German parliament debates war budget

Johannes Stern

Germany’s 2022 federal budget, which was adopted by the cabinet on March 16 and is currently being debated in the Bundestag (federal parliament), is a declaration of war on the population in several respects.

Firstly, with the massive increase of the regular military budget by 7.3 percent to €50.33 billion and the establishment of the “German Army Special Fund” in the amount of €100 billion, the ruling class is launching the largest rearmament of the German military since Hitler. To underscore the true dimension of the plans: There was never a tripling of military expenditure within a year, even in the Nazi era.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) at a press conference after the NATO summit in Brussels on 24 March (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

Secondly, the cost of rearming will be borne in every respect by the working class. At the presentation of the budget in the Bundestag, Finance Minister Christian Lindner (Free Democrats, FDP) repeatedly called for the “debt brake” and “the necessary consolidation of public finances.” In the financial planning, “the intention is to comply with the debt brake of the Basic Law in 2023 and in the following years until 2026.” It is “not a non-binding declaration of intent; it is a requirement of our constitution.”

The implications of this are clear. Every cent that flows into the military via a planned “supplementary budget” is to be squeezed out of the working class again. The labour and social affairs budget is falling by 2.9 percent from €164.92 billion in 2021 to €160.12 billion this year. And the education budget will also be cut by 2.5 percent from €20.82 (2021) to €20.3 billion.

Thirdly, amidst the highest infections and incidence rates since the outbreak of the pandemic, the government is ending the last remaining COVID-19 protective measures. In his government statement on Wednesday, Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz (Social Democrats, SPD) said:

“The economy is slowly regaining momentum and can process the full order books… That is a good thing—also in view of the burdens that the war in Ukraine brings and will bring to the economy. In almost all the countries around us, the coronavirus restrictions have now been relaxed or almost completely lifted. The Bundestag also amended the Infection Protection Act last week. It allows for further relaxations.”

This too is unequivocal. The “profits before life” policy, which has already led to almost 130,000 deaths in Germany alone, is now being pursued even more aggressively under conditions of war. Overall, the health budget is rising slightly, but the money for combating the pandemic is being massively cut. While €8.89 billion was earmarked for the central procurement of vaccines in 2021, this year’s spending amounts to only €6.3 billion. Subsidies for combating the virus will fall from €4.06 billion to €1.9 billion.

Fourthly, the arming directly serves the purpose of waging war. In his speech, Scholz emphasized that Germany is already playing a central role in the NATO war offensive against Russia. “Since the beginning of the war, Germany has been supplying Ukraine with anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons, equipment and ammunition,” he said. The European Union would provide “an additional €1 billion in military aid,” and “together with our international partners … Sanctions that are second to none.”

Germany is also becoming increasingly involved in the massive NATO military buildup in Eastern Europe, which was further accelerated at the NATO meeting in Brussels on Thursday. In recent weeks, the NATO Battlegroup in Lithuania, led by the German Armed Forces, has been reinforced by a further 350 German soldiers and 100 vehicles and weapons systems. In addition, the airforce transferred six Eurofighters to Romania and the Patriot air defense missile system to Slovakia. Germany is now sending 700 more soldiers there and taking over the leadership of another battlegroup.

Fifthly, the “new era” invoked in politics and the media is about the comprehensive return of German militarism. In the budget debate, Scholz and other representatives of the government and opposition justified the rearmament by citing the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In fact, the plans—including the €100 billion “German Army Special Fund”—have long been prepared behind the backs of the population.

With the systematic military encirclement of Russia, NATO has provoked Putin’s reactionary intervention. German imperialism is now exploiting this to reestablish itself as the dominant military power in Europe and to militarize the continent under its leadership. “We are currently experiencing the dynamic of the new era at the European level,” Scholz explained. “We will use it. If you want security in Europe, you have to significantly strengthen the EU’s crisis resilience.”

And Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht said in her speech: “Our goal is clear: We need a German army that is able to perform the classic task of state and alliance defense without restriction.” What she means is the ability of the German military to conduct “very large” and “high intensity” operations “across the entire intensity spectrum,” as the “German Armed Forces doctrine” adopted in 2018 states.

Sixthly, the war drive, which was pushed by the SPD, FDP and Greens, is supported in all its essentials by all the parties in the Bundestag and strengthens the most right-wing forces. In his speech, the honorary chairman of the far-right AfD, Alexander Gauland, rejoiced: “Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the government has learned quickly in terms of security, and €100 billion for the German army is already an astonishing learning achievement for politicians who have grown up with a firm belief in a rules-based, multilateral foreign policy.”

When Bundestag deputies criticised the government’s plans, they aimed to organise the rearmament even more aggressively and effectively. For example, the chairman of the Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union parliamentary group Friedrich Merz called for the creation of “an appropriate monitoring body to ensure that this [the planned rearmament] actually takes place and that this investment in the Bundeswehr actually takes place in the coming years.”

The Left Party also supports the war drive against Russia and is closely involved in the rearmament offensive through the Defence and Budget Committee. Significantly, representatives of the Left Party repeatedly applauded Scholz’s speech. Left Party leader Dietmar Bartsch accused the government of remaining silent “after the Ukrainian president’s speech here in parliament.”

“That was unworthy of the government and the German Bundestag,” he added. In his speech on March 17, Volodymyr Zelensky called for a strengthening of German militarism against Russia and the establishment of a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

Seventhly, the foreign policy of war goes hand in hand with the militarisation of society at home. “Strengthening the alliance and defense capability and respect for the Bundeswehr must not only be measured in terms of budget titles and figures,” Finance Minister Lindner demanded. It was also important “to repay the soldiers the respect they deserve for their service to our country.”

The ruling class knows that the vast majority of the population rejects the drive to war. The horrors of two world wars, the Holocaust and the war of extermination in Eastern Europe are too deeply rooted in popular consciousness. In his speech to the Bundestag, the former AfD defense politician and former colonel of the Bundeswehr, Rüdiger Lucassen, was visibly angry: “An INSA survey revealed that only three out of ten Germans are willing to defend our country. If that is true, Germany has a problem…”

Commodity markets in turmoil

Nick Beams

The wild movements in the prices of commodities, including oil, wheat and industrial metals, following the imposition of sanctions on Russia, are sending shock waves through the financial mechanisms and markets used to facilitate trade deals.

A man wearing a protective mask walks in front of an electronic display board in the lobby of the Shanghai Stock Exchange building in Shanghai, China, Friday, Feb. 14, 2020. (AP Photo)

The initial impact was the closure of the nickel market of the London Metal Exchange for more than a week at the beginning of March after the spot price of the metal doubled in a single day to reach $100,000. The spot price surge left a major Chinese steel company facing potential losses running into billions of dollars because it had made financial deals based on a falling price.

The market closure was described as the “canary in the coal mine” for major commodities markets and that has proven to be the case.

On March 8, the European Federation of Energy Traders (EFET), which includes BP and Shell, as well as major commodity traders Vitol and Transfigura, sent a letter to market participants and regulators calling for emergency assistance.

According to the letter, the contents of which were published last week, the energy industry needed “time-limited emergency liquidity support to ensure that wholesale gas and power markets continued to function.”

The problem confronting traders is that they are increasingly unable to finance derivatives contracts they take out to try to hedge their positions on deals. This is because banks and other lenders are raising their margin calls on the loans they have made to finance such contracts, due to the uncertainty surrounding price movements.

“Since the end of February 2022,” the EFET letter said, “an already challenging situation has worsened and more [European] energy participants are in [a] position where their ability to source additional liquidity is severely reduced or, in some cases, exhausted.”

The letter warned there was a possibility that generally sound and healthy energy companies would be “unable to access cash.” The issue is regarded as so serious that it has been discussed with central banks.

The volatility in energy markets is reflected in the fact that prices in the futures markets linked to the European gas market jumped by almost 200 percent earlier this month.

According to a report in the Financial Times, the EFET wants central banks, including the Bank of England (BoE) and the European Central Bank (ECB), to provide support to lenders to soften the impact of margin calls.

In an interview last week, EFET executive vice chair Peter Styles said guarantees that exchanges would be the backstop in the event of defaults would allow them to provide greater margins to companies involved in trading.

“The main objective is to ensure that there is still an accessible, orderly market in energy futures, particularly for gas and power producers and suppliers who need to hedge in these difficult times,” Styles said.

While the ECB and the BoE have spoken with representatives of energy firms and commodity traders, they have so far not given any commitment.

The extreme financial tightening was indicated in comments by Russell Hardly, the chief executive of Vitol, one of the world’s major commodity traders, who told the Financial Times (FT) that participation in the spot market had dwindled because of the cost. To move cargo of liquefied natural gas priced at €97, traders had to price €80 in cash, placing a strain on their financial resources.

The money provided to traders in commodities such as oil, gas and wheat, is returned once the commodity is delivered but while the deal is being finalised, the trading firms face liquidity problems.

The extreme volatility in gas prices is revealed in the futures market. On the eve of the Russian invasion of Ukraine they were about €80 a megawatt hour. They then rose to more than €300 earlier this month and have since fallen back to below €100. Two years ago, they were less than €20.

Gas is not the only problem. Speaking at the FT Commodities Global Summit in Switzerland this week, the heads of three of the world’s largest commodity traders—Vitol, Gunvor and Transfigura—warned of a diesel shortage.

Vitol chief Hardy said Europe imported about half of its diesel from Russia and about half from the Middle East. The “systemic shortfall of diesel is there,” he stated.

Torbjorn Tornqvist, the chair of Gunvor, said: “Diesel is not just a European problem, this is a global problem.”

In addition, the European gas market was no longer functioning properly because of the demands from banks for cash from traders to cover their margin positions. “I think it’s broken,” he said.

Reporting on what it called the “cash crunch” in commodities markets, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) noted it extended far beyond Russia and Ukraine.

“Trade that is not even linked to Russia or Ukraine is getting more and more difficult to finance,” one senior portfolio manager said, and commodity traders, producers and lenders were withdrawing support from what were regarded as “economically fragile” countries such as Egypt and Tunisia.

Egypt is the world’s largest importer of wheat with as much as 85 percent of its supplies coming from Russia and Ukraine.

The WSJ article noted that according to traders, “a vicious financial cycle is exacerbating the volatility and could worsen in some parts of the world.”

It cited Jack Bardakjian, the founder of the London-based Gapuma Group which ships fertilizers, foodstuffs and petrochemicals into Africa, who said he had approached banks, asking them to double their credit lines, but they were only willing to lend 20 to 25 percent more.

“There are some huge, huge humanitarian issues that could be developing because of this,” he said.

One of the reasons for the refusal of banks to lend more is their fear that commodity prices will fall, and they will be faced with losses on their margin loans.

The upshot is that hundreds of millions of people are being confronted with massive cuts in their living standards and extreme hunger in some cases because of the profit demands of the banks and finance houses as well as the operations of speculators who see the violent swings in commodities and the social misery it is producing as a highly lucrative opportunity.

COVID clusters grow at Australian schools as Omicron BA.2 surges

Carolyn Kennett

Aided and abetted by the teacher unions, Australian governments, both federal and state, are covering up the spread of COVID throughout the school system. Case numbers among those under 19 years of age are growing rapidly in Australia, with a surge in cases from the new Omicron BA.2 variant which is becoming the dominant strain across the country.

South Australian teachers protesting attacks on their pay and conditions in 2019 (Credit: AEU SA, Facebook)

In the past seven days, for instance, there have been more than 20,000 confirmed infections of 0–9-year-olds and over 34,000 amongst 10–19-year-olds in New South Wales (NSW), representing roughly a third of the total new cases. In Victoria, there are over 71,000 active cases of 0–9-year-olds and almost 100,000 among those aged 10 to 19.

In Queensland between 1,000 and 2,000 young people have tested positive every day since the end of February. Queensland has also released data confirming that between December and February 1, some 136 children were hospitalised for COVID with 23 children being treated in Intensive Care Units.

Buried at the end of a report issued by NSW Health earlier this month, some aggregated data was made available about COVID in schools.

In the four-week period between January 30 (the first day of school in NSW) and February 26, around 92,000 school aged children reported a positive COVID test. Almost 60,000 of those reported were from a rapid antigen test (RAT). The report stated that in the first four weeks of school, approximately 2,000 schools each week had students attending who had registered a positive RAT.

Case numbers among school aged children have more than doubled since the end of February. It is hardly surprising that large clusters of cases in schools have developed across the country.

For example, in NSW, Castle Hill High School, Cherrybrook Technology High School and St Ignatius College are reporting case numbers of over 500 students and teachers. In the regional centres of Albury, Bathurst, Orange and Queanbeyan, schools have experienced a surge in cases. A small primary school in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney had 100 children absent from class on one day earlier this month out of a school population of 221.

In Shepparton, a regional town in Victoria, both the local high school and primary schools have had large numbers of students and staff impacted. One example is Verney Road school, which caters for students with complex and sometimes multiple disabilities. The school has 136 students and 100 staff, and recently recorded 50 positive cases, 20 percent of the school community. In defiance of the Victorian government, the school principal, Angela Buxton fought to have the school return to remote learning in order to protect her staff and students.

In Queensland, several schools, including the Marist College in Ashgrove and Brisbane Girls Grammar have reported more than 200 infections of staff and students.

Parents in Western Australia have also begun reporting substantial clusters. That includes more than 90 infections at the South Coast Baptist College Waikiki and over 90 cases at Byford Secondary College. In that state, the Labor government abandoned a “strong suppression” strategy that had kept case numbers low throughout the entire pandemic earlier this month.

In the second half of 2021, Australian federal and state governments fully embraced the “let it rip” policy. Teachers and students were forced back to face-to-face learning. Both the Liberal-National Coalition and Labor parties declared that schools would remain open regardless of increased community spread of the virus. Schools had to be open so parents could be forced back into workplaces and profits made.

In a revealing speech to the Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA), Dominic Perrottet, the Liberal Party premier of NSW, revealed the extent of the political collusion between himself and Victorian Labor Premier Daniel Andrews.

Speaking in late February, Perrottet openly admitted that mitigation measures accompanying this year’s school reopenings in late January and early February were not based on public health. Instead, the introduction of limited RAT testing in the initial phases of term, and recommendations that older students wear masks, were a political manoeuvre to “instill confidence” and damp down concerns that there would be major school outbreaks.

This confirms what the Committee for Public Education (CFPE) warned in January, as the drive back to classrooms was being laid out. In a statement, the CFPE warned that, “the surveillance-testing program is not about preventing the spread of the disease, but about creating a false sense of security for teachers and parents.”

The teacher unions, including the New South Wales Teachers Federation (NSWTF) and the Australian Education Union (AEU), have worked hand in glove with the governments to suppress opposition among teachers. When both the Andrews and Perrottet governments announced near-identical reopening plans, the unions endorsed them.

Responding to the latest surge in cases, NSWTF President Angelo Gavrielatos said that “health advice should prevail” and “there should have been a steady graduated lifting of the risk mitigation strategies in order to monitor how each mitigation strategy was impacting our schools.”

In other words, Gavrielatos supports the reopening and the overturning of mitigation. His quibbles are solely with the tempo, and express union fears that the mounting opposition among teachers and parents could get out of the NSWTF’s control.

Despite the surge in cases, all mitigation measures have been removed, including surveillance testing, contact tracing, mask mandates and quarantine rules for contacts. Information about the infection rates in schools has been suppressed with only a few stories being reported in the mainstream media.

In the first two weeks of the school year both the NSW and Victorian governments released classroom case numbers to the media. No information was provided about the schools impacted. Since then the data has not been made publicly available.

In 2021, CFPE made the decision to collect information about COVID impacts in schools to help provide parents, teachers and workers with the truth and a means to expose the government-union cover-up of COVID transmission schools. While the CFPE data only captures a snapshot of the broader situation, it paints a devastating picture of the situation in schools.

Parents and teachers have reported that sometimes more than two-thirds of children in a year group have been diagnosed with COVID. In a South Australian primary school, 80 percent of the youngest children tested positive for COVID. Many schools have received notifications of infections in the schools almost every day since late January. The CFPE has been told that some schools are providing a small amount of information about infections in the schools to parents and teachers while others have absolutely no information.

One teacher reported, “We have large numbers of students infected, staff (including myself) who have been infected at school, and the only reporting is the standard form letter stating that ‘someone with COVID has been on site in xyz year levels.’ Reality is that by day 10 of school, up to 75 percent of some grades were directly impacted—one grade has had more than 20 absent students who are either infected or household contacts. A significant cluster is growing, and NOTHING is being done about it. Parents are not being given the opportunity to make accurate judgements based on actual risk.”

Overwhelmingly respondents have expressed deep concerns and anger at what is being allowed to happen in schools. One parent wrote, “I am scared for my family members going into a school environment where many students have not been vaccinated and COVID is rampant.”

Many have expressed a desire to return to remote learning, with one writing, “Please just lock us down, homeschool until numbers drop again, this is insane.” Another said, “We need to go back to home schooling... this is awful, every day there’s more msg’s saying there’s more covid cases present at the school and to monitor our kids... I am a single mother of three kids, 2 with disability and that go to this school.”

Amid a broader surge of the BA.2 variant, more infectious and lethal than the original strain of Omicron, governments, with the support of unions, are doing everything they can to ensure that children remain in classrooms and parents at work to ensure the unfettered flow of profits to big business.

This week, as NSW infections reached highs not seen since the Omicron tsunami of December–January, the state government released “updated” guidelines for schools. Essentially, nothing has changed. Schools will be provided with limited supplies of RAT tests, and indoor mask recommendations in classrooms “may be” reinstated in areas with high levels of transmission.

In South Australia, the state authorities have declared that whole school classes would be sent home if ten or more of their students test positive for the virus. The measure is premised on a continuation of mass transmission and is aimed at ensuring that schools remain open no matter what.

The NATO-Russia conflict threatens nuclear war

Andre Damon

On Thursday, NATO held a summit without precedent. In total secrecy, with not only cameras and phones prohibited but even aides, the leaders of the Western powers met to plan out the unthinkable: A full-scale war between nuclear-armed states.

A military aide carries the “President’s emergency satchel,” also known as “the football,” which contains nuclear launch codes, before boarding Marine One behind President Joe Biden on the South Lawn of the White House, Wednesday, March 23, 2022, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

As the proxy war between NATO and Russia over Ukraine spirals out of control, the use of nuclear weapons that could kill hundreds of millions of people or more is being actively contemplated.

Nuclear war has become part of the daily vocabulary of the US media. In an article published Wednesday, “How the Ukraine war could go nuclear,” Politico wrote, “Not since the Cold War has the specter of nuclear war hung so heavily over a president’s crisis diplomacy.” Politico cited Izumi Nakamitsu, United Nations High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, who warned Tuesday about the risk of “mushroom clouds appearing on the battlefield.”

Last week, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, founded by former Senator Sam Nunn, outlined a “hypothetical scenario illustrating just one possible pathway to a global, catastrophic nuclear war” that could be triggered by the Ukraine crisis. After a Russian missile crew inadvertently shoots down an American reconnaissance aircraft, a series of escalatory measures lead to an American president ordering a nuclear strike on Russia, followed by a retaliatory strike by Russia:

Over the course of the next hour, 82 million Americans are killed with allied countries faring similarly. Most die instantly, while more will die of radiation poisoning over the coming days and weeks. Those who survive will have chronic health problems for the rest of their shortened lives, and their children will likely be born with genetic defects.

In the New York Times, David Sanger wrote an article yesterday under the headline “U.S. Makes Contingency Plans in Case Russia Uses Its Most Powerful Weapons.” The article revealed the existence of a so-called “Tiger Team” within the White House dedicated to planning a full-scale war with Russia. According to Sanger:

A senior administration official said any use of a “small” tactical nuclear bomb by Russia—even inside Ukraine and not directed at a NATO member—would mean that “all bets are off” on the United States and NATO staying out of the war.

In a raving editorial, the Wall Street Journal accused unnamed political figures of preferring peace to war. The United States must go all in. “If the nuclear threat works to stop NATO support now,” the Journal declared, “the Russians will use it in the future against NATO proper. The essence of deterrence is credibility, which means persuading Mr. Putin that his resort to nuclear weapons in Ukraine will be met with a requisite response.”

As the media talks about the possibility of nuclear war, not a single word is being spoken about diplomacy, deescalation or peace talks. Rather, the watchword was, in the parlance of US President Joe Biden, “increasing the pain.”

As the NATO summit in Brussels concluded yesterday with a plan to double NATO’s troop presence along Russia’s borders, Biden raised, for the first time, the prospect of the deployment of NATO troops into Ukraine and offensive operations against Russia.

Speaking at a press conference following the summit, Biden was asked whether, if Russia used chemical weapons, this could “trigger a military response from NATO.”

Biden replied, “We’d make that decision at the time.” In other words, Biden said that sending US troops into Ukraine and firing on Russian forces would be considered as a response to the alleged use of chemical weapons, which could be manufactured by US proxies in Ukraine, as was done in Syria.

The summit was dedicated to discussing and implementing a series of measures aimed at involving NATO more directly in the conflict. Speaking at the conclusion of the summit, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg outlined what he absurdly claimed were “non-escalatory” measures:

We have activated NATO’s defense plans, deployed elements of the NATO Response Force, and placed 40,000 troops on our eastern flank, along with significant air and naval assets, under direct NATO command supported by Allies’ national deployments. We are also establishing four additional multinational battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia. We are taking all measures and decisions to ensure the security and defense of all Allies across all domains and with a 360-degree approach.

Stoltenberg concluded:

We will now accelerate NATO’s transformation for a more dangerous strategic reality. ... In light of the gravest threat to Euro-Atlantic security in decades, we will also significantly strengthen our longer term deterrence and defense posture and will further develop the full range of ready forces and capabilities necessary to maintain credible deterrence and defense.

If these are the “non-escalatory” measures being taken, what would escalation look like?

In reality, NATO is being transformed into a fully weaponized fighting force on Russia’s border.

Following the summit, NATO tweeted a war map outlining the troops deployed on its “Eastern Flank,” pointing to hundreds of thousands of troops, including 40,000 under NATO command and 100,000 under US command, along with 13 aircraft at high alert and 140 ships at sea.

The preparations for world war, waged with nuclear weapons, are being accompanied by an unrelenting wave of propaganda in the corporate media.

Attempting to manufacture support for war, the New York Times published yesterday an article, “Most Americans say Biden is ‘not tough enough’ on Russia, a new poll finds,” which purports to describe the state of public opinion in the United States.

Does the New York Times really think that if the American population were honestly asked whether millions of American civilians should be incinerated in a nuclear war to defend the right of Ukraine to join NATO that they would agree? Both the motivations behind US policy and the implications are being systematically covered up.

This media propaganda campaign, aimed at whipping up a right-wing, pro-war hysteria in the affluent upper middle class, is itself a factor driving military escalation.

The US and NATO imperialist powers, driven by intractable internal crises, are proceeding with utter recklessness, bringing the entire world to the brink of World War III.

The Russian government of Vladimir Putin, for its part, under threat from NATO’s relentless expansion, launched the offensive in Ukraine with the aim of reaching some sort of accommodation with imperialism. It clearly underestimated the extent to which the US and NATO were prepared for war, and it is seeking to offset its initial setbacks with nuclear saber-rattling.

Slovak Government Scholarships 2022/2023

Application Deadline: 30th April 2022 by 16:00 CET (4 pm)

About the Award: The Government of the Slovak Republic approved the establishment of the National Scholarship Programme of the Slovak Republic for the support of mobility of students, PhD students, university teachers, researchers and artists in 2005. The National Scholarship Programme of the Slovak Republic (NSP) is funded by the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic.

Type: Masters, PhD, Research, Short Course

Eligibility: Eligible applicants for a scholarship in the framework of the NSP:

A) students who:

• are university students at universities outside Slovakia;
• are students of the second level of higher education (master’s students), or are students who at the time of application deadline have already completed at least 2.5 years of their university studies in the same study programme;
• will be on a study stay in Slovakia during their higher education outside Slovakia and who will be accepted by a public, private or state university in Slovakia for an academic mobility1 to study in Slovakia.

All 3 conditions must be met. This category does not apply to doctoral (PhD) studies (or their equivalent).

• Duration of a scholarship stay (students): 1 – 2 full semesters (i.e. 4 – 5 or 9 – 10 months) or full 1 – 3 trimesters, in case the academic year is divided into trimesters (i.e. 3 – 4 or 6 – 7 or 9 – 10 months).

B) PhD students whose higher education or scientific training takes place outside Slovakia and who are accepted by a public, private or state university or a research institution in Slovakia eligible to carry out a doctoral study programme2 (e.g. the Slovak Academy of Sciences) for an academic mobility1 to study/conduct research/artistic stay in Slovakia.

• Duration of a scholarship stay (PhD students): 1 – 10 months.

C) international university teachers, researchers and artists who are invited to a teaching/research/artistic stay in Slovakia by an institution with a valid certificate of eligibility to carry out research and development, which is not a business company3 and it has its seat in Slovakia.

• Duration of a scholarship stay (university teachers, researchers or artists): 1 – 10 months.

Eligible Countries: International

To be Taken at (Country): Slovakia

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The scholarship is intended to cover international scholarship holders’ living costs, i.e. the costs related to staying in Slovakia (food, accommodation, etc.), during their study, research/artistic or teaching stay at universities and in research organisations in Slovakia. The scholarship holder can ask for assistance concerning accommodation and formalities related to entering and staying in the territory of the Slovak Republic either his/her host institution, or he/she can handle all the necessities him-/herself. 

Duration of Award: When planning your scholarship stay, the following applies:

• beginning of the scholarship stay:

o    students: the earliest date of the beginning of the stay is 1 September 2022; the latest date of the beginning of the stay is 1 April 2023

o    PhD students, university teachers, researchers and artists: the earliest date of the beginning of the stay is 1 September 2022; the latest date of the beginning of the stay is 31 August 2023

• completion of the scholarship stay:

o    students: the latest date of the completion of the stay is 31 August 2023

o    PhD students, university teachers, researchers and artists: the latest date of the completion of the stay is 30 November 2023

How to Apply: Scholarship applications are submitted online at www.scholarships.sk. Online application system is opened at least 6 weeks prior to the application deadline. Applications can be filled in only in case that the online application system has already been opened.

• It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Women RISE Research Teams 2022

Application Deadline:

12th April 2022

Which Fields are Eligible for Women RISE Research Teams 2022 – Call for Proposals?

Research Teams are invited to submit Concept Notes for two-year research projects. Teams successful at the Concept Note stage will be invited to submit Full Proposals.

The following types of research are considered in scope:

• Epidemiological studies that describe and analyze patterns of diseases or health among women and consider different population and occupational factors.
• Population health research that explores diverse women’s experiences as individuals and within the society (e.g., family and community, intergenerational relationships, socioeconomic groups, work groups and enterprises).
• Intervention and Implementation research focused on exploring how policies, practices and strategies already put in place to alleviate the impact of COVID-19 influence the relationships between women’s paid and unpaid work and their health.

Specific Research Areas

A subset of funds is available to support research that is relevant to the scope and objectives of Women RISE and specifically addresses one of the following three Specific Research Areas:

• Infectious diseases research focused on understanding how relationships between women’s work and health have been shaped by and are shaping disruptions to infectious disease prevention, immunization programs and care services.
• HIV/AIDS STBBI research specific to women living with HIV/AIDS, COVID-19-related disruptions to HIV and STBBI prevention or care services, or the health of women in occupations that put them at increased risk for HIV and STBBI acquisition.
• Pandemics and other health emergencies research that investigates ways the COVID-19 experience can inform, improve, and safeguard women’s health and socioeconomic well-being against future health emergencies.

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Grant

Who can apply for Women RISE Research Teams 2022 – Call for Proposals?

The Research Team must include a Principal Investigator (PI) who is a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) researcher based in the LMIC Lead Applicant Organization and residing in an eligible LMIC country/territory where the research is proposed. The PI will be the team lead and will work in close collaboration with a Canada-based Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI) and a Decision-Maker Co-PI based in the same country as the Lead Applicant Organization or in a country where the research will take place. For applications involving Indigenous communities, the RT must include at least one member who self-identifies as Indigenous or provides evidence of having meaningful and culturally safe involvement with Indigenous Peoples in an Indigenous Health Research Environment.

The Research Team must also include a Lead Applicant Organization and a Canadian Co-Applicant Organization.

Which Countries are Eligible?

Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Papua, New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, South Sudan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Viet Nam, West Bank and Gaza, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

How Many Grants will be Given?

Twenty projects with a maximum budget of CAD1,000,000 per grant

What is the Benefit of Women RISE Research Teams 2022 – Call for Proposals?

CAD1,000,000 per grant

How Long will the Program Last?

Up to 24 months.

How to Apply for Scholarship:

If you are eligible for this opportunity we welcome you to submit an application.

Apply online

It is important to go through all application requirements before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Nepal Accepts US Aid despite Protests, Chinese Objections

W.T. Whitney Jr.

Nepal’s Parliament on February 27 ratified an aid package provided through the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), an “independent agency” located in the United States.  The $500 million to be dispensed, plus $130 million from Nepal, will pay for roadway improvements and transmission lines conveying hydro-generated electricity to India and to domestic users.

Nepal’s acceptance process was long and tortuous due to the country’s layered, fractured, and unwieldy political system.  China’s government opposed the MMC funding.

Massive protests unfolded outside the parliament building in Kathmandu prior to parliamentary approval. Joining the demonstrators were those representing student and peasant groups and sections of the Nepal’s two Communist Parties. They were protesting the government’s alleged disrespect for Nepal’s sovereignty.

The U.S. Congress passed legislation creating the MCC in January 2004. The intention was that of providing economic aid low- and middle-income countries via “threshold programs” and “compacts” lasting five years. The MMC web site highlights “cost-effective projects, a lean staff, an evidence-based approach …[and] a good investment for the American people.”

The aid is tailored to reducing investment risk and promoting “growth …[and] economic freedom.”  MMC officials look for “good economic policies in recipient countries, such as free markets and low corruption.”

After first awarding a threshold grant, the MMC in 2014 offered Nepal a compact. The agreement signed in 2017 represented the largest foreign assistance grant ever received by Nepal, and the first MMC compact with a South Asia nation.

The MMC has offered 83 compacts and threshold programs to 51 countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and the Pacific. Some MMC agreements have ended abruptly – with Madagascar in 2009, Tanzania in 2016, and Sri Lanka in 2020. The MMC complained of election irregularities in the first two situations, while Sri Lanka objected to violations of sovereignty.

The almost six-year hiatus between the agreement being signed and Nepal’s ratification of the compact stems from governance problems in Nepal. Two factors contribute.  One is institutional immaturity, the result of decades of political turmoil prior to 2015 when Nepal’s present Constitution took effect. The other is parliamentary dysfunction associated with wrangling over disparate caste, ethnic, and regional interests.

A constitutional monarchy, in place between 1990 and 2006, had succeeded decades of absolutist minority rule. A 10-year-old armed Maoist insurgency ended in 2006, coincident with the king’s departure. From then until 2015, strife over dissolution of the Maoists’ army, regional demands, and the shape of a new constitution weakened the Maoist political party as it tried to exercise political power. All the while, it was contending with internal schisms, another Communist party, and Nepal’s Congress Party.

Following institution of the new Constitution in 2015 and the general elections two years later, the Communist Party of Nepal–Unified Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML) and the Communist Party of Nepal–Maoist Centre were positioned to jointly form a government. They did so, and, having united in May 2018, they established the Nepal Communist Party .

The Supreme Court nullified the unification. Afterwards, the CPN-UML headed a shaky government amid continuing factionalism. It exited in early 2021 after a no-confidence vote. The Supreme Court named Congress Party head Sher Bahadur Deuba as prime minister, and he remains.

The picture is of a government that is precarious and rudderless. In particular, according to The Statesman news service in New Delhi, “With the leadership of the executive practically non-functional …  the onus of making the system work lay upon Parliament. Sadly, the legislature has become almost dysfunctional.” Adding to the chaos is the matter of corruption.

Reports the Kathmandu Post: “Nepal’s position on the latest Corruption Perception Index remained unchanged at 117th out of 180 countries … Nepal’s score also remained unchanged at 33 …[and a] score below 50 is considered as having a relatively higher level of corruption.”

Once more The Statesman: “The biggest “achievement” of Parliament is that it had succeeded in ratifying the Millennium Challenge Corporation … Compact in the face of considerable resistance from the constituent political parties in government itself.”

It would be miraculous, so it seems, if mechanisms of accountability are in place as to where and to whom the money goes, and if the 28% of rural Nepalese who were poor in 2019 find that, with the money, their lives improve. Only through wishful thinking might one expect China to rest easy with Nepal’s half billion-dollar bonanza. Perhaps that’s the U.S. purpose: to provoke and to intrude.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi will visit Nepal on March 25 to deal with Nepal’s ratification of the MMC compact. According to a Chinese official quoted by India’s ANI news: “Implementation of the BRI projects in Nepal is important for Beijing … But this time Beijing is more worried about the security challenges emanating from the compact’s approval.”

Nepal’s government in 2017 had signed an agreement with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) for a railway project linking Kathmandu to Central Asia.

“We tried hard to stop the MCC compact’s parliamentary approval,” declared another Chinese official, who remarked also that, “[Nepalese] leaders who had earlier assured us of the compact’s failure started shaking under US pressure.”

Peruvian transport carriers end road blockages as giant copper mines remain shut down

Cesar Uco & Don Knowland

On March 14, freight carriers in Peru’s capital Lima, its principal seaport El Callao and Arequipa, Peru's second most populous city, began blocking roads in protest against sharp increases in fuel prices.

A strike by 200 transport companies was called for March 17 that would paralyze economic activity in Lima and Callao.

Truck convoy in Peru (Credit:ANDINA/Vidal Tarqui)

A strike in Arequipa was called by heavy load carriers, threatening disruption of the economy in the south of the country.

While, paying 40 percent more for fuel, truckers have also been hit with a tax on cargo vehicle ownership equivalent to some 18,000 soles per truck (almost $5,000). In addition, commercial activity has fallen 50 percent, so that heavy haulage is no longer profitable.

Fearing that the labor conflict would spread to other sectors and ignite the class struggle in Peru, the government extended its state of emergency for 45 more days in Lima and Callao, authorizing the national police and military to maintain “internal order,” and continuing the suspension of constitutional rights as to the inviolability of the home, and freedom of transit, assembly and personal security.

The government quickly turned to the leaders of the transport workers unions to nip the strike in the bud. They then agreed to a two-week respite from strike activity. By Saturday the 20th, the government and the transport workers unions entered into a settlement. The settlement established that diesel fuel will be included in the government’s fuel price stabilization fund, but it appears that little more was accomplished.

Meanwhile, struggles taking place at the giant Las Bambas and Southern Copper copper mines are contributing to an already deteriorating economy.

Peru is the second largest copper producer in the world, and the two companies account for close to a third of national copper production. Their combined production was down approximately 27 percent in the first two months of this year.

Las Bambas is a Chinese transnational owned by MMG valued at more than $5 billion. It stopped operations in mid-January, due to local residents blocking the road to the mine, demanding financial contributions from the company. This is an ongoing conflict between the company and the indigenous communities, whose land the road passes.

Southern Copper’s Cuajone mine, the country’s second largest, valued at $7.9 billion and with 5,000 employees, is owned by a consortium of Mexican companies, Grupo Mexico S.A.B. de C.V.

On February 28, local protestors, demanding $5 billion in compensation as well as a 5 percent share of the company’s profits, blocked the company’s access to a water reservoir and other key supplies. On March 15, operations at the mine were suspended for 15 days.

In 2021, Peru's GDP grew by 13 percent. This was largely due to re-opening the economy at the cost of eliminating measures against the pandemic.

At the beginning of 2022, the Central Reserve Bank (BCR) was projecting 3.5 to 4 percent annual growth. It has now reduced this figure to less than 2 percent.

Rising interest rates, inflationary problems in the US and the effects of the war in Ukraine are major economic stressors. According to the chief economist at Spain’s bank BBVA, Hugo Perea, “Inflation itself is deteriorating purchasing power.” Gestión reports that a barometer of “the deterioration of the Peruvian economy is the low consumption of credit and debit cards, especially on food, health, education and entertainment.”

According to the BCR, annualized government figures for the family consumption basket indicate that inflation of goods for the last two months was 5.1 percent. Among the main ones were food and beverages at 8.2 percent and household appliances at 7.1 percent. Further affecting the family basket, inflation in services was 2.5 percent, the main one being 'food outside the home' at 8.6 percent.

Inflation in goods and services pales when compared to annual rates of inflation for energy, with gasoline increasing 21 percent annually, domestic gas at 8 percent and diesel at 11 percent.

The government’s figures undoubtedly understate the reality. A WSWS reporter interviewed the owner of a small food stand, serving workers on lunch break. She told the WSWS: 'a kilo of chicken had gone up from 8.3 to 9 soles in 7 months (a 15 percent annual increase); bread from 20 cents to 40 cents in one year (100 percent); a sack of rice from 135 soles to 174 soles in one year (29 percent); a kilo of aji rocoto more than double in one week, from 6 soles to 14 soles; a kilo of lemons from 3.5 to 4 soles; a kilo of carrots from 1.5 to 2 soles, a 33 percent increase in one day; oil from 6 to 11 soles in 6 months (236 percent), sugar from 130 to 150 soles in one week; and churrasco meat from 20 to 25 soles in six months.

The rating agency Fitch said recently that the 'increasing political volatility in Peru was the key to the decision to remove the positive outlook for the credibility of the country's macro and fiscal policy in its rating,” which led to a downgrade to “BBB/Stable.” This week it announced the possibility of further downgrading Peru from “Stable” to “Negative.” As a consequence, foreign currency loans to the Peruvian government and domestic companies will be markedly more expensive.

La República announced that 'S&P downgraded the dollar risk rating of Petroperú to 'BB+' and placed the state-owned company on its special review list with negative outlook.' In other words, one of the most important companies owned by the government now has a 'junk bond' rating.

This economic deterioration comes as the government and the ruling class are already plunged into deep crisis.

Pedro Castillo assumed the presidency on July 28 of last year, after defeating the ultra-right-wing and corrupt Keiko Fujimori of Fuerza Popular in a close race. His approval rating has rapidly plummeted and now hovers at around 25 percent.

On March 14 the Peruvian Congress passed a motion to impeach Castillo over alleged corruption, with 76 voting in favor, 41 against and 1 abstention. Impeachment requires 87 or a two-thirds vote. Congress has summoned Castillo to appear for an impeachment trial on March 28.

On March 15, in an hour-long speech, Castillo rejected corruption allegations. He told Congress that all branches of government are in crisis. “Peru is going through an institutional crisis without precedent,” Castillo said. “We will send to the Congress of the republic a set of reforms that will allow us to overcome this structural crisis,” he continued.

Castillo, a former teacher’s union leader, posed as a left-wing populist in his presidential campaign, garnering wide support from the international pseudo-left. However, once in office, he veered sharply to the right. He lost no opportunity to praise the Peruvian military, and called the Army into the streets on the pretext of combating crime in order to quell disquiet among workers and youth.