerns about the future direction of the international monetary system and the world economy are also being raised. An editorial in the Economist headlined “A new age of economic conflict” said the implications of the sanctions on Russia were “huge” and marked a “new era of high-risk economic warfare that could further splinter the world economy.”

One issue that has been raised is that the sanctions, which demonstrate the enormous financial power of US imperialism because the dollar functions as the world’s major currency, will lead to a bipolar financial world—one based on the dollar and the other on the Chinese renminbi.

There is no realistic prospect that the renminbi can assume anything like the dollar’s global role given the fact that the Chinese financial system is controlled by the state while US markets, by contrast, are open and liquid. Furthermore, at present the renminbi is used to finance only 2 percent of world trade. While there are predictions it could rise to 7 percent in the next few years, it is dwarfed by the position of the dollar which finances 59 percent.

However, as the Economist noted, the sanctions will have long-term effects, the implications of which were “daunting.”

“The more they are used, the more countries will seek to avoid relying on Western finance. That would make the threat of exclusion less powerful. It would also lead to a dangerous fragmentation of the world economy. In the 1930s, a fear of trade embargoes was associated with a rush to autarky and economic spheres of influence.”

While the editorial did not make the point, this fracturing was one of the economic driving forces behind the eruption of World War II.

China will no doubt be carefully examining the implications of the Russian sanctions because in a war, or even a conflict over Taiwan or some other issue, the US and Western powers could freeze its $3.3 trillion of foreign reserves. Other countries, such as India, “may worry they are more vulnerable to Western pressure,” the Economist said.

An article by Wall Street Journal writer Jon Sindreu said the sanctions on Russia, which showed that reserves accumulated by central banks can simply be taken away, raised the question of “what is money?”

He noted that, in the wake of the Asian financial crisis of 1997–98, scared developing countries sought to protect themselves by accumulating foreign currency holdings, raising them from less than $2 trillion to a record of $14.9 trillion in 2021.

“Recent events highlight the error in this thinking: Barring gold, these assets are someone else’s liability—someone who can just decide they are worth nothing,” Sindreu said.

In the 19th century and into the first part of the 20th, the world financial system operated on the gold standard. This system collapsed with the eruption of World War I and attempts to restore it in the 1920s failed, leading to the breakdown of international trading and financial relations in the 1930s and a return to barter in some cases.

A new system of international finance was devised at the Bretton Woods conference of 1944 where it was determined that the US dollar would function as the global currency, with the proviso that dollar holdings could be redeemed by gold at the rate of $35 per ounce.

The Bretton Woods system was ended in August 1971. Due to mounting balance of trade and balance of payments deficits, reflecting the start of the economic decline of the US from its absolute post-war dominance, US President Nixon unilaterally removed the gold backing from the US dollar.

Since then, the world economy has functioned entirely on the basis of the US dollar as a fiat currency, one that has no backing by gold or any other commodity embodying labour, the ultimate source of value within the capitalist system.

Money within the capitalist economy is not only a means of financing trade and financial transactions, it is also a store of value. With the dollar operating as a fiat currency this function been sustained through a kind of fiction, or circularity. The dollar is eagerly sought after because it is regarded as a store of value, and it is a store of value because it is needed as a means of payment for international trade and financial transactions.

Now the basis of this system, which has operated for the past 50 years, is being called into question.

As Sindreu put it, “the entire artifice of ‘money’ as a universal store of value risks being eroded by the banning of key exports to Russia and boycotts of the kind corporations like Apple and Nike announced this week.”

If currency balances become “worthless computer entries” then there will be a shift back to gold.

He noted that one of the barriers to China’s push to internationalise the renminbi has been the fear that access to it was always at risk of being revoked by political considerations. “It is now apparent that, to a point, this is true of all currencies.”

His conclusion was that: “For once the old trope may not be ill advised: buy gold. Many of the world’s central banks will surely be doing it.”

Just as the US-led NATO military war against Russia marks a new stage in geopolitical relations, directly raising the threat of world war, its weaponisation of finance has raised all the contradictions lying at the very heart of the capitalist economy, including within the entire value and monetary system.

COVID cases explode in South Korea ahead of presidential election

Ben McGrath


COVID-19 is currently raging out of control in South Korea only days before the country’s March 9 presidential election. Daily cases have surged to over 250,000 new infections while the death toll has reached all-time highs as well. Neither the current Moon Jae-in administration nor any of the presidential candidates have proposed any measures to stop the spread of the deadly virus.

On Friday, new cases had increased by 2.6 times compared to two weeks earlier, according to health authorities. On March 4, the number of daily cases reached a record high of 266,850. In little more than a month, daily cases have exploded since first topping 10,000 on January 26. The current positivity rate of those tested is approximately 50 percent. Last week, 1,013 people died, double the number of deaths the previous week. This includes a record 216 people who passed away on March 5 alone. These grim facts expose the fraudulent narrative that the Omicron variant is milder and less dangerous.

A medical worker in a booth takes a nasal sample from a man at a makeshift testing site in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Nov. 24, 2021 (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

Despite the surge in cases, Seoul has further reduced the few anti-virus measures remaining. On Saturday, the curfew on businesses such as cafés and restaurants was pushed back by one hour to 11 p.m. Interior Minister Jeon Hae-cheol made clear the decision was taken for the benefit of businesses, not public health. “The government took into consideration the prolonged and worsening hardship of business owners and small merchants despite a series of government compensations and partial easing of social distancing,” Jeon stated.

The QR code check-in system confirming vaccinated individuals was “temporarily” suspended on March 1 and all contact tracing is being eliminated as well. That same day, the government dropped all requirements for someone in close contact with a confirmed patient to quarantine or to receive a PCR test.

The change came right before the beginning of the new academic year and is certainly meant to keep schools open despite cases spreading among children and adolescents. According to the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, about a quarter of all those testing positive nationwide are under 18. Schools are able to have online classes this week if they choose, but are set to have full in-person teaching from March 14.

From the start of the so-called “with COVID” era last November, schools became the new hotbed for transmission of the virus. The first deaths among children were also reported at the end of that month. Since then, five children and one teenager have died from the virus while countless more have been infected and now face the potential debilitating effects of Long COVID.

All of the major candidates have largely ignored the pandemic. The People’s Health Institute, a non-profit, released a statement January 24, saying, “Three months have passed since all of the major parties have nominated their candidates. With the election only about a month away, it’s still hard to make out what each candidate’s views are on pandemic response and health care policy.”

Instead, Lee Jae-myung from the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DP) and Yoon Seok-youl of the People Power Party (PPP), when forced to acknowledge it, have pledged support for businesses as they attempt to woo the wealthy elite. Minor candidates Sim Sang-jeong of the “progressive” Justice Party and Ahn Cheol-soo of the People’s Party have also failed to address the pandemic. Ahn dropped out of the race and folded his campaign into Yoon’s last Thursday.

Health professionals have also questioned the lack of any concrete plan from the candidates, leading a healthcare workers’ union, undoubtedly under pressure from its rank-and-file, to release a statement on February 15, saying, “No concrete policy proposals for reducing COVID-19 threats have come from the would-be presidents, whose top priority should be the health and safety of the public, with the election rhetoric instead mired in salacious controversies and scandals.”

The political establishment is moving quickly to meet the demands from big business and do away with all measures that impact profits. A survey last month by the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI) found that only 8.9 percent of companies in South Korea with foreign investors planned to make investments this year, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as the reason for their hesitation. Among that number, only 22.2 percent plan to increase investment from last year.

“The next administration that will be chosen through the presidential election in March will have to acknowledge companies’ difficulties and improve tax benefits to those that have good employment and investment performance,” said an FKI official told the media. “It should focus on creating a good business environment by refraining from raising the minimum wage and expanding the flexible work system.”

In other words, while stock markets have surged and many companies are enjoying record profits, this is not enough for the corporate elite. All restrictions on businesses must be removed, more tax handouts provided to the wealthy, workers forced to labor for pittances, and “flexibility” enforced, i.e., the ability to fire workers at will.

Some 110 representatives of big business released a statement on February 20 in support of Yoon. “We couldn’t sit idly by anymore, while the Moon administration and the ruling party put the entire nation in distress with their failed policies,” the statement read. Signatories included Hwang Yeong-gi, former chairman at both Woori Financial Group and KB Financial Group. Both groups announced last month that they were paying out record dividends of 3.8 trillion won ($US3.2 billion) or approximately 26 percent of net profits from 2021.

Lee Jae-myung has attempted to brush aside the corporate concerns that he is insufficiently pro-business. Speaking during an interview in December on Yonhap News TV, “I am a pro-business person in fact, and people don’t know that. Those who don’t communicate directly with me, or do not know me enough, suspect that I am anti-corporate, pro-labor and anti-market.”

Lee added, “[Companies are] the pillar of the market economy. It’s very important that we provide the companies with a free environment.” Lee has pledged to push back the curfew on businesses for customers who have received a vaccine booster shot to 12 a.m.

There has undoubtedly been a great deal of financial suffering during the course of the pandemic, but it has been the working class that has borne the brunt of the health disaster. None of the candidates has a genuine solution to this problem. It is only the working class that can end the pandemic by fighting for measures to eliminate the virus.

Russian government cracks down on media and protests

Andrea Peters


In an effort to forestall the eruption of significant popular opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Putin government is systematically banning news outlets and social media platforms in the country. The government is simultaneously cracking down on still as of yet small anti-war protests in Moscow, Saint Petersburg and other cities.

On Friday, Russia’s federal agency for information technology and mass communication, Roskomnadzor, announced that Facebook and Twitter are now banned. As a justification, the agency cited the fact that these platforms have been blocking the “free circulation of information” by limiting the Western public’s ability to read material from Zvezda, RIA Novosti, Sputnik, RT, Lenta.ru, and Gazeta.ru, a combination of private and state-owned Russian media.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, chairs a Security Council meeting in the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, Monday, Feb. 21, 2022. (Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

The same day, Roskomnadzor announced that it is demanding to know why TikTok is scrubbing material posted by RIA Novosti. TikTok has since declared that it is halting its operations in Russia altogether due to a new law passed penalizing “false” information.

Roskomnadzor has also declared that it will limit Zello, a platform that enables users to subscribe to channels and communicate with one another through phone and two-way walkie talkies, if it did not stop sending messages “that contain false information about the course of the special operation of the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine.”

Several internet, radio and TV agencies associated with the anti-Putin opposition have now been blocked, including Ekho Moskvi, Dozhd, and Meduza. The first two suspended their operations entirely, with Ekho Moskvi declaring that it is liquidating its website, radio station and social media accounts. Dozhd announced it was halting its work but on a temporary basis. Meduza continues to post material on Telegram, a social media channel widely used in Russia.

Telegram, along with YouTube and Vkontakte, the Russian version of Facebook, now remain some of the only accessible platforms. However, Pavel Durov, the founder and head of Telegram, said in late February that he was considering shuttering the operation, citing concerns that it was contributing to the escalation of social tensions and “ethnic hatred.” His remarks unleashed a flood of objections from users who indicated it is their only way of sharing information. The government has now asked Telegram to delete users and bots posting information about dead and captured Russian soldiers.

The domestic press crackdown is extending to foreign media as well, with access to German press outlet Deutsche Welle, US-sponsored Radio Svoboda, and the Russian version of the BBC all being ended.

This is unfolding as Putin signed a new law on Friday that authorizes fines and prison sentences for people that spread allegedly untrue reports about Russia’s military actions and/or call for sanctions against the country. The promotion of “false facts” could result in a financial penalty of between 700,000 and 1.5 million rubles and up to three years in prison, and should that be done by “officials or organized groups,” the fine and detention time will be even higher. The most severe consequences—10 to 15 years of imprisonment—are reserved for those who knowingly use “false fakes.” It also bans the “obstruction” or “discrediting” of the use of Russian troops “in the best interests of the country” and to “maintain peace and security.”

The language of the law is extremely broad, such that basically any expression of opposition to war could force one to fork over large sums of money, land one in prison or both.

According to official reports, over the weekend the police detained 1,700 people in Moscow, 750 in Saint Petersburg, and 1,061 in other areas of Russia for participating in anti-war rallies. Based on what the government claims to have been the overall size of these protests—6,200 total—in each case somewhere between 50 and 80 percent of participants were arrested.

According to social media images re-broadcast on smaller news sites, in addition to the country’s two largest cities, demonstrations took place in Irkutsk, Novosibirsk, Chita, Krasnoyarsk, Belgorod and Petrozavodsk. Another press report said that anti-war events happened in 49 cities across Russia. Signs held aloft by protesters read, “Ukraine is not our enemy,” “No to war with Ukraine,” and “We are for peace.”

The attack on democratic rights is also unfolding in Europe and the United States, where either access to press agencies from Russia has been cut off or coverage and commentary on the war from these sources are being labeled in such a manner that encourages readers to dismiss them as false out of hand. This is accompanied by a campaign targeting Russian artists and cultural figures and even Russian culture itself, in an effort to demonize that society and its people.

In all cases the aim is to deaden the population’s thinking, prevent them from making a critical appraisal of the causes of the war, and above all, forestall the emergence of a mass anti-war movement that is equally hostile to Western imperialism and Russian nationalism. Nothing terrifies the ruling classes in Washington, London, Berlin, Paris, Moscow and elsewhere more than the prospect that millions of working people will unite across national lines and drive all of them out of power.

Thus, everywhere war propaganda, intimidation and the threat of physical violence are mobilized in a desperate effort to keep the war drive alive. No one should ever make the mistake of thinking that the White House will not resort to the same repressive measures to which the Kremlin is currently turning when it is confronted with an eruption of social discontent. The American ruling class, for all its hosannas to democracy, will have no compunction fining, arresting and beating up masses of workers when they challenge their policies.

In the US and Europe, every nerve is being strained by the press and the political elite to whip up pro-war moods and direct ordinary people’s deeply felt disgust at Putin’s criminal act into support for the West’s war-mad policies. In Russia, there is a desperate attempt to prevent the population’s well-founded hostility towards the provocations and threats of the US and NATO from transforming into politically conscious hatred of the Russian capitalist system that has brought society to an utter dead end.

US gives “green light” for Poland to provide fighter jets to Ukraine

Clara Weiss


On Sunday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that the US had given “the green light” to allow Polish fighter jets to be flown by pilots from the Ukrainian Air Force in Ukraine in order to fight against Russia’s air force. According to Blinken, the US is “in very active” discussions with Poland about the possibility of the US replacing Poland’s 28 MiG-29 warplanes, which would be given to Ukraine, with new F-16s from the US.

Poland, which shares a border with Ukraine, is a member of NATO and has been at the forefront of the military buildup and provocations by imperialism against Russia.

Ukrainian soldiers take positions outside a military facility as two cars burn, in a street in Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday, Feb. 26, 2022. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

Blinken also announced that the US would increase its deployments to Lithuania and indicated that he had been discussing “additional sanctions” against Russia with European NATO members. Those already in place, he acknowledged, had a “devastating” impact on the Russian economy.

The moves are yet another reckless escalation by NATO in the Russia-Ukraine war. Last week, the Kremlin had put Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert after the UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss had threatened that NATO could get drawn in the war. On Saturday, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned at an event with Russian female pilots and stewardesses that imposing a no-fly zone over Ukraine directly was “impossible. This can only be done by a third party. But any move in that direction will be regarded by us as participation in a military conflict from the side of the country from whose territory threats for our soldiers are being created. And that very second we will regard them as a participant in the military conflict, regardless of what organizations they are a member of.”

On Sunday, Russia’s Defense Ministry also explicitly warned that if countries are hosting Ukrainian military aircraft that would then be involved in attacking Russian forces, it “could be considered as those countries’ engagement in the military conflict.”

As heavy fighting continues in large parts of Ukraine, especially around the city of Mariupol in the south, the Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelensky is now issuing virtually daily demands for NATO to impose a no-fly zone over the country. One Ukrainian official justified the call for a no-fly zone on Sunday by saying that “World War III” had already started.

In the US and Europe, rallies are being held in support of this demand. In the US, prominent Democratic and Republican politicians have joined calls for a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

In a veiled threat of the deployment of nuclear weapons, Putin said that imposing a no-fly zone over Ukraine would have “colossal and catastrophic consequences not only for Europe but also the whole world.” Even the far-right Republican Marco Rubio acknowledged on Sunday, “A no-fly zone means World War III.”

Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on Saturday, that NATO had “no plans that I’m aware of to establish a no-fly zone” over the country, adding: “If a no-fly zone was declared, someone would have to enforce it, and that would mean someone would have to then go and fight against Russian air forces.”

While NATO is so far officially rejecting a no-fly zone, the moves it is undertaking already signify far-reaching involvement in the military conflict. Twenty members of NATO are flooding Ukraine with highly sophisticated weapons, arming far-right militias and the Ukrainian military which has publicly announced the intention to violate the Geneva Conventions for the humane treatment of prisoners of war. Tens of thousands of volunteers from NATO are flocking to Ukraine to participate in military combat.

And more direct lethal aid is being discussed. Writing for Foreign Affairs magazine, the Democratic former Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman and Dominic Cruz Bustillos suggested that if a no-fly zone is considered “too provocative,” then NATO should establish “a lend-lease program” for Ukraine. This, they wrote, would “allow the alliance to loan or give aid to Ukraine at little or no cost; such aid could include medium- and long-range air defense systems, antitank weapons (beyond the Javelins that have already been provided), advanced extended-range antiarmor capabilities, coastal defense systems, high mobility artillery, and critically important UCAVs.”

Acknowledging that this move too would risk being considered a direct intervention in the military conflict by Russia and trigger a nuclear response, they wrote, “The truth is that there are no risk-free options right now, and the longer the West waits, the worse the options will become.”

Even leaving aside its ever more overt involvement in the military conflict, the unprecedented economic sanctions imposed by NATO against Russia are already seen by the Kremlin as virtually tantamount to a declaration of war. On Saturday, Putin said the sanctions could “be compared to a declaration of war,” adding: “That [a declaration of war] has, fortunately, not happened so far.”

Writing for the Kremlin-controlled Rossiiskaya Gazeta last week, Fyodor Lukyanov stated that the war in Ukraine had “rapidly grown into an economic war by the West against Russia. There’s no other way to call it. First, the scale of the adopted measures has no parallel in international practice. Second, the destruction of the Russian economy is the stated aim.”

He added that the conflict between Russia and the West was “highly asymmetrical” as Russia was in an extreme disadvantage on an economic and financial level. Under these conditions, the only thing that could somehow “serve as at least a relatively stable base is the classical power relation, especially enshrined in nuclear parity.”

Noting that the US had “stayed in the shadows” of the conflict, leaving much of it to European NATO states, he suggested that “Washington will take the stage before the finals. In the decisive phase. The United States probably understands that the ultimate point of escalation will be what the Russian president recalled on Sunday: nuclear confrontation. And it will be addressed to them personally. President Biden urged Americans on Monday not to fear nuclear war. But the very fact that the topic has entered the discussion speaks for itself.”

New talks between Russia and Ukraine are scheduled for Monday. Both sides also spoke with the Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett this weekend, who is seeking to assume the role of mediator in the conflict. With Putin, Bennett reportedly discussed the Iran nuclear deal which Israel wants to see canceled on Saturday. That day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov declared that Russia would only back the Iran nuclear deal by the US if Washington gave Moscow written guarantees of exemption from further economic sanctions. Blinken rejected these demands by Moscow on Sunday.

France’s Emmanuel Macron spoke for almost two hours with Putin on Sunday. The discussion reportedly focused on the security of Ukraine’s many nuclear power plants and waste sites. Last week, Russian forces took control over the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest of its kind in Europe, after having earlier seized the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone around the site of the 1986 nuclear disaster.

This weekend, Ukraine’s security service killed one of the participants of Ukraine’s negotiating team, Denis Kireev, presumably when he was resisting his arrest on suspicion of treason. Ukraine’s security service has close ties to the country’s far right, which has long been built up by imperialism and is now receiving a substantial portion of NATO’s weapons. These forces have also been criticizing Zelensky for conducting negotiations with Russia, even as he has made every attempt to integrate them into the war effort. The Ukrainian government has reported that the president had survived three assassination attempts within the past week.

5 Mar 2022

Google Africa PhD Fellowship Program 2022

Application Deadline: 27th April 2022 by 11:59:59pm UTC-12 (AoE)

Eligible Countries: African countries

About the Award: Nurturing and maintaining strong relations with the academic community is a top priority at Google. The Google Africa PhD Fellowship Program has been created to support and recognize outstanding students pursuing or looking to pursue PhD level studies in computer science and related areas.

Fields of Study: Computer science and related areas

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Students and professionals are welcome to apply to the PhD Fellowship program.

For current PhD Students

  1. Applicants must be enrolled into a full-time PhD program at a university in Africa. Applicants who are currently in their first year of a part-time PhD program and transferring to full-time positions are also welcome to apply.
  2. Students should be early PhD students, i.e., should not have been into more than 1 year of their PhD. Applicants for the 2022 Fellowship must have started their program on or after 1-Jan-2022.
  3. Students must remain enrolled in the PhD program for the duration of the Fellowship or forfeit the award.
  4. Applicants must be pursuing a PhD in Computer Science or related areas.
  5. Google employees and family members of Google employees are not eligible
  6. Students who are already receiving another corporate fellowship are not eligible.

For current Undergraduate/Masters students and Professionals

  1. Grant of the fellowship to this category of applicants is contingent on them joining a full-time PhD program at a university in Africa within the calendar year of the award.
  2. Student applicants must be full-time Undergraduate or Masters students enrolled at an African university. Professionals must be employed/affiliated with an organization registered in Africa.
  3. The Google Fellowship award shall be contingent on the awardee registering for the full-time PhD program at an African university, in Computer Science or related areas, within the calendar year 2022, or the award shall be forfeited.
  4. Grant of the Google Fellowship does not mean admission to the PhD program of a university. The awardee must also complete the PhD admission process of the respective institute/university where he/she wishes to register for PhD.
  5. Grant of the Google Fellowship will be subject to the rules and guidelines applicable in the institute/university where the awardee registers for the PhD program.
  6. Google employees and family members of Google employees are not eligible.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Details of Google Africa PhD Fellowship: 

  • Successful students receive named Fellowships, which include a $10,000 award per year over 3 years.
  • The funds are given directly to the university to be distributed to cover the student’s expenses and stipend as appropriate.
  • The funds are given as an unrestricted gift, and it is Google’s policy not to pay for overhead on unrestricted gifts.
  • In addition, the student will be matched with a Google Research Mentor who we hope will become a valuable resource to the student.
  • There is no employee relationship between the student and Google as a result of receiving the fellowship.
  • Fellowship recipients are not subject to intellectual property restrictions unless they complete an internship at Google.
  • Fellowship recipients serving an internship are subject to the same intellectual property and other contractual obligations as any other Google intern.
  • If a Fellowship student is interested, an internship at Google is encouraged, but not guaranteed or required.

How to Apply: 

  • Applications are accepted directly from students. There is no limit to the number of students who may apply from each university.
  • Applicant’s areas of research interest must be one of the areas listed at https://research.google.com/.

Instructions for Applicants

  • Gather the following documents:
    1. Applicant’s resume with links to publications (if available).
    2. One-page resume of the student’s PhD program advisor.
    3. Available transcripts (mark sheets) starting from first year/semester of Bachelor’s degree to date.
    4. Research proposal (maximum two pages).
    5. Three letters of recommendation from those familiar with the applicant’s work (at least one coming from the thesis adviser in case of current PhD students). If the recommendation writers want to send the letter separately, they can mail it directly to research-africa@google.com with the subject “Recommendation for [applicant-name]”.

Submit your applications by clicking on this link.

Visit Program Webpage for Details

AfDB Japan Africa Dream Scholarship (JADS) 2021/2022

Application Deadline: 22nd April 2022 (OCTOBER enrollment)

Eligible Countries: African countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Japan

About the Award: The Japan Africa Dream Scholarship (JADS) Program – capacity building in energy sector through skills development for sustainable development– is a joint initiative by the AfDB and Japan that aims at providing two-year scholarship awards to highly achieving African graduate students to enable them to undergo post-graduate studies (i.e. a two-year Master’s degree program) in priority development areas on the continent and abroad (including in Japan). This Japan Africa Dream Scholarship programme is funded by the Government of Japan.

The overarching goal that the AfDB and the Government of Japan seeks to attain is to enhance skills and human resources development in Africa in a number of priority areas pertaining to science and technology with a special focus on the energy sector. JADS’s objectives are aligned with the Bank’s High 5 agenda (i.e. Light up and power Africa, Feed Africa, Industrialize Africa, Integrate Africa and Improve the quality of life for the people of Africa) and key Japanese development assistance initiatives to Africa and the 6th Tokyo International Conference for African Development (TICAD VI) outcomes.

Upon completion of their studies, the beneficiary scholars are expected to return to their home countries to apply and disseminate their newly acquired knowledge and skills, and contribute to the promotion of sustainable development of their countries.

Type: Masters

Eligibility: The Japan Africa Dream Scholarship is open to those who have gained admission to an approved Masters degree course at a Japanese partner university. Candidates should be 35 years old or younger; in good health; with a Bachelor’s degree or its equivalent in the energy area or related area; and have a superior academic record. Upon completion of their study programs, scholars are expected to return to their home country to contribute to its economic and social development.

Details on Eligibility Criteria are provided in that call’s Application Guidelines, and these detailed eligibility criteria are strictly adhered to. No exceptions are made.

Broadly speaking, nationals of African countries must:

  • Be a national of a AfDB member country;
  • Be in good health;
  • Hold a Bachelor (or equivalent) degree in the energy area (or related field) earned at least 1 years prior to the application deadline date;
  • Have 1 years or more of recent development-related experience after earning a Bachelor (or equivalent) degree;
  • Be accepted unconditionally to enroll in the upcoming academic year in at least one of the JADS partner universities for a Master’s degree;
  • Applicants living or working in a country other than his or her home country are not eligible for scholarships.
  • JADS does not support applicants who are already enrolled in graduate degree programs.
  • Not be an Executive Director, his/her alternate, and/or staff of all types of appointments of the African Development Bank Group or a close relative of the aforementioned by blood or adoption with the term “close relative” defined as: Mother, Father, Sister, Half-sister, Brother, Half-brother, Son, Daughter, Aunt, Uncle, Niece, or Nephew.

Selection Criteria: The Japan Africa Dream Scholarship programme uses the following four main factors and the degree of cohesion, to review eligible scholarship applications, with the aim of identifying the candidates with the highest potential, after completion of their graduate studies, to impact the development of their countries.

  1. Quality of Education Background
  2. Quality of Professional Recommendations
  3. Quality of Professional Experience
  4. Quality of Commitment to your Home Country
  5. Quality of Statement of Purpose

Japan Africa Dream Scholarship (JADS) awards scholarships to applicants who have had at least 1 year of paid employment in the applicant’s home country or in other African countries acquired after receiving the first Bachelors (or equivalent university) degree within the past 3 years.

The JADS Secretariat uses the following criteria to select the finalists:

  • Maintaining a reasonably wide geographical distribution of awards, that takes into account the geographic distribution of eligible applications;
  • Maintaining a reasonable distribution of awards across gender that takes into account the distribution of eligible applications across gender;
  • Giving scholarships to those applicants who, other things being equal, appear to have limited financial resources
  • Unusual circumstances / hardships, when assessing the employment experience and other aspects of an application.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The scholarship program provides tuition, a monthly living stipend, round-trip airfare, health insurance, and travel allowance.

How to Apply:

  1. Applicant requests for information and application forms and procedures from the chosen JADS partner university. For any inquiries, please contact JADS@AFDB.ORG(link sends e-mail)
  2. Applicant completes required documents and sends them to the university.
  3. University evaluates and selects applicants.
  4. University sends selected candidates to the AfDB.
  5. AfDB reviews submissions from universities, prepares and approves the final list.
  6. AfDB contacts selected awardees, and informs the universities.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Destination Australia Scholarship 2022

Application Deadline:

June 2022

Tell Me About Destination Australia Scholarship:

The Destination Australia scholarship is funded by the Australian Government Department of Education. It aligns with the National Strategy for International Education 2025. 

The scholarship’s objective is to:

  • attract and support study in regional Australia
  • grow and develop regional Australian tertiary education providers
  • offer students a high-quality learning experience.

Which Fields are Eligible?

Agriculture and animal sciences, Science and mathematics

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Undergraduate, Postgraduate coursework

Who can apply for Destination Australia Scholarship?

You’re eligible if you:

  • are an international student
  • hold a student visa for the scholarship’s duration
  • are a new UQ student
  • are UQ alumni commencing a different program (for example, Master’s after completing a Bachelor’s degree)
  • have a full offer to study an eligible program delivered entirely at the UQ Gatton campus in 2022 (you don’t need to accept your full offer by the scholarship application deadline).

And you:

And you’re starting any of the below programs in 2022:

  • Bachelor of Agricultural Science
  • Bachelor of Equine Science
  • Bachelor of Veterinary Science (Honours)
  • Bachelor of Veterinary Technology
  • Bachelor of Wildlife Science
  • Master of Agribusiness (#24)
  • Master of Agribusiness (#32)
  • Master of Agricultural Science (#24)
  • Master of Agricultural Science (#32)
  • Master of Animal Science (#24)
  • Master of Animal Science (#32)

Dual degrees with the Bachelor of Agribusiness and Master of Agricultural Science (Plant Protection Major) are not eligible because they are not delivered full-time at UQ Gatton.

How are Applicants Selected?

We’ll consider:

  • eligibility under the program guidelines
  • academic merit
  • your personal statement

UQ values diversity and inclusion and may consider this when we review your application.

Which Countries are Eligible?

International

Where will Award be Taken?

Australia

How Many Scholarships will be Given?

May vary

What is the Benefit of Destination Australia Scholarship?

Up to AUD $15,000 per year of study

How Long will the Program Last?

For the program’s duration (maximum 4 years)

How to Apply for Destination Australia Scholarship:

Complete the online application form. 

You will need to submit:

  • a personal statement (limit 300 words)

Use our tips for putting together a great application to help you through this process.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Pan-African School for Emerging Astronomers (PASEA) Alumni Research Program 2022

Application Deadline:

26th March 2022

Tell Me About Award:

The Pan-African School for Emerging Astronomers (PASEA) is hosting a fully-online educational program for ~60 STEM-interested university-level students. Guided by career astronomers, participants in our program will foster their scientific curiosity and gain hands-on research experience and scientific computing skills via a number of exciting activities!

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Training

Who can apply?

STEM-interested university-level students.

Where will Award be Taken?

Online

How Many Scholarships will be Given?

60

What is the Benefit of Scholarship?

Guided by career astronomers, participants in our program will foster their scientific curiosity and gain hands-on research experience and scientific computing skills via a number of exciting activities!

How to Apply for Scholarship:

To apply, click on this link or scan the QR code below using the camera app on your mobile device.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Ex-Japanese Prime Minister Abe suggests Japan host US nuclear weapons

Ben McGrath



Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on, August 31, 2020. (AP Photo/Koji Sasahara)

In a February 27 television appearance, former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made several inflammatory statements directed above all at China. Abe, who remains highly influential in Japanese politics and the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), is seizing on the current crisis in Ukraine to further the right-wing nationalist agenda of remilitarization.

Abe appeared on a Fuji Television Network program calling for Tokyo to discuss hosting US nuclear weapons. “In NATO, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy take part in nuclear sharing, hosting American nuclear weapons,” Abe stated. “Japan is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has its three non-nuclear principles, but it should not treat as a taboo, discussions on the reality of how the world is kept safe.”

Taking advantage of the anti-Russia war hysteria, Abe claimed that if Ukraine had kept some of the nuclear weapons on its soil after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, it could have used the weapons as a deterrent to the current Russian invasion. Abe went on to say that hosting nuclear weapons in Japan was one possible way to deter supposed threats from China and North Korea.

In reality, the spread of nuclear weapons, far from preventing war, only increases the danger of their use in a conflict that does break out. In the case of Japan, the permanent placement of American nuclear weapons on its territory will only heighten tensions with China in conditions where successive administrations have been engaged in an aggressive military build-up throughout the region against Beijing over the past decade.

The placement of US nuclear weapons in Japan would likely begin an arms race in the Indo-Pacific, increasing the risk of conflict. Abe’s purpose is not to provide for the defense of Japan, but to prepare it for a US-instigated war against China.

Abe did not stop there. He called on Washington to further challenge the “One China” policy and firmly state that it would come to Taiwan’s aid militarily in a conflict with the mainland. In establishing diplomatic relations with China, the US tacitly acknowledged that Beijing was the legitimate government of all China and broke off formal ties with Taipei.

At the same time, Washington called for peaceful reunification and declared it would oppose the use of armed force. Its policy of “strategic ambiguity” left open the question as to whether the US would support Taiwan in a conflict with China. On the one hand to act as a deterrent to an invasion by Beijing, and on the other to discourage Taipei from declaring independence—a move that would provoke a war. For the US to openly abandon that policy would greatly heighten already sharp tensions with China.

Wang Wenbin, China’s foreign ministry spokesman, responded to Abe’s comments, saying “Japanese politicians have frequently spread fallacies related to Taiwan and even blatantly made false remarks that violate the nation’s three non-nuclear principles. We strongly ask Japan to deeply reflect on its history.” He urged Tokyo to “be cautious in words and deeds on the Taiwan issue [and] to stop provoking trouble.”

This is not the first time Abe has made inflammatory statements since leaving office. Last December, Abe called for a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics, which concluded last month, citing US allegations of “human rights” violations in Xinjiang. In separate remarks the same month, Abe also stated that any emergency in Taiwan would constitute an emergency in Japan, essentially declaring that Japan should be prepared to go to war over the island.

As prime minister from 2012 to 2020, Abe pushed through record annual increases in military spending and laws to implement a “reinterpretation” of the Constitution to allow for “collective self-defense.” The laws were another breach in Japan’s so-called pacifist constitution allowing the Japanese military to support other countries—particularly its US ally—in conflicts.

Abe is also notorious for his whitewashing of the crimes and atrocities committed by the Japanese military in the 1930s and 1940s in China and Korea in particular. These crimes include the 1937–1938 Rape of Nanjing and the exploitation of approximately 200,000 “comfort women” as sex slaves. The aim is to condition the population especially young people for imperialist war on overseas battlefields.

However, the Japanese working class remains deeply opposed to remilitarization and hostile to nuclear weapons in particular, as the only country in the world that has suffered a nuclear attack. The US took the criminal decision to drop atomic bombs on the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, despite the fact that the Japanese government had already offered to surrender.

Well aware of the widespread opposition to nuclear weapons, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida quickly dismissed Abe’s suggestion as “unacceptable given our country’s stance of maintaining the three non-nuclear principles.”

Abe’s comments, however, indicate that the issue is being more widely discussed behind the scenes in ruling circles. Abe maintains a great deal of influence in the LDP. He remains a member of the National Diet’s House of Representatives and leads the Hosoda faction the largest in the LDP. Prime Minister Kishida is from the rival Kochikai faction.

The three non-nuclear principles, first outlined in 1967, are not legally binding and have been violated in the past. These principles state that Japan will not possess, produce, or allow nuclear weapons on its territory. A 1969 memorandum declassified by the US in 2017 confirmed that Tokyo officially gave Washington its consent to bring nuclear weapons into Okinawa on an “emergency basis.” The agreement helped pave the way for the end of the US occupation of Okinawa and its return to Japan in 1972.

As with the current crisis in Ukraine, the growing danger of war in East Asia is the result of years of US efforts, working in concert with allies like Tokyo, to subordinate China to the demands of American imperialism.

Even though Japan and the US are allies, the interests of the Japanese bourgeoisie ultimately differ from those in the US. For the time being, Tokyo views its alliance with Washington as a stepping-stone towards remilitarization and reasserting itself militarily on the Asian continent, even at the risk of a catastrophic war.