Enforced Disappearances

 Abdul Majid Zargar

The international community commemorates 30th day of August as the  International day  of the Disappeared. Kashmir, which has witnessed thousands of enforced disappearances  is commemorating this  day with a renewed appeal to international community to force India to divulge information about the enforced disappearances.

In international human rights law, an enforced disappearance  (or involuntary disappearance) occurs when a person is secretly arrested, abducted, detained or is deprived of his liberty   by the state  or  its agents  with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state followed by a refusal to acknowledge the person’s fate and whereabouts, with the intent of placing the victim outside the protection of the law. The definition is wide enough to cover the enforced disappearances committed by State as well as non-state actors. According to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which came into force on 1 July 2002, when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed at any civilian population, a “forced disappearance” qualifies as a crime against humanity and, thus, is not subject to a statute of limitations. On 20 December 2006, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

In J&K, since the onset of armed struggle in 1990, thousands  of people have been made to disappear  , never to see their families or friends again, left for dead or even tortured. This inhuman, savage & insensate act  has been committed by all the  tributaries  of so-called  security apparatus comprising Army, Paramilitary forces and  special task forces as well as counterinsurgents working under the superintendence, control & direction of the security forces. In few cases even the militants have been accused of picking  people for  never to return. As per Association of disappeared persons (APDP), a non-govt. voluntary organization representing the families of victims,  the total number of persons who have disappeared involuntarily are estimated to be in the range of  10,000 people till date.

Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances is barbarism at its worst and constitutes the most abominable form of human rights violations. Disappearances inflict intolerable pain on the victim’s mind, body and spirit. Worse, the victims’ relatives-parents, spouses, children-also suffer deep anguish due to separation, not knowing if their loved ones are alive, fear for their own safety, unable to grieve, with no legal support and economic deprivation. In resorting to enforced disappearances, states attempt to hide their practices of torture and extra-judicial killings. It denotes “the reversal of what we may call the project of the 18th-century Enlightenment”, namely the establishment of a universal system of such rules and standards of moral behavior, embodied in the institutions of states dedicated to the rational progress of humanity.

And  the practice of enforced disappearances has given rise to a new class of people called half-widows & half orphans which are now common phrases used in Kashmir for those women & children whose husbands & parents went missing without a trace after having been picked up by security forces. Their plight is most difficult & worst aspect of the whole issue as uncertainty is greatest oppression of all, affecting the women’s or children’s whole life.

And as we observe this week, It is of paramount importance that Cases of enforced disappearances are well documented and brought before international Human Rights courts and bodies: the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee, Committee Against Torture, the UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances. Through international community, we must impress upon Indian Govt   to first divulge the information about existing cases of  disappeared persons, co-relate the same with mass unmarked graves and further re-examine its policies and practices in Kashmir to  assess if these meet the test of the global  standards of scrutiny. This process is necessary for perpetrators to be held accountable for their actions and justice rendered, including reparations to victims and their families.

Australian property bubble fuelling mortgage stress

Oscar Grenfell

Recent figures show that soaring house prices, especially on the east coast of Australia, have fuelled a deepening social crisis. Millions of working people are mired in “mortgage stress,” with not enough funds to cover housing repayments and other living expenses. Millions more are on the precipice, sparking warnings of a housing market crash that could trigger an economic breakdown.

According to modelling by Digital Finance Analytics, featured on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s “Four Corners” program last week, a quarter of all mortgaged households, numbering some 820,000, are in stress. Of those, around 32,000 are estimated to be in severe stress and 52,000 are thought to be at risk of defaulting on their loans by next May.

The modelling highlighted the social divide that underlies the housing crisis. In working-class areas of Sydney and Melbourne, mortgage stress is endemic, while in the wealthiest suburbs it is in the single digits.

In Sydney, for instance, 47 percent of around 13,000 mortgaged households in the southwestern suburb of Liverpool are in stress. The figure is 38 percent of the 2,634 mortgage-holders in North Parramatta, 53 percent of 4,495 in St Mary’s, 40 percent of 5,848 in Mount Druitt, and 51 percent of 10,683 in Campbelltown.

Each of these suburbs, in the city’s west and southwest, has been hit by the decimation of manufacturing and industry, and the gutting of social spending on education, healthcare and other necessities, overseen by Labor and Liberal-National governments over the past three decades.

These are centres of poverty, youth unemployment and myriad social problems for which government authorities offer no solutions. Despite lacking basic services, and being over an hour from Sydney’s central business district, affordable home ownership in such areas is out of reach for tens of thousands of workers.

Across Sydney, dozens of working-class suburbs registered rates of stress at, or approaching 20 percent of the mortgaged population. The figures mean that a substantial proportion of working people are already unable to cope with their housing repayments, and could be tipped over the edge by the loss of a job, a health problem or unanticipated expenses.

By contrast, mortgage stress is at 6 percent in Vaucluse and 7 percent in Rose Bay, two of the city’s most affluent eastern suburbs.

Similar figures were recorded in Melbourne. In seven working-class suburbs in the city’s northeast, for instance—Diamond Creek, South Morang, Epping, Meadow Heights, Fawkner and Mill Park—mortgage stress stands at well over 50 percent, affecting more than 20,000 households.

The annual Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey, released earlier this month, also showed that a substantial proportion of mortgage-holders are increasing their housing debt, indicating difficulties with existing repayments. Between 2011 and 2014, at least 40 percent of young homeowners increased their nominal home debt. Between 2002 and 2014, average housing debt for young mortgage-holders rose from $169,000 to $337,000.

This is part of a broader explosion of household debt, which stands at 189 percent of total income, the second highest ratio in the world. Average annual wage growth was 1.9 percent last financial year, the lowest in recorded history, and barely on par with the official inflation rate.

House prices have risen far more quickly. Average prices in Sydney and Melbourne, the centres of the property bubble, have doubled over the past eight years, reaching more than $1 million in the former and over $900,000 in the latter.

The divergence between soaring property prices and declining or stagnating wages, and the massive increase in debt, has sparked fears of a housing market crash.

On “Four Corners,” Martin North, the head of Digital Finance Analytics, commented: “I’ve been studying the market here for a good number of years and I have never seen this perfect storm of issues coming together.” North added: “We’ve got households in some degree of difficulty already now and so it doesn’t take much to see the tipping point, such that then we get this downward spiral and boy if it goes, it could be as bad as Ireland or the US.”

The modelling featured in the program underscored the dilemma confronting the Reserve Bank of Australia and other government authorities. Having promoted the boom through low interest rates and incentives for speculative property investment, any move to rein in the market could trigger widespread mortgage defaults, and a rapid fall in lending.

According to the modelling, a 1 percent interest rate increase by the Reserve Bank would push an additional 200,000 households into mortgage stress, taking the total to over a million. A 5 percent rise would lead to rates of stress among mortgaged households of 90 percent or more across 170 metropolitan suburbs.

Already, despite official interest rates being at record lows of 1.5 percent, there are indications of a slowdown in the property market. National apartment sales fell in July, on a month-to-month basis, by 15.7 percent, contributing to an overall fall in housing sales of 3.7 percent. The release of those figures followed warnings by BIS Oxford Economics that the construction of residential apartments will fall by 31 percent over the next three years.

If that occurs, it would have far broader implications, indicating a collapse in investor confidence in the property market and impacting on every sector of the economy, as well as wiping out thousands of construction workers’ jobs. The major banks would be heavily exposed to any marked slowdown of the housing sector, as around 60 percent of their assets consist of mortgage debt.

A substantial proportion of that debt is composed of high-risk “interest only” loans, which do not require the borrower to pay off any of the principal, for a fixed period of up to seven years. Such loans account for up to 40 percent of all housing loans, and an estimated 60 percent of loans to investors.

The “Four Corners” program documented how mortgage brokers have been actively encouraged to sell risky loans. Phillip Dempsey, one former broker, noted that in the past the industry-standard was for loans to be no more than three to four times combined gross income. Now the standard is seven or eight times income.

The promotion of speculation in housing, and the massive expansion of debt, has not been simply a product of individual banks or brokers. It is part of the broader rise and rise of finance capital, aided by the deregulation of the economy, including the housing market, by successive governments, beginning with the Hawke and Keating Labor governments in the 1980s.

The tendency toward speculation has accelerated since the 2008 global meltdown, amid fear on the part of investors that they will not receive a sufficiently profitable return on investments in the productive economy.

Burmese military steps up brutal crackdown on Rohingya Muslims

Kayla Costa 

Five thousand Rohingya Muslims and non-Muslim residents have fled into Bangladesh in the past few days after the Burmese (Myanmar) army stepped up its program of torching villages and forcing residents to flee.

The Burmese military (Tatmadaw) waged this violence in the northwestern part of Rakhine state, supposedly in response to small-scale attacks on August 24 by insurgency groups linked with the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA).

In fact, the army began a build-up in the area earlier in the month, with two planeloads of troops arriving in the state capital Sittwe on August 10.

On Saturday, Social Welfare Minister Win Myat Aye gave an ominous sign of a major expansion of the “clearance operation” that began last October. He announced that 4,000 “ethnic villagers” had been evacuated from the military’s operational area. About 500 arrived in Sittwe on Monday. “Ethnic villagers” refers to Buddhists—the country’s majority religion—and their evacuation cleared the way for more army violence.

The latest wave of refugees arrived in Bangladesh after Burmese troops cracked down on Rahkine state villages, firing machine guns and mortars at residents, even as they ran for their lives.

According to Burmese state officials, Rohingya insurgents used home-made weapons to launch last week’s attacks on 30 police stations and an army base near a village in Rakhine state. Myanmar military forces, backed by Buddhist militias, responded with indiscriminate killing and heavy weaponry. The total death toll climbed up to 102 over the weekend, with nearly 90 Rohingya civilians, branded as “insurgents,” killed by the Burmese military.

Speaking to Reuters by phone on Tuesday, a villager described the attack, involving shotguns, on three hamlets in the Kyee Kan Pyin village group. Houses were torched. “Everything is on fire. Now I’m in the fields with the people, we’re running away.”

Those fleeing find Bangladesh border patrols waiting to turn them away. By Tuesday, Bangladesh military forces prevented about 1,000 refugees from crossing the border, and captured another 90 who were en route to the nearest refugee camp in Kutupalong.

Bangladeshi military official Mohammad Ali Hossain told Reuters: “We have a zero tolerance policy—no one will be allowed [in].” On Monday, a Bangladesh foreign ministry official told reporters that Bangladesh, to stem the tide of refugees, would offer to work with Burma in cracking down on Rohingya insurgents.

Those who successfully crossed the border remain fearful of evacuation, knowing Bangladesh troops could still seize them after arriving at any refugee camp. Most of the refugees are women, children and the elderly seeking safety.

The Rohingya Muslim civilians were not the only ones to flee. An estimated 1,000 non-Muslim residents either armed themselves or fled to nearby towns, though they receive protection from the Burmese military. Additionally, humanitarian aid workers are considering evacuation as the Myanmar military accuses them of helping insurgents carry out attacks.

Since October, 87,000 Rohingya have fled into Bangladesh, bringing the total number to 400,000. Another 40,000 are in India, which has threatened to deport them back to the war zone.

Early last month, India’s junior interior minister Kiren Rijiju, told parliament the government would deport all the Rohingya. He later declared it was irrelevant that the UN refugee agency issued them identity papers. “We are not a signatory to the [UN] accord on refugees,” he said. “Anyone who is an illegal migrant will be deported.”

While the military’s persecution of the Rohingya minority is longstanding, it has escalated under the National League of Democracy (NLD) government, headed by State Counsellor and Foreign Minister Aung San Suu Kyi.

The campaign is aimed at driving the Rohingya Muslims out of Rakhine state, where they have lived, sometimes for centuries, as a minority. The military has continually terrorized villages in the area, including via murder, rape, pillaging, kidnapping and arson. The Rohingya are falsely branded as illegal immigrants and have no rights as citizens.

Nobel laureate Suu Kyi has defended the military, denouncing international criticism as lies, blocking proposals for limited UN investigations and expanding the army’s powers. The army has near-complete autonomy to conduct whatever actions it sees fit, including the ruthless ethnic cleansing campaign. The generals control the key ministries of defence, interior and border control.

On Friday, after her government declared ARSA a terrorist organization, Suu Kyi commended the police and security forces for “great courage.” She made the absurd claim that the ARSA’s limited and essentially defensive actions against the security forces, were attacks on “those seeking to build peace and harmony in Rakhine state.”

To declare that the army is seeking “peace and harmony” simply underscores the fact that the NLD is thoroughly permeated with Buddhist Burmese chauvinism and functions as a junior partner to the military, which dominated the nation for over five decades. This is the military that has driven 40 percent of the population of 1.1 million Rohingya out of the country and forced another 140,000 into squalid concentration camps inside Burma.

Suu Kyi’s unqualified support for the military’s brutal measures makes clear that the US and its allies backed her not to defend democratic rights in Burma, but to promote their own interests and in particular to curb China’s influence. Once the military shifted away from Beijing and reached a modus vivendi with the US and its “democracy icon,” criticism of its gross abuse of democratic rights has been all but dropped.

The response of the US Embassy on Sunday to the military operations of the past week is a case in point. It supported the actions of the government and security forces, with full knowledge of the brutality underway, only adding an empty caveat that the operations should be conducted “in a way that protects all innocent civilians.”

Corbyn and Labour backtrack on Brexit

Chris Marsden

Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer has called for a post-Brexit arrangement committing the UK to do whatever is required to maintain membership of the Single European Market and Customs Union for up to four years.

Writing in the Observer on Sunday, Starmer said that Labour’s proposed transitional period would avoid a "cliff edge" for the UK economy. Labour would “abide by the common rules” of the SEM and Customs Union. This means accepting the free movement of goods, services, capital and European labour at the expected end of negotiations in March 2019.

His pledge is equivalent to continued EU membership until at least 2023—with the sole difference that the UK would have no say on EU policy. Starmer added that any new relationship with the EU after this transition would also "retain the benefits of the customs union and the single market."

This is tantamount to membership of the EU in all but name. He does not say so openly due to concern over the electoral impact of moving too hastily to reverse the referendum vote. Pro-Brexit commentators have stressed that seven out of 10 Labour constituencies voted leave in the referendum. But Starmer anticipates that this majority is already being eroded by the economic impact of the falling pound and will be reversed later down the line. He therefore made clear that even a four-year transition was a fudge, writing that “for all its merits” it would “be imperfect and prove unsustainable beyond a limited period. It would not provide a durable or acceptable long-term settlement for Britain or the EU.”

The next day, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn lent his support to Starmer’s position, stating that “it's the [Conservative] Government that has confusion. It restarts the negotiations tomorrow [Tuesday], and it seems to me they're in danger of wandering into a 'cliff edge Brexit'. Ours is to protect jobs and protect working conditions in the transition."

Corbyn’s shift to a long-term embrace of single market membership was bemoaned by his pseudo-left supporters in the Socialist Workers Party. The decision would “please some of left wing leader Jeremy Corbyn’s most bitter enemies,” it wrote, citing “right wing Labour MPs… Alison McGovern and Heidi Alexander.”

The SWP was left to pathetically urge “The left in Labour” to “put forward a left-wing vision for Brexit” that “has to involve extending freedom of movement, ending austerity and privatisation—and opposing the single market.”

Which is political nonsense: With no democratic mandate or even discussion with party members or the wider electorate, Labour and Corbyn are in the process of overturning the Brexit referendum result. And contrary to the SWP’s appeals, the only aspect of the referendum the party still genuflects towards is the demand for an end to free movement. Starmer says that a final deal must address the "need for more effective management of migration…"

EU negotiatior Michel Barnier has no reason to accept any conditions placed by the UK, because he knows that Labour’s position is determined by the dominant sections of big business and the City of London that view the Brexit vote as a disaster.

The latest of many U-turns by Corbyn demonstrates that there are no principled differences between left and right within Labour or between Labour and the pro-EU wing of the Tory Party.

Having opposed EU membership for decades while on Labour’s backbenches, as party leader Corbyn campaigned in the referendum for continued EU membership. His switch was dictated by the demands of both big business and the trade union bureaucracy, which acts as Labour’s paymaster and is just as concerned as the City of London with the impact of exit on the profit margins of the banks and major corporations. Starmer stated bluntly that Labour’s position “is a view shared widely by businesses and trade unions,” while Trades Union Congress General Secretary Frances O’Grady joined the likes of leading Blairite, Chukka Ummuna and the architect of New Labour, Peter Mandelson, in praising the shift.

Even David Owen, one of the “Gang of Four” who broke with Labour in the 1980s to form the Social Democratic Party, wrote to the Guardian, “As a Labour supporter not yet ready to renew my membership... it is good to see Keir Starmer’s position agreed with Jeremy Corbyn.”

The Blairites and the rest of the Parliamentary Labour Party moved their motion of no-confidence in Corbyn last year, after denouncing his “lukewarm” efforts in the Brexit referendum campaign. Removing him as leader was bound up with efforts to refashion Labour as the pro-austerity, anti-Brexit party needed by the ruling class, given that the Conservative Party has proved incapable of standing against its anti-EU right-wing.

Once again, as on every major issue, Corbyn has done all in his power to convince the PLP that he will toe the line and can be trusted to lead the party. His occasional “leftist” rhetoric is deployed only to sell Labour to all those who are bitterly hostile to the right-wing agenda it truly stands for. He is seeking to put Labour in power by capitalising on the popular support he enjoys. But once in office, Labour will do the bidding of the ruling elite just as surely as the Tories.

Corbyn has now been given a pat on the head by some of his erstwhile opponents. But this is only in preparation for the next stage in Labour’s political refashioning for a role in government.

Peter Mandelson, one of the prime movers, along with Tony Blair, in the fashioning of New Labour writes, “Labour has done parliament and the public a big favour in starting what will be a complicated debate,” but must now establish “the clear principle that Britain should not decide to leave the EU and its single market until it knows just where it is leaving to.”

Labour MP Heidi Alexander who had called for Corbyn’s removal after the EU referendum result, told ITV News, “I think that if there isn’t a better offer on the table then staying in the single market and customs union permanently would be the right thing for the country.”

Stewart Wood, a former adviser to Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown, commented, “I think if I was a Brexiter I’d be worried that over the next three or four years if a transition deal lasts that long that other circumstances will change and the will to move on from transition stage to full Brexit might be less present than it is now.”

The Financial Times welcomed Labour’s position. But it views this as an opportunity to help stiffen Prime Minister Theresa May’s resolve to defy the Brexiteers in her own party, rather than as a reason to embrace Labour—given the risks posed by Corbyn’s appeal to popular anti-austerity sentiment.

The Tories too have called for a two-year transition period post Brexit. To maintain party unity, however, Chancellor Philip Hammond was forced to state that the UK would be "outside the single market and outside the customs union" and therefore free to negotiate trade deals with non-EU states.

The FT predicts that such conditions will now be abandoned. It described Starmer’s announcement as “the best news to come out of British politics in a long time” for having renounced “unrealistic hopes for a quick and easy divorce or a bespoke transition deal.”

It continued, “It is paradoxical that this outbreak of Burkean common sense should have come from an opposition led by a revolutionary throwback such as Jeremy Corbyn… That said, whatever the motivation, the Labour shift puts it firmly on the side of business and challenges the government to go still further along the road to pragmatism.”

If not “the consequences could be severe… a Corbyn government, which could have painful consequences for business and the economy that reach far beyond Brexit.”

Germany: Policeman and lawyer conspire to murder left-wing politicians

Sven Heymanns

On Monday morning, police searched the dwellings and business premises of two men in the German state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (MWP). According to the prosecutor general they are suspected of planning the murder of left-wing politicians.

The prosecutor’s web site alleges that the two accused had exchanged opinions with other persons in a chat group about the political situation in Germany, in particular “what they regarded as a mistaken refugee and immigration policy.” They feared “the emptying of private and state budgets,” as well as an increase in attacks and other crimes that could lead “to the breakdown of public order.”

The prosecutor further alleges that the suspects had made deliberate preparations for such an eventuality. In addition to food, they had acquired ammunition “for their legally procured weapons.” The suspects regarded the crisis as an opportunity “to apprehend and kill representatives on the politically left spectrum.” The accused had correspondingly drawn up a list of names.

Based on research carried out by the Süddeutsche Zeitung and the NDR and WDR television channels, lists of names and particulars of state and federal politicians belonging to the Free Democratic Party (FDP), the Greens and the Left Party were found during the police searches. Names of refugee organisations, a workers' welfare charity and trade unions were also on the list.

The Interior Ministry in Schwerin has reported that one of the accused is a police officer stationed at Ludwigslust. He faces disciplinary measures and has been suspended from duty.

The second accused, Jan-Hendrik Hammer, is a lawyer from Rostock. The 45-year-old is a member of the city parliament and vice-chairman of the organisation “Independent citizens for Rostock” (UFR). Malte Philipp, the president of the UFR group, expressed his surprise and shock at the searches on the UFR website. He stated that Hammer was not a member of the UFR, but had only affiliated to the organisation as a former activist for the FDP. Philipp maintained that he had not noticed “any form of extremism on the part of Hammer.”

According to media reports, police have also searched the private and business premises of several other persons who are not currently facing charges. These persons include a high-ranking officer in the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania state police.

Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the prosecutor's office has failed to issue a warrant for the arrest of the two accused.

In initial reactions to the searches the Left Party in particular expressed its disquiet. “Death lists have been drawn up against left-wing politicians,” the party noted on Twitter Thursday, and continued: “The key factor for the growing violence by the right is the AfD.”

In fact, responsibility for far right violence lies not just with the nationalist Alternative for Germany (AfD), but with all of Germany’s parliamentary parties, including the Left Party, which have whipped up sentiments against refugees and immigrants in recent months and years.

In this respect the Left Party has played a particularly insidious role. While occasionally mouthing social-reformist phrases, leading party members have made clear that the Left Party, like all the other parties, is quite prepared to carry out the mass deportation of refugees. Left Party leader Sahra Wagenknecht notoriously declared, “whoever abuses the law of the host country, has also forfeited the law of the host,” and the state administration in Thuringia, headed by Left Party state premier Bodo Ramelow, has been carrying out Wagenknecht’s threat in practice. Thuringia currently has one of the highest rates of deportation in the entire country.

The latest events in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania also show the hypocrisy of the campaign by the German government, supported by opposition parties, notably the social democrats, against the alleged threat of “left-wing extremism.” The police searches of the right-wingers took place only three days after interior minister Thomas de Maizière (CDU) banned the anti-fascist website leftunten.indymedia.org.

In order to enforce its unpopular policy of military rearmament and social attacks against the population, the ruling class in Germany is cracking down on all forms of political opposition. The police provocations at the recent G20 summit have been exploited to shift politics to the right.

The result has been to boost the far right. The latest incident in MWP is the second within a few months in which forces inside the security apparatus were involved in planning far right terrorist attacks. In April it emerged that a right-wing extremist network led by the officer Franco A was active inside the German army. The group planned to commit terror attacks in Germany and then place the blame on refugees.

The flood of reports on allegedly unprecedented violence during protests against the G20 summit in Hamburg drowned out further media coverage of the terror cell at the heart of the German army. It has since been revealed that contrary to the promises of the German defence minister, most of the Bundeswehr barracks that still carry the names of military officers associated with the Nazis will not be renamed.

This week’s searches in MWP reveal the extent to which far-right networks have penetrated the state apparatus. Only officials of the federal criminal police office and federal police were deployed during the searches. The state’s interior ministry reported that local police were not involved in the raids. Evidently the authorities were concerned that the suspects could be informed in advance of the searches.

German court issues draconian ruling against Hamburg G20 protester

Katerina Selin

The Hamburg District Court issued its first ruling in the ongoing legal proceedings related to the protests and violence at the G20 summit in Hamburg in early July on Monday.

The judge imposed a prison sentence of two years and seven months on a 21-year-old man from the Netherlands, because he allegedly threw two empty glass bottles at a police officer and resisted arrest during a protest. In the view of the court, this was sufficient to justify a conviction of a serious breach of the peace, inflicting grievous bodily harm, a severe assault on law enforcement officers, and resisting law enforcement officers.

This draconian ruling rests on scant evidence. The court relied on statements by two officers from a riot police unit from Berlin, which had deployed to Hamburg for the G20.

Peike S., the accused, remained silent during the trial. His lawyer appealed for his acquittal.

There are good reasons not to give any credibility to the police officers’ accusations. In the case of the banning of the left-wing platform linksunten.indymedia.org by the Interior Ministry last Friday, the claim by the police to have found weapons in the apartments of the site’s administrators was quickly exposed as a lie. The Interior Ministry, questioned on the issue by netzpolitik.org, was forced to acknowledge that no dangerous objects had been found.

The young man sentenced on Monday has no prior criminal convictions and has already been in custody for several weeks. On the evening of 6 July, he participated in the left autonomist “Welcome to Hell” protest in the Schanzen quarter that planned to march to the left-wing “Rote Flora” centre. A unit of riot police in helmets, and armed with batons, pepper spray and water cannons blocked the route and declared the demonstration to be dispersed. When the demonstrators refused to end the demonstration and organised spontaneous protests, police officers intervened with water cannons and beat people with batons. Bottles were thrown in the direction of the police from the demonstration.

The accused allegedly threw two bottles that hit a 30-year-old police officer on the helmet and leg, but did not injure him. He said he felt pain, but he neither received treatment nor took sick leave.

Instead, with the help of another officer he intervened against Peike S, whom he had identified as the person who threw the beer bottles, and arrested him. Peike S. sought to defend himself against the police by rolling on the ground and tensing his muscles.

This “fetal position,” which the judge deemed to be “resistance,” was an act of self-defence, according to the lawyer for the accused. Her client had curled up in fear. She also rejected the other accusations in the charge. The identity of her client was not confirmed beyond doubt during the trial, she added. In addition, the charge of “severe breach of the peace” was not justified, because the defendant was part of a small group of less than 15 people. According to the Federal Supreme Court, only in a group of at least 15 to 20 people can a “breach of the peace” be considered.

The approximately 40 observers in the courtroom responded with shock to the sentence. District Court Judge Johann Krieken, who has won a reputation as a hardliner, went even further in his sentencing than the harsh demands made by the state prosecutor, who had appealed for a sentence of one year and nine months. According to the Tageszeitung, the state prosecutor spoke of significant criminal intent on the part of the defendant. It was necessary to take account of “the civil war-like conditions” in Hamburg in the sentencing, she added, and deter other potential offenders. She thereby made clear prior to the judge’s ruling that the trial was not about finding out the truth, but setting an example.

The judge firmly supported the police. In his ruling, he drew on a reform to a law on the protection of public officials carrying out public services, which came into force on 30 May and makes it easier to punish acts of resistance. Police officers are “not fair game for a hedonistic society,” he declared. Since they have been protected by lawmakers, the courts must also back them, the judge continued. The presumption of innocence for the accused hardly appears to have played a role in this case. Apart from the statements of the police officers, no other evidence was presented in the court record.

The Hamburg ruling makes a mockery of any careful judicial evaluation. It is part of a political campaign against “left-wing extremism” which has been conducted by all major German political parties and media outlets over recent weeks. The violence surrounding the G20 summit was deliberately exaggerated so as to create a hysterical atmosphere for the federal election. The politicians and their media mouthpieces in their editorial offices are utterly indifferent to the fact that investigations have proven that most of the stories of alleged left-wing rioting in the Schanzen quarter were groundless. Several politicians, including Hamburg’s social democratic Mayor Olaf Scholz, have repeatedly called for tough sentences against the detained protesters.

Deliberate political decisions have led to the court ruling. This cannot be concealed by the judge’s threadbare claim that he was not concerned with fulfilling the demands of politicians. The absurdly long sentence and extremely scant evidence are typical characteristics of politically motivated rulings in dictatorial regimes such as Egypt, where such decisions occur on a daily basis. The goal is to suppress any opposition to the policies of militarism, the build-up of the domestic state apparatus, and social austerity.

The Hamburg police are currently investigating 2,000 alleged crimes by opponents of the G20. “In connection with the violence surrounding the G20 summit, the Hamburg state prosecutor has registered 109 investigations against persons whose names are known,” stated Carsten Rinio, spokesman for the state prosecutor, according to the Hamburger Abendblatt.

A second show trial against a G20 protester took place yesterday. The defendant, Stanislav B., was accused of violating the arms and explosives law, as well as the law on assembly. According to investigators, irritant gas, diving goggles, seven fireworks, “clothing typical of the scene,” and two marbles were in his backpack when he was arrested. For this, he received a six-month suspended sentence. His defence lawyer announced that the ruling would be appealed.

Serious outbreaks of syphilis and hepatitis underscore social crisis in America

Genevieve Leigh

Diseases considered largely eradicated in modern society are breaking out in the United States as yet another devastating consequence of the present social crisis.

The most recent data, for 2015, reveals that nearly 24,000 cases of early-stage syphilis, the sexually transmitted infection that can lead to blindness, paralysis and dementia, were reported that year in the United States. This represented a 19 percent rise over the previous year. The total number of sufferers in 2015, including those with later-stage disease, was nearly 75,000, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

More recent evidence indicates that the outbreak has only worsened since 2015. Oklahoma City recently reported possibly the country’s most severe outbreak. Dozens of cases were discovered that are believed to have spread rapidly through gang networks and prostitution rings.

Rates are rising in Oklahoma’s capital city among white women and their infants. Similar trends are being reported nationwide. Nearly five times more babies are being born at present with syphilis than with HIV.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles County has recently reported a record outbreak of hepatitis A, leading to the deaths of 14 people thus far and sending hundreds to the hospital for treatment. The latest data from San Diego County indicate that more than 350 cases have been diagnosed there since the beginning of the year and 264 people have needed hospital care.

Hepatitis A has been well known to scientists and the medical community for decades, and syphilis for centuries. The fact that both of these diseases have treatments—and for hepatitis A, a vaccine exists—raises the pertinent question: how are these diseases able to reemerge in the most advanced capitalist country in the world in the 21st century?

Both illnesses have taken hold almost exclusively in poverty-ridden areas and within some of the most vulnerable social layers. In Oklahoma City, the first identified victims of syphilis were found at the local juvenile detention center, which reported three cases—a boy and two girls, the youngest, 14. The center had not had a syphilis case in seven years of testing for it.

A few months later, a prison inmate tested positive. Looking into the origin of the outbreak, investigators discovered that the spread was largely caused by the opioid epidemic, as many users trade sex in exchange for heroin or methamphetamine. The syphilis outbreak has also been tied to gang activity, which is heavily associated with the opioid trade and drug abuse in the area. These conditions make the disease difficult and dangerous to track and contain.

The hepatitis A outbreak in Southern California also has origins associated with social conditions. Officials have reported that the overwhelming majority of the victims are drug users, and also homeless people. The virus, which impairs liver function and causes jaundice, nausea and fatigue, is primarily spread through food or water contaminated by fecal matter, but can also be spread by intravenous drug use. With limited access to resources needed for basic hygiene, the homeless are very susceptible to hepatitis A.

Both Los Angeles and San Diego counties have large homeless encampments and severe drug abuse problems. San Diego’s homeless population has grown some 40 percent since January 2014. The largest encampments of the homeless in San Diego, the 8th largest city in the US, are miles away from the nearest 24-hour public restroom. Such facilities have been increasingly shut down to drive the homeless population away from gentrified areas.

Two restrooms in Fault Line Park, where the homeless often congregate to get out of the sun, were shut down months ago, although the city is paying the park’s developer $1.6 million to keep them clean and open.

The profit system has not only created the conditions in which such horrors erupt, but it cannot offer any viable solution to solving these afflictions. Doctors, many of whom haven’t seen a case of syphilis since the late 1990s, often misdiagnose the disease, the lab testing procedure is now antiquated and there has been a shortage of the antibiotic, made only by Pfizer, for over a year.

In response to the hepatitis outbreak in Southern California, officials have proposed setting up a number of hand-washing stations throughout the city’s most affected areas as a “solution” to the public health crisis. There is no serious discussion by officials in the affected areas of the dire social conditions that have given rise to these outbreaks.

Australian government offers to send troops to the Philippines

Mike Head 

For the second time this month, without any public consultation, the Turnbull government has moved to place Australia on the front line of a US-led military intervention in Asia that could trigger a wider war.

In a doorstop interview outside parliament yesterday, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop let it be known that at a recent meeting she offered Philippine President Rod­rigo Duterte to send troops to the Philippines, supposedly on an “advise and assist” mission.

Pointedly, Bishop made the “offer” public, despite conceding that Duterte had not yet accepted it. In most previous US and Australian interventions, the diplomatic pretence has been that the military forces were invited by the host country, which then announced the decision.

Bishop claimed that Australian troops could assist the fight against alleged Islamic State (IS)-linked forces in Marawi City on the southern island of Mindanao. In reality, Australian Special Forces would join their US counterparts, who are already on the ground in Mindanao as part of an intervention in collaboration with the Philippine military.

The US Embassy in Manila and the Philippine military revealed on June 9 that US Special Forces have been involved in the Marawi battle since it was launched in May.

Less than three weeks ago, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull gave an unprecedented pledge to join what would be a catastrophic war by the United States against North Korea.

Confronting a deepening political crisis at home, Turnbull is seeking to don the mantle of a wartime prime minister, despite widespread anti-war sentiment. As well as joining the Trump administration’s belligerent stance against North Korea, he and his ministers are hyping up misleading propaganda about the involvement of IS in long-running conflicts in Mindanao.

Bishop’s declaration marks an escalation of Canberra’s involvement in the Philippines, raising the prospect of ground troops being sent to Asia for the first time since the disastrous Vietnam War. In June, Turnbull government announced the dispatch of air force surveillance planes to Mindanao.

Bishop drew a parallel with Australia’s role in Iraq, where some 300 regular troops are training local forces, and about 80 Special Forces soldiers are “advising and assisting” close to the front line—in other words, actively engaged in the fighting. She made clear the same would take place in the Philippines. “We would be ready to support the Philippines in the same way we are supporting Iraq in advising, assisting and training,” Bishop said.

Bishop suggested that Duterte was receptive to the offer. “The president heard my offer. I know the United States, likewise, made offers. I know Malaysia and Indonesia are prepared to support, Singapore are prepared to support the Philippines should they request that support.”

In other words, this is a US-backed “offer” that Duterte is under immense pressure to accept. Bishop emphasised how intimately she was working with Washington. She said she was in “constant” discussion with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, as well as Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, about the situation in Marawi.

Once again, the “war on terrorism” is being used as a cover for US militarism. Washington and the Philippines military have seized upon the conflict in Marawi, which began as a battle between rival armed clans, to effectively discipline Duterte, who was shifting Manila’s foreign policy away from the US and toward China.

As part of a pitch for Chinese investment and financial assistance, Duterte previously vowed to eject US military personnel from the Philippines, a former US colony. Washington, which retained a large military presence under the Marcos dictatorship, signed an agreement with Duterte’s predecessor, Benigno Aquino, to secure virtually unlimited access to military bases in the country.

The Marawi battle suddenly erupted on May 23, just as Duterte arrived in Moscow to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The military launched a raid against what it claimed was the IS headquarters in the Philippines. Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana then declared military rule, compelling Duterte to return immediately to the Philippines.

With its allies in the Philippines military, Washington is using the Marawi battle to reorient Manila’s geopolitical ties away from Beijing and Moscow, and firmly back into the camp of US imperialism.

Bishop’s comments yesterday followed an extraordinary June 29 public call by a visiting US Marine general for Australian commandos to be dispatched to the Philippines. Lieutenant General David Berger, in Australia for the biennial Talisman Sabre US-Australian military exercises, said he expected Australian forces could soon join American troops in that country.

“Both of us have a long history of being an expeditionary force when needed, so we begin from a common point I think and we’ve operated alongside for 100 years,” Berger told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. He spoke of “looking for stability” in the region to deter “bad behaviour.”

Berger’s remarks point to concerns in Washington about the instability of the Duterte regime, which the US and its partners have continued to shield from criticism of its murderous, fascistic activities, mostly conducted under the cover of a “war on drugs.”

Since Duterte took office in July last year, government figures show police have killed close to 3,500 “drug personalities.” Thousands more have been murdered in unexplained circumstances in poor urban areas, even according to police data. Duterte has declared he is “happy to slaughter” millions of supposed addicts and dismissed the deaths of children as “collateral damage.”

On Monday, Duterte provocatively told police they could kill “idiots” who violently resist arrest. This came just two days after hundreds of people turned the funeral of a schoolboy into a protest against Duterte’s rampage. Kian Loyd delos Santos, 17, was shot in the head by plainclothes police in a Manila alley.

Far from opposing Duterte’s brutality, the US and its allies have publicly appeased him as part of their intervention. Bishop’s announcement came after a brazen display of support for Duterte by the director-general of the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS), Nick Warner, in Manila on August 22.

Australia’s top foreign spy chief, who rarely appears in public, met with Duterte and Defense Secretary Lorenzana at the Malacañang presidential palace. The president’s office later released photos of Warner and Duterte smiling and using Duterte’s signature closed-fist hand gesture, a symbol of his 2016 presidential campaign pledge to kill thousands of “criminals.”

ASIS is Australia’s highly secretive equivalent of the US CIA. The presence of its chief, who has also been involved in interventions in Iraq and Solomon Islands, and previously headed Australia’s Defence Department, is a sure sign of intense Australian intelligence and military involvement in the Philippines.

The Mindanao deployment is another front in Canberra’s escalating involvement in predatory US military operations globally. In May, the Turnbull government added 30 troops to the Australian contingent in Afghanistan, making a total of 300. It is now refusing to rule out an increased commitment under the Trump administration’s plans to expand the US intervention there.

North Korea: Time to Focus on Minimisation, Not Denuclearisation

Rahul Raj


The North Korean nuclear programme has been the focus of international attention over the last two decades because Pyongyang’s development of nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles cannot be separated from its bellicose behaviour, which has caused a great deal of tension in the region and the world. Since revelations of North Korean nuclear weapons development surfaced, the US and South Korea have tried unsuccessfully to bring the programme to a halt. Denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula has been central to the foreign policy of both countries for decades, yet one presidential administration after another has left office without deterring North Korea’s steady progress in becoming a nuclear-armed state. In fact, just the opposite has occurred, with North Korea currently developing even more sophisticated nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems.

US intelligence services have recently reported that North Korea has developed miniaturised nuclear weapons that can fit into the heads of a new class of ballistic missiles, which Pyongyang has successfully tested in the waters between Korea and Japan. These tests began a war of words between Washington and Pyongyang, with President Donald Trump promising “fire and fury” if North Korea attempts to threaten the US. North Korea retorted by threatening to conduct missile tests directed towards the US territory of Guam in the Pacific Ocean, edging both states to the brink.

Although President Trump tried to adopt a fresh approach soon after taking office, ignoring a North Korean missile launched in February 2017 and saying he “would be honoured” to meet with the North’s leader Kim Jong-un, he soon reverted to the rhetoric of previous administrations, vowing to resolve the crisis through harsh sanctions and tough talk. Meanwhile, South Korean President Moon Jae-in, who took office this year, pledged to engage North Korea, although his pronouncement that a nuclear freeze would make possible the beginning of official talks, and that denuclearisation would be the final outcome of such talks, seems farfetched.

One of the problems in the approaches taken by South Korea and the US is that both countries want North Korea to accept their terms and conditions before they consider Pyongyang’s demands, which include a peace treaty, political normalisation, and a suspension of joint military exercises. They discount the fact that Pyongyang is pinning the survival of the regime on nuclear weapons as a deterrent against the advanced weaponry of the US and South Korea. Hence, North Korea is not likely to give up its nuclear weapons programme as long as it feels threatened and vulnerable to attack or invasion. Ironically, North Korea had agreed in the past to drop its nuclear programme but backed away after a number of events which might have forced it to reconsider, including the 1994 Agreed Framework with the US that saw Washington fail to live up to its own pledges to deliver fuel oil to North Korea, build two light water nuclear reactors in the country, and other promises. Then, there was the pronouncement by President George Bush Jr calling North Korea part of an “axis of evil,” and the failure of the Six Party Talks. North Korea has also been witness to what happened in Iraq and Libya, where regimes that were in confrontation with the US were destroyed after they gave up their nuclear weapons. With Iran, too, President Trump has pushed for new sanctions despite Tehran's adherence to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). 

Consequently, North Korea has every reason to distrust the US and hold onto technology it sees as levelling the playing field between itself and the world’s superpower. Even the former US Director of National Intelligence, James R Clapper Jr, has said that “the notion of getting the North Koreans to denuclearise is probably a lost cause.” North Korea will likely continue to develop its nuclear weapons until it gets a second strike capability, which would be a credible deterrent against attack by a more powerful opponent. Given the reckless rhetoric coming from the White House – including that the US has a military offensive for North Korea “locked and loaded” – the denuclearisation of the Korea peninsula may be an unrealistic goal for the foreseeable future. Perhaps it would be better to focus on a different goal, one of minimising the nuclear weapons North Korea is willing to possess, and sending tangible encouragement to get Pyongyang to observe a moratorium on launching more missiles in the region. Any proposals for talks that have pre-conditions of denuclearisation however, especially given the recent round of UN Security Council sanctions and the continuing joint South Korean-US military exercises, are likely to be a non-starter. 

The time has come to accept the reality on the ground – North Korea is a nuclear-armed state – and find ways to dissuade Pyongyang from further nuclear and ballistic missile tests. More rhetoric of fire, fury, and war between the US and North Korea will only further escalate tensions and reinforces Pyongyang’s belief that it is only safe if it continues to develop nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to countries within the region and eventually, the US.

60 Max Weber Post-Doctoral Fellowships for International Scholars 2018/2019 – Florence, Italy

Application Deadline: 25th October, 2017

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: All countries

To be taken at (country): Italy

Eligible Fields of Study: Economics, History, Law and Social and Political sciences. All areas and types of research within these fields are considered.

About the Award: Amongst the largest, most prestigious and successful post doctoral programs in the historical and social sciences, and located in one of the most beautiful settings, with truly outstanding research facilities, we offer from 50-60 fully funded 1 and 2 year post doctoral fellowships to applicants from anywhere in the world in the fields of economics, history, law and social and political sciences. All areas and types of research within these fields are considered. Last year 98% of Fellows found an academic position on completing the Fellowship.

Type: Research, Fellowship

Eligibility: 

• Candidates must have received their Ph.D within the past 5 years or have official approval to defend their thesis by the time of the start of the programme (1 September). Therefore, to apply for 2018-19 they should have received or submitted their Ph.D. between 1/9/2013 and 1/9/2018 and the Ph.D defence should take place no later than 31/12/2018.
• Extensions to the five-year rule are allowed for applicants whose academic career has been interrupted for maternity or paternity leave, illness or mandatory military service. Cite circumstances in the application form in the field ‘Additional Notes’. Successful candidates will be asked to provide supporting documents.
• EUI graduates can only apply for a Max Weber Fellowships after having been away from the EUI and in a full-time occupation or another fellowship for at least a year after defending their Ph.D
• Candidates of any nationality are eligible for the Max Weber Fellowships.
• The expected level of English proficiency is level C1 of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). Successful candidates will be requested to provide a certificate/supporting document on registration. This can be one of the international certificates listed below, or a supporting document showing that the candidate has written the doctorate, or published an article or a book chapter of at least 6000 words in English, or has studied and hold a qualification from a University where the language of instruction and assessment was English. Native English speakers are exempt of proof.
• The following international certificates of English proficiency are recognised by the EUI:
  • IELTS: From 7.5
  • TOEFL (IBT)
  • Cambridge Proficiency
  • Cambridge English: Advanced (CAE)

Selection Criteria:

• Academic accomplishments and potential: Academic excellence is assessed on the basis of the candidate’s contributions (publications, PhD thesis, etc. as outlined in the CV), their plans and commitment to an academic career as outlined in their ‘Research Proposal’ and ‘Academic career statement’, and other supporting evidence (i.e. two letters of reference). Preference is given to applicants in the early stages of their post-doctoral career, who can gain most from the programme.
• Research Proposal: the proposal must be clear and well structured, with well-defined and realistic goals that can be achieved within the duration of the fellowship.
• Mentorship: The capacity and availability of EUI faculty, be it in the departments or the RSCAS, to provide mentorship is taken into account; however, while having common research interests may be helpful, it is not a necessity for mentorship

Number of Awardees: 50 to 60 candidates

Value of Fellowship:

• The Fellowship provides a grant of 2000 euro per month plus – when appropriate – a family allowance.

• The Max Weber Fellows enjoy the superb research facilities of the European University Institute (including an outstanding library, a shared office space, and a personal research fund of 1000 euros).

• The MWP is unique among postdoctoral programmes in helping Fellows to become full members of a global academic community.

• Fellows are given training and support in all aspects of an academic career – from publishing and presenting, teaching, applying for research grants and jobs. A particular focus is placed on communicating effectively in English to different kinds of academic audiences.

• Its placement record is second to none: most Max Weber Fellows secure an academic position in the finest institutions around the world upon completion of the Programme.

Duration of Fellowship: 1 and 2 year post doctoral fellowships

How to Apply: The annual deadline is 25 October, but applications for self-funded fellowships will be considered until 25 March. Visit Application Webpage to apply

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Max Weber Fellowship

UN Economic Commission for Africa Internships for African Students 2017 – Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Application Deadline: 11th September 2017

Eligible Countries: African countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

About the Award: OHCHR-EARO (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights – East Africa Regional Office) is based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and was established in 2002.

The core functions of the Office are to: serve as OHCHR office in the region developing and implementing country engagement strategies requiring more focused attention in East Africa; mainstream human rights in the work of the African Union, sub-regional intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations; and, support United Nations Country Teams (UNCTs) and UN offices in the region including UNECA by providing relevant thematic expertise for capacity-building, advocacy, and other activities.

Under the general guidance of the Regional Representative and the direct supervision of staff members of the EARO, the intern will assist the team in achieving the annual work plan of the office. The intern may be assigned to different thematic and regional focal areas as needs arise and in order to best utilize and develop the intern’s skills.
The responsibilities are as follows:
•He/she assists the team in developing, planning, implementing and evaluating training and human rights promotion activities in cooperation with the concerned governments, national institutions, regional organizations (AU, ECA), NGOs, and UN agencies.
•He/she contributes to the team in developing activities aimed at promoting international and regional human rights mechanisms.
•He/she will prepare the bi-annual newsletter on the activities of the office for the corresponding period.
•He/she participates, as relevant and appropriate, in various meetings, consultations and co-ordination fora with various partners in the region.
•He/she participates in internal staff meetings and follow-up on relevant issues upon request.
•Assist in day-to-day work of the office: the intern is expected to participate and familiarize herself in administrative work of the office. This may include but is not limited to: providing support in the organization of training workshops, searching requested information, preparing reports documentation/presentations for professional staff, drafting correspondence letters, etc.
•Assist in preparing monthly reports.
•Contribute to the preparation of internal and external reports on the work of the Regional Office.

Interns work five days per week (35 hours) under the supervision of a staff member in the department or office to which they are assigned.

Type: Internship

Eligibility: To qualify for consideration for an internship by the United Nations Headquarters Internship Programme, the following conditions must be met:

• Be enrolled in a graduate school programme (second university degree or equivalent, or higher);
• Be enrolled in the final academic year of a first university degree programme (minimum Bachelor’s level or equivalent);
• Have graduated with a university degree as defined in (1) and (2) above.(4) Candidates who are selected, must commence the internship programme either prior to graduation or within one year of graduation from an academic programme as describe in (1) and (2). Applicants who are unable to commence the internship within one year of graduation shall not be accepted.

Applicants are not required to have professional work experience for participation in the programme.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The internship is UNPAID and full-time.

How to Apply: A completed online application (Cover Note and Personal History Profile) is required. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed.

The Cover Note must include:
– Title of degree you are currently pursuing;
– Graduation Date (when will you be graduating from the programme);
– List the IT skills and programmes that you are proficient in;
– List your top three areas of interest/department preferences;
– Explain why you are the best candidate for our office;
– Explain your interest in the United Nations Internship Programme.

In your Personal History Profile, be sure to include all past work experience, IT skills, and three references.

Due to a high volume of applications received, ONLY successful candidates will be contacted.

Apply Now

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: United Nations