14 Jul 2018

Education and the Mental Health Epidemic

Graham Peebles

Across the western world June is exam time in secondary schools; in Britain, written tests taken halls of silence and tension have triggered a mini-epidemic of anxiety-rooted conditions. Pupils have reported mental exhaustion, panic attacks, crying, nosebleeds, sleepless nights, hair loss and outbreaks of acne.
Over the past 25 years, depression and anxiety amongst teenagers in the UK has increased by 70%. This pattern is repeated across the developed world, and is the result of a cocktail of pressures, pressures that result in 10% of under 18-year-olds in America being dependent on mental health medication.
In parts of Asia things are just as bad or worse: the pressure to achieve high marks in exams in Hong Kong is driving some students to suicide: “71 students took their lives between 2013 and 2016,” reports The South China Morning Post. In Singapore, which produces children who excel in standardized tests, an 11-year-old jumped to his death from the 17th floor of an apartment building in 2016 because he was afraid to tell his parents his exam results. The inquest heard that the boy’s parents relentlessly pushed him to achieve at school: his mother would cane him for every mark he received under 70%. In 2015 a record 27 suicides were reported amongst children between 10 and 19, which was double the previous year’s total.
Suicide or attempted suicide is a raw scream revealing the internal agony a child is living with; pain that he/she feels suffocated by, and unable to openly acknowledge. In most cases children don’t kill themselves, they just become ill, some, chronically. The World Health Organization (WHO) relates that neuropsychiatric conditions are the primary cause of disability in under 25-year-olds worldwide and says that globally between 10% and 20% “of children and adolescents experience mental disorders,” feeding what are often long-term conditions. Research shows that 75% of all mental health issues begin before a person reaches 18, with 50% taking root before age 15.
Engines of conformity
There are various interconnected reasons for this mental health epidemic; the burden to conform and the relentless pressure to succeed are primary causes and are present throughout institutionalized education. For many young people education has become a bi-word for competition and anxiety, school or university a place where uniformity is demanded and individuality denied: a hostile place in which pressure and stress dominate.
Despite the best efforts of teachers, many of whom are doing wonderful work, the goal of academic institutions in many countries has been reduced to passing exams and achieving good-to-high grades. This is anathema to what education ought to be. At the heart of education should be the aim of creating happy, integrated human beings free from fear. This requires establishing environments that allows an individual to discover innate talents, to explore him/herself and slowly, perhaps clumsily, give expression to that; a stimulating, nurturing space where mistakes can be made, failure allowed, independent thinking fostered and responsibility for society and the natural environment engendered.
Like all aspects of contemporary life, education has been tainted by the values of a particular approach to life, a materialistic methodology that fosters negative tendencies instead of feeding the good and liberating the spirit. Competition is encouraged instead of cooperation, placing people in opposition to one another, cultivating division instead of unity. Individual success is championed at the expense of group well-being and life is reduced to a battleground ruled by desire and the pursuit of pleasure.
The focus within this paradigm of misery is on material success and the accumulation of status and things. Hedonism is sold as the source of all happiness, feeding perpetual discontent. It is an extremely narrow approach to life that denies mystery and wonder, pours cynicism on the miraculous and attempts to crush self-investigation and silence opposition.
Whilst the majority of humanity suffer and struggle to live healthy fulfilling lives within this mode of living, there are those who, economically at least, profit handsomely. As a result, and failing to recognize that they too are trapped, they do everything to maintain it; they are the wealthy and powerful, the ‘ruling elite’. Money begets power and political influence under the pervading paradigm; such influence is used to shape (and draft) government policies that strengthen systems, which maintain the existing unhealthy order.
To uphold the status quo, freedom of thought and true individuality is curtailed, social conformity insisted upon. The major tools of conditioning are the media, which is commonly owned by corporations or controlled by governments, organized religion, and education. The policies of schools and colleges are set by central government, and, consistent with the pervasive ideology politicians ensure that conformity and competition are built into the working methodology.
Students are set in competition with one another, with established standards and with themselves, and are regularly forced to sit written examinations to evaluate how much they can remember or know, about any particular subject. Taking exams dictates the passage of a child’s education and establishes the benchmark against which young people are judged, and by extension often judge themselves. Using tests as a way of assessing a persons abilities and knowledge is archaic; sitting exams exerts colossal pressure, and although some may be able to cope and ‘do well’ the majority feel suffocated.
In Britain, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) states that in 2016/17 Childline delivered “3,135 counseling sessions on exam stress – a rise of 11% over the past 2 years.” Children aged between 12 and 18 reported that exam stress was causing “depression and anxiety, panic attacks, low-self-esteem, self harming and suicidal thoughts.” This pattern is common in many developed and developing countries, where ideologically driven corporate governments obsessed with trade, continue to pursue methods, that are, by design, detrimental to the well being of children.
Instead of policies rooted in competition, cooperation and sharing need to be encouraged in all aspects of education and standardized exams consigned to the past. The educational environment needs to be one in which children are encouraged to support each other, to share their own particular gifts with the group and build a sense of social responsibility. Many teachers naturally employ such inclusive methods, but working within divisive systems, which promote individual success, conformity and competition, their efforts are often frustrated.
An Alternative way
A more enlightened approach to education is found in Finland. Here, children don’t start school until they are seven, there is no streaming or selection in schools, so children of varying abilities work side by side, no homework is set, school holidays are long and there is only one standardized test, administered in the final year of high school. The result is happier children than in countries where testing, homework, selection and competition reign supreme. Not only are children happier (according to the World Happiness Report, Finland is the happiest country in the world), they achieve higher academic marks than students in many other countries; according to The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) organized annually by the OECD, Finland ranks fourth for reading and 5th for Math in the world; 93% of students graduate from High School, compared to 78% in Canada and 75% in America.
Teachers in Finland are well qualified – all have a Master’s Degree – and are highly valued. They are not dictated to by misguided politicians who come and go, but are trusted to do their job independently, and the country has a long-term approach to education policy, which “means plans remain in place for a significant amount of time, giving them a chance to work,” says, Russell Hobby, leader of the National Association of Head Teachers.
An education system is part of a societies overall approach to living. As well as being a happy place to live and having a relaxed attitude to education, Finland has some of the lowest levels of wealth and income inequality in the world and the highest level of community trust. In contrast, Britain, USA, Singapore and Hong Kong have some of the highest levels of inequality. The Finland education system is inseparable from the culture, which it serves. Saku Tuominen, director of the HundrEd project says that Finland has “a ‘socially cohesive’, equitable and efficient society, and it gets a consistently reliable school system to match.”
Systems of education built around the ideals of the market that use competition, selection and examinations are contributing to a collective atmosphere of division, injustice and anxiety. They need to be fundamentally changed, replaced by creative environments in which children and young adults can simply be, without pressure to achieve or become anything in particular. In such an atmosphere, true intelligence, which is beyond the limitations of knowledge, can flower.

Lessons That Should Have Been Learned From NATO’s Destruction of Libya

Brian Cloughley

The summit meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the military alliance that is expanding its deployments of troops, combat and surveillance aircraft and missile ships around Russia’s borders, took place on July 11-12 and was a farce, with Trump behaving in his usual way, insulting individuals and nations with characteristic vulgarity.
Before the jamboree, NATO’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg (one of those selected for a Trumpian harangue), recounted in a speech on 21 June that “NATO has totally transformed our presence in Afghanistan from a big combat operation with more than 100,000 to now 16,000 troops conducting training, assisting and advising.”  But then he had a bit of a rethink when he was asked a question about whether NATO had learnt any lessons that might make it think about “intervening in the future.” To give him his due, Stoltenberg replied that he thought “one of the lessons we have learned from Iraq, from Afghanistan, from Libya, is that military intervention is not always solving all problems.”
He is absolutely right about that, because the US-NATO military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have been catastrophic.
It is intriguing that NATO’s secretary general can at last admit that military muscle doesn’t solve every problem, but he did not expand on the subject of Libya, which unhappy country was destroyed by US-NATO military intervention in 2011, and it is interesting to reflect on that particular NATO debacle, because it led directly to expansion of the Islamic State terrorist group, a prolonged civil war, a vast number of deaths, and hideous suffering by desperate refugees trying to flee from Libya across the Mediterranean.
Towards the end of the West’s seven-month blitz on Libya its leader, Muammar Gaddafi, was murdered by gangs supported by US-NATO, which caused the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, to giggle “We came; we saw; he died” in an interview on CBS, which was a good indicator of how the peace-loving West approached its devastation of a country whose president had plenty of flaws but whose main mistake was to threaten to nationalize his country’s oil resources, which were in the hands of US and European oligarchs.
Gaddafi was a despot who persecuted his enemies quite as savagely as the Western-supported dictator Hosni Mubarak in neighboring Egypt, but life for most Libyans was comfortable, and the BBC had to admit that Gaddafi’s “particular form of socialism does provide free education, healthcare and subsidized housing and transport,” although “wages are extremely low and the wealth of the state and profits from foreign investments have only benefited a narrow elite” (which doesn’t happen anywhere else, of course).  The CIA World Factbook noted that in 2010 Gaddafi’s Libya had a literacy rate of 82.6% (far better than Egypt, India and Saudi Arabia), and a life expectancy of 77.47 years, higher than 160 of the 215 countries assessed. But the West was intent on getting rid of Gaddafi, and managed to fudge a UN Resolution to begin the war. (Germany, under the wise leadership of Angela Merkel, refused to have anything to do with the long-planned carnival of rocketing and bombing.)
Gaddafi was murdered on October 20, 2011, in particularly disgusting circumstances, and ten days later the US-NATO alliance ended its blitzkrieg. The normally sane Guardian newspaper of the UK reported that the operation had demonstrated “a unique combination of military power that could set a model for future warfare” while the secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, proclaimed the end of “a successful chapter in Nato’s history.”
The “successful chapter” involved 9,600 airstrikes that amongst other destruction “debilitated Libya’s water supply by targeting critical state-owned water installations, including a water-pipe factory . . that manufactured pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipes for the Great Manmade River project, an ingenious irrigation system transporting water from aquifers beneath Libya’s southern desert to about 70% of the population.” As the Christian Science Monitor reported in 2010, “the Great Man-Made River, which is leader Muammar Qaddafi’s ambitious answer to the country’s water problems, irrigates Libya’s large desert farms. The 2,333-mile network of pipes ferry water from four major underground aquifers in southern Libya to the northern population centers. Wells punctuate the water’s path, allowing farmers to utilize the water network in their fields.”   Not any more, they don’t, and there is now a critical water shortage
One recent observation was that “The water crisis is a powerful symbol of state failure in a country that was once one of the wealthiest in the Middle East but has been gripped by turmoil since a 2011 uprising unseated [sic] Muammar Gaddafi. For Libyans the chaos has meant power cuts and crippling cash shortages. These are often made worse by battles between armed groups vying for control of the fractured oil-rich state and its poorly-maintained infrastructure.”  Thank you, US-NATO, for liberating Libya.
Two prominent figures involved in the US-NATO war on Libya were Ivo Daalder, the US Representative on the NATO Council from 2009 to 2013,  and Admiral James G (‘Zorba’) Stavridis, the US Supreme Allied Commander Europe (the military commander of NATO) in the same period.  As they ended their war, on  October 31, 2011, these two ninnies had a piece published in the New York Times in which they made the absurd claim that “As Operation Unified Protector comes to a close, the alliance and its partners can look back at an extraordinary job, well done. Most of all, they can see in the gratitude of the Libyan people that the use of limited force — precisely applied — can affect real, positive political change.”
Well, there’s no doubt that “limited force” — if you call 9,600 airstrikes “limited” — can produce political change, but it is difficult to see how even these two twits could think for an instant that it would be “positive.”  Then Rasmussen lobbed in to Tripoli on 31 October and announced that “It’s great to be in Libya, free Libya. We acted to protect you. Together we succeeded. Libya is finally free.”
The Western mainstream media, which was so supportive of the war, has not asked the team of Rasmussen, Stavridis and Daalder how they feel about the current catastrophe in Libya that they did so much to accomplish.  There are few reports in western newspapers or TV outlets about the gravity of the shambles (search, for example, the New York Times and the Washington Post), but such organizations as Human Rights Watch keep the world informed about what is going on. Its 2018 World Report records that “Political divisions and armed strife continued to plague Libya as two governments vied for legitimacy and control of the country, and United Nations’ efforts to unify the feuding parties flagged . . . Armed groups throughout the country, some of them affiliated with one or the other of the competing governments, executed persons extra-judicially, attacked civilians and civilian properties, abducted and disappeared people, and imposed sieges on civilians in the eastern cities of Derna and Benghazi.”
Thank you US-NATO, and especially thank you, President Obama and Messrs. Rasmussen, Stavridis and Daalder, and all the brave pilots who had a wonderful blitzing shindig, and all the brave button-pressers on US and UK Navy ships whose Tomahawk missiles blasted the cities.  The country you wrecked will take decades to recover from your use of what you called “limited force,” and the amount of human suffering you caused is incalculable.
NATO’S Jens Stoltenberg seems to have learned the lesson, albeit belatedly, that military force does not solve what NATO regards as problems.  That’s to be welcomed, and what would be even more welcome would be realization that provocation and the threat of force don’t work, either, and therefore that it would be wise to stay out of wars and to draw-down the confrontational US-NATO deployments along Russia’s borders.

India: Entrepreneurship and job growth

Praloy Majumder & Ashish Kumar Singh

Around 12 million Indians joining the labour force every year. With millions of young people joining the labour market every month, the question everyone has is if there will be enough jobs for them. Few are asking who creates jobs. Entrepreneurship and job creation is directly proportional one does not need to worry about it. The question, however, is if India (and other Asian countries) are ready to change their way of seeing things
The next round of growth story would be coming from the Asian countries. This phase of economic growth can be termed as the fourth stage of economic growth of the world. The first stage of economic growth was driven by the discovery of steam engine followed by a second round of economic growth was driven by the USA. The third round of economic growth was driven by market economy post world war II. All the previous three phases of economic growth was driven by the developed nations. However, this fourth round of economic growth would be driven by Asian countries. This round of economic growth would be fundamentally different from previous rounds of economic growth.
During previous rounds of economic growth, population and natural resources were not constrains. Besides the capital formation of first round and second round of economic growth has put the developed nations at an advantageous position. Social security was not a problem as the population was not large. However, the situation has changed. Due to the presence of social security network in the form of unemployment allowances etc, the income disparity was not a severe problem. However, with an increasing amount of unemployment, the income disparity is becoming a problem even in the developed country.
However in the fourth round of economic growth income inequality would be a major problem due to the absence of a proper social network as well as a strong judicial system. Crony capitalism which is associated with developing economy has increased the economic disparity too great extent and this can lead to disruption of the social fabric of the countries which would drive the global growth. So it is imperative that this problem of economic disparity is addressed at the beginning well before it turns into a monster.
The fundamental ways to reduce the income inequality is to increase the income for a large number of people. This would be possible by creating a system where more and more number of people would get a meaningful job. This is particularly true for cases where a large number of population is entering in the job market. For e.g. in India, every month about a million people are entering in the job market for the last two years and this would continue for the next ten years. In this backdrop, the availability of job is crucial to reduce the income equality.
At the same time, the world has moved towards embracing automation in a big way. The advent of Artificial Intelligence ( AI), Robotics are threatening the creation of lower-level jobs. These lower level of jobs are crucial to generate sufficient employment for a large number of workforces who do not have specialized skillsets to capture the benefits of the advancement of AI and Robotics.
Creation of entrepreneurship is one of the possible solutions to this problems. If more and more entrepreneurs are created, then more and more job would be created. However, entrepreneurship creation is a serious business even on a smaller scale. However today the requirement is the creation of entrepreneurship in a massive scale.
To achieve this objective a methodical approach is required. This is not just a question of providing a wage employment, but about creating an entrepreneurial society and how such society would work towards the solution of employment-related problems. Several factors play important roles in developing entrepreneurship in a country. Identification of these factors is of crucial importance. Besides the relative degree of importance of specific factors would vary from country to country. In India, for example, caste-class-religion may or may not a crucial role, gender also an important factor in Indian as well as in other Asian societies. Government rules-regulations, availability of funds, training, nurturing/incubation etc are also some such factors.
The report titled “National Knowledge Commission Report to the Nation 2006-09” has two chapters worth mentioning related to our inquiry. Emphasizing the importance of Vocational Education and Training (VET), the National Knowledge Commission (NKC) consulted with different stakeholders and provided some short and long-term strategies as follows. The report suggesting the formation of National Institute for Vocational Education Planning and Development under MHRD to continue working on the theme of Vocational Education and Training.
The report also suggested finding linkages between mainstream education and VET- that to some extent seems to be fulfilled by National Skill Development scheme. The demand for both skilled and unskilled labour has increased in recent years, the report says that in order to have sufficient supply of labour the government should take innovative steps such as distance training, decentralized delivery, public-private partnership etc. A focused approach is required to enhance the training options for the unorganized and informal sector. The report provides various recommendations for strengthening the existing institutional infrastructure of Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) and Industrial Training Centres (ITCs). The report recommends the formation of an independent regulatory agency should be established. It would provide a license to the accreditation agencies and prescribe standards for certification. While talking about the current certification system the report asks for proper certification, probably electronic identification as well.
The NKC report in its chapter on Entrepreneurship states that it is important to recognize the importance and significance of entrepreneurship in wealth creation and employment generation in India.  To accelerate the growth of Entrepreneurship in India, the report recommends creating a supportive business environment by simplifying processes, curbing corruption and improving delivery time. Establishing newer institutional mechanisms to rebuild the structure and ambiance required for the growth of entrepreneurship in India. Facilitating information flow is also considered an important part of this process. An increased awareness and emphasis should be given to providing early stage finance. For entrepreneurship seed capital plays a key role, the report recommends some solutions to it such as developing new institutions and instruments for start-up funding. The role of business incubation before market entry is considered a primary factor, which also affects the success and viability of an enterprise. The last but not the least recommendation suggests to recognize and reward successful entrepreneurs in India.
While at the societal level majority of India faces challenges on the everyday basis, one cannot deny that having a possibility of income generation (/or regular income) may not solve all the problems but can certainly reduce the pressure. Entrepreneurship today is neither limited to being a characteristic of a certain class or merely a buzzword in roundtables. There is much to do in this direction and there will not be homogenous growth as Ejaz Ghani puts it, “The two most consistent policy factors that predict overall entrepreneurship in a district are its local education levels and the quality of local physical infrastructure.
… The future of jobs remains positive, given that India is starting from a low base in entrepreneurship. India’s strength in entrepreneurship lies in its small enterprises. They are now well integrated with global supply chains. Last but not least, women-headed entrepreneurship will become the new driver of job growth in the future.
The policy message on entrepreneurship and job growth is simple. Local governments wanting to promote pro-entrepreneurial growth should focus less on firm-casing —attracting large mature firms from somewhere else—and focus more on encouraging entrepreneurship in their community. This link between entrepreneurship and job growth is not automatic. Places with a higher level of local education and better quality of local infrastructure will attract many more entrepreneurs and create many more jobs.”
It needs a meticulous approach with proper checks and balances in place.

Australia’s new secrecy laws block exposure of government crimes

Mike Head

Under the cover of outlawing so-called improper foreign influence in Australia, the Espionage and Foreign Interference (EFI) Act pushed through parliament last month contains 12 new or expanded secrecy offences.
These are specifically designed to criminalise the exposure of abuses—especially war crimes and human rights violations—committed by Australian governments and their US partners.
The laws can outlaw reporting on everything from the SAS killings of civilians in Afghanistan to the torture-like treatment of refugees in Australia’s Pacific island detention camps.
Terrified of growing unrest, hostility toward capitalism and opposition to war, the Australian government is seeking to block access, especially via the Internet, to critical information that the public has the right to know.
Above all, the targets are whistleblowers and journalists such as WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange and former US National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden. They helped alert the world’s people to the atrocities, regime-change operations and mass surveillance of Washington and its military-intelligence allies.
Anyone who assists individuals to reveal such crimes, or reports their exposures, including writers and publishers on progressive, left-wing or anti-capitalist media outlets, can now face lengthy imprisonment.
This is on top of a raft of secrecy laws imposed over the past decade to outlaw reportage of secretive operations by the spy services, identification of undercover intelligence agents and disclosures about the treatment of refugees by the militarised Australian Border Force.
The latest secrecy laws are a crucial element in the anti-foreign influence laws being imposed by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s government, with the opposition Labor Party’s bipartisan backing, to suppress dissent amid intensifying US-led preparations for war against China.
In an extraordinary June 8 radio interview, Andrew Hastie, who chairs the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, pointed to the real thrust of the measures.
Hastie, a member of the Liberal-National Coalition government and former SAS officer, said Australia’s role in the US-led Five Eyes intelligence alliance made the country a “soft underbelly” for authoritarian regimes “seeking to get secrets from the United States.”
Australia’s spy and electronic surveillance agencies, which monitor the highly strategic Indo-Pacific region, are a key link in Five Eyes network with the NSA and its counterparts in Britain, Canada and New Zealand.
Hastie told Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio: “What we can’t have is radical transparency.” Questioned on what he meant by that, he said: “Radical transparency is Julian Assange dropping a whole bunch of Commonwealth secrets out for public consumption.”
Hastie, having received closed-door intelligence “briefings” in Washington, along with other members of his committee, was drumming up the agitation by the government and the intelligence agencies for the rapid passage of the legislation.
His remarks underscored the intense pressure being applied to the Turnbull government by the US military-intelligence establishment to pass the legislation and step up its commitment to the US military confrontation with China, Australian capitalism’s largest export market.
Hastie’s comments also highlighted the fact that the laws target any independent investigatory journalism that endangers ruling class interests, especially by laying bare government war plans, lies and propaganda.
The new secrecy offences go significantly beyond the old Crimes Act official secrets laws, which they replace.
First, they have a wider scope. Instead of banning the disclosure of secret documents—either classified, “prescribed” or relating to “prohibited places”—they outlaw divulging “inherently harmful information” or material that “is likely to cause harm to Australia’s interests.”
“Inherently harmful information” covers classified material, information obtained by the Australian and allied intelligence agencies, and information relating to the operations of the Australian or foreign law enforcement agencies. Thus, for example, WikiLeaks’ publication of files exposing the CIA’s computer hacking activities is now a serious crime in Australia.
“Cause harm to Australia’s interests” is even more sweeping. It includes to “harm or prejudice the health or safety of the Australian public or a section of the Australian public” or “harm or prejudice the security or defence of Australia.” This extends to information that supposedly endangers any Australian person or threatens the country’s anti-refugee operations or the profit interests of Australian companies.
The EFI Act defines “national security” to include “protection of the integrity of the country’s territory and borders from serious threats” and “the country’s political, military or economic relations with another country or other countries.”
Second, the new laws apply to everyone, not just internal whistleblowers, as the Crimes Act offences did. The EFI Act outlaws not just leaking, but “dealing with” information. “Deal with” is defined to cover a long list of activities: “collect,” “possess,” “make a record of,” “copy,” “alter,” “conceal,” “communicate,” “publish” and “make available.”
“Make available information” includes “place it somewhere it can be accessed by another person,” “give it to an intermediary” and “describe how to obtain access to it, or describe methods that are likely to facilitate access to it (for example, set out the name of a website, an IP address, a URL, a password, or the name of a newsgroup).”
In other words, whoever is sent information, and therefore automatically possesses it, can be convicted, as can individuals associated with WikiLeaks or any other platform that is set up to anonymously receive material from whistleblowers.
Third, the new laws particularly target non-corporate media websites by providing a limited defence for people “engaged in the business of reporting news, presenting current affairs or expressing editorial or other content in news media.” According to the explanatory memorandum attached to the act, this defence is confined to the staff of “media organisations.”
The defence is highly conditional. It only applies if the individual “reasonably believed” that dealing with the material was “in the public interest.” These terms are not defined, leaving the way open for politically selective prosecutions. Who decides what is “reasonable” and what the “public interest” is?
Anyone claiming the defence also bears an “evidentiary burden” of proving it, undercutting the centuries-old requirement for the prosecution to prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
In addition, the “reasonable belief” defence does not apply to material that identifies an intelligence agent or a person in witness protection program, or that “directly or indirectly” assists a foreign intelligence agency or military organisation.
However, media companies that cooperate with the intelligence apparatus in censoring sensitive material to remove any damning information are likely to be protected as acting “reasonably” in the “public interest.”
The Crimes Act penalties have been substantially increased, up to 10 years for an “aggravated” offence from seven years’ imprisonment for leaking official secrets that allegedly prejudice Australia’s military defence or security. There is a roughly proportional increase in the jail terms for lesser offences.
People can be convicted even if they did not intend to “deal with” information that was “harmful” but were merely “reckless” as to that possibility. That is, they were aware of a “substantial” and “unjustifiable” risk of such an outcome. And “strict liability” applies to some offences. For example, an “aggravated offence” can be committed even if the person is not aware that the document had a security classification.
As with some other parts of the EFI Act, the attorney-general must consent to prosecutions, but that only magnifies the danger of political victimisation.
The secrecy laws, like the “foreign interference” legislation as a whole, are designed to give governments and the intelligence-police apparatus a broad array of powers to try to silence dissent and jail those who reveal the truth about the drive to war and austerity.

Human right groups reveal French complicity in torture in Egypt

Francis Dubois

Several major corporations and successive governments in France were and are actively participating in the repression of the Egyptian people by the current military dictatorship. They are active accomplices in mass surveillance of the population aiming to identify political opponents to be tortured and disappeared, and in arming the military junta of General Abdel Fatah al-Sisi.
This is the conclusion of a 64-page report titled “Egypt: repression made in France,” published on July 2 by a group of human rights organizations including the Human Rights League (LDH). It documents the explosive growth since Sisi’s coup in 2013 of the French sales of weapons and mass surveillance material to Egypt, as well as the support of presidents François Hollande and Emmanuel Macron for Sisi.
At the “heart of the repressive machinery” supported by France in Egypt, the report states, is the “omnipresent surveillance of the population.” The report points to Egyptian domestic intelligence’s systematic acquisition of mass spying equipment and wholesale interception of communications. The regime carries out “massive and constant surveillance of digital activism” and aims to turn “social media into an intelligence asset for the authorities.”
This surveillance, made possible by France, produces “systematic and grave violations” of human rights, the report continues: “Human rights violations due to surveillance by Egyptian intelligence of communications and digital activity go from simple arrests to heavy prison terms and include arbitrary detention, forced disappearance, extrajudicial executions, torture leading to death, rape, and the public broadcasting of private conversations.”
The report adds that it makes possible “the fabrication of evidence” against people suspected of political dissidence.
The report cites sales by Renault of armored vehicles, by Manurhin of machine tools used in the production of bullets, and by Nexa Technologies of the highly intrusive Cerebro surveillance system, the Cortex database system, and the Morpho/Idemia database that allows for mass collection of individual data.
According to the report, these programs are used to identify any potential opponent or undesirable person and target them for detention, torture or execution. Other material sold includes “crowd control technology,” light armored vehicles, Airbus-Thales military satellites and Safran patrol drones.
By furnishing this material, the French state and business community are considerably increasing the Egyptian military junta’s repressive capacity and making themselves complicit in its crimes. The exported surveillance material, according to the report, “gives the [security] services greater and more intrusive surveillance and identification capacities than that of the material they previously had, and in particular reinforces their capacity to spy on the population, laying out the structure of a true architecture of state control.”
Sisi took power in July 2013 after a bloody military coup that toppled the Islamist government of Mohamed Mursi, but was above all aimed at the working class, which in 2011 had mobilized in a revolutionary struggle that overthrew the hated dictator Hosni Mubarak. Sisi’s counterrevolutionary operation was backed by the pseudo-left Revolutionary Socialists group and its international affiliates, like the International Socialist Organization in the United States.
The report accuses the French state and the Hollande and Macron administrations of having made a “political choice” to sell Sisi equipment specifically designed to repress social movements.
It describes a regime of state terror imposed on Egyptians by laws banning all opposition to the regime, forced disappearances, arrests, mass arbitrary incarceration, “torture … and other harmful treatment inflicted by security forces” and police in “police stations and detention centers.”
“The use of lethal weapons and assault weapons to disperse protests has significantly increased,” the report adds.
Extrajudicial executions have increased the toll from the already massive resort to the death penalty. The report estimates at 60,000 the number of political prisoners and mentions “2,811 cases of forced disappearances by the security services” between July 2013 and June 2016. It says this practice has “become a modus operandi of the Egyptian security forces.”
The report stresses the criminal character of French supplies to the Sisi regime and the systematic violation of French and European law that is involved. The French authorities, it states, have “chosen not to respect European Union decisions on weapons exports to Egypt, including by overstepping the European Union’s decision … on 21 August 2013 to ‘suspend all export licenses towards Egypt of equipment that could be used for internal repression.’”
In December 2017, the crimes against humanity section of the Paris prosecutor’s office opened an investigation into Nexa Technologies for “complicity in torture and forced disappearances in Egypt.”
The report partially illuminates the links between the Macron government and the Sisi regime. It identifies former Hollande defense minister, and Macron foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian as the main conduit for collaboration with Sisi. It reports that it is under his influence that military supplies and contracts with Egypt “exploded” starting in 2013. These contracts “mark the beginning of uninterrupted political support of the French government to the new Egyptian military regime,” the report notes.
Sisi officially decorated Jean-Yves Le Drian in February 2017.
Macron received Sisi for a lavish visit in October 2017. He refused to publicly mention the crimes of the Egyptian regime, insisting that he “had no lessons to give” to Sisi.
The activities of the Macron government exposed by this report constitute a warning to workers across Europe. The French state and business community, under the political oversight of the social democrats, Macron and their allies, are descending into the worst political criminality.
France is testing in Egypt a technical apparatus for surveillance and repression that the Nazi Gestapo would have envied.
The EU, with Germany and France in the lead, is planning the systematic construction of detention camps on European soil, supposedly destined for refugees, but ready to be employed against the massive opposition to austerity and militarism that is growing among European workers and youth.
These developments call for stepped-up opposition to police state measures by workers in France, Egypt and internationally.

Mexican president-elect assembles right-wing cabinet

Alex González

After a sweeping victory in the Mexican presidential elections, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), the leader of the Movement for National Regeneration (Morena), has proposed a cabinet for his upcoming six-year administration that is dominated by leading figures of previous reactionary Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and Party for National Action (PAN) administrations.
AMLO, whose coalition included Morena, the Evangelical Christian right-wing Social Encounter Party (PES) and the Workers Party (PT), won more votes than any other Mexican presidential candidate in history and more than twice the number of votes as the runner up, Ricardo Anaya of a coalition including the right-wing National Action Party (PAN) and center-left Party for Democratic Revolution (PRD).
The Morena-led coalition will have a super majority in both houses of congress and the mayorship of Mexico City, the second largest city in Latin America. Morena also won governor races in five out of the nine states that held elections. The new federal and state governments will take office on December 1.
The election results are another indication of a leftward shift in the population. Over 30 million people voted for AMLO and Morena, many of them based on the illusion that the new administration would implement measures to address rampant inequality, the country’s advanced state of militarization, and the plight of immigrants on both sides of the border.
Studies have shown that the purchasing power of the population has declined by as much as 80 percent in the past three decades, while the homicide rate is equivalent to, if not worse than, war-torn countries. Highlighting the collaboration of the Mexican government with the US deportation apparatus, a recent report by the BBC revealed that the Mexican government detained—often under deplorable conditions—and deported over 138,000 Central American children under the outgoing Peña Nieto administration.
AMLO’s cabinet is very close to the one he proposed last December. While the media and pseudo-left have hailed the “progressive” gender composition of his cabinet (eight men and eight women), the appointment of well-known figures from former administrations is yet another reassurance to the powers-that-be that he is a “responsible” bourgeois politician who can be trusted to safeguard their interests.
Esteban Moctezuma, the proposed secretary of education, was an interior and social development minister under former PRI president Ernesto Zedillo (1994-2000). On Wednesday, Moctezuma stated that the national teacher evaluations would stay in place, albeit with removed provisions that tie scores to hiring and pay. He also stated that teachers who missed working days while on strike should be subject to punishment by the school administrations and the unions. In June, a strike by more than 80,000 teachers was betrayed by the teachers’ unions, which urged them to vote for AMLO as a supposed solution to their demands. This has been exposed as a reactionary fraud.
For the position of secretary of the interior, AMLO has tapped Olga Sánchez Cordero Dávila, a former member of the Mexican supreme court and a Zedillo appointee. Sánchez Cordero has already backpedaled on AMLO’s campaign promise to dismantle the Mexican intelligence agency Cisen. The agency came under fire last year after an investigation by the New York Timesrevealed that the Mexican government had purchased software to hack into the phones of journalists and political opponents.
As overseer of the Cisen, Sánchez Cordero has expressed her enthusiastic support for the repression of social struggles. “It is imperative that we rule using intelligence. ... Imagine that there is a social movement in Guerrero or Oaxaca and that we do not have knowledge of these social movements, that we do not have knowledge of what is happening in Mexican society,” said Sánchez Cordero. “That would be very serious.”
The proposed secretary of finance, Carlos Urzúa, is an economist and World Bank consultant. He has reiterated promises to maintain “fiscal balance,” i.e., to not raise taxes on the rich or undertake significant spending on social programs. Instead, the AMLO administration has proposed “consolidating social welfare programs” and “centralizing government purchases” to finance his minuscule new programs. In other words, even with control of the legislature and the presidency, the new government will not carry out any significant measures to address the country’s social crisis.
Urzúa has elaborated on AMLO’s campaign promise to improve “competitiveness” along the US-Mexico border by slashing the value added tax (VAT) in half. Last week, Urzúa detailed that the “free zone” would extend around 30 kilometers south of the border, encompassing the cities of Tijuana, Mexicali, Ciudad Juárez and Reynosa.
Recent studies have estimated that such a policy would create a budget shortfall of 30.3 billion pesos per year (about US$1.6 billion). Given that AMLO has promised an “austerity budget,” lowering taxes will be paid for by attacks on social programs and the creation of a super-exploited labor force for transnational corporations.
Alfonzo Durazo, AMLO’s new chief of public security, was a former member of the PRI before being appointed as private secretary of former PAN president Vicente Fox (2000-2006). Durazo has vowed to create a new border police force to round up and deport immigrants. “We need to create a border police force that will be highly specialized. ... They need to apply the law,” stated Durazo in a recent interview.
As for AMLO’s nebulous campaign promise to “fight corruption,” Durazo disclosed that this meant increasing the salaries of law enforcement officials and creating more police academies to double the number of security personnel that could receive training each year. AMLO has previously backed centralizing the country’s police forces and holding daily briefings with military brass.
The repressive measures that organically flow from AMLO’s right-wing policies are spelled out by the inclusion of Manuel Mondragón, who is infamous for coordinating the assault on demonstrators during the inauguration of Peña Nieto in 2012. The assault on the peaceful protesters led to one death and the injuries of dozens of students. After AMLO confirmed that Mondragón would join his security team, the hashtag #MondragónNoEsCambio (#MondragónIsNotChange) became a trending topic on social media.
As objective conditions draw the masses into struggle, illusions that AMLO or Morena will address the intolerable social and economic conditions confronting millions of Mexicans may dissipate sooner rather than later. AMLO is not rejecting the “mafia in power,” which he has blamed for the country’s social ills, but rather incorporating them into the highest levels of his government.
The task of socialists is not to lend “critical support” to AMLO, but to politically educate and prepare the working class for a revolutionary struggle to put an end to the capitalist system. This requires the unification of the Mexican working class with workers in the United States and across the Americas, who are also being driven into struggle.

Inflation cutting real wages of US workers

Barry Grey

The US Labor Department released its consumer price index (CPI) report for June on Thursday, showing that accelerated inflation has cut the real wages of most American workers over the past year.
This is despite a significant increase in strike activity in the US—and internationally—since the beginning of 2018, including the state-wide teachers’ strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma and Arizona, and growing signs that workers are eager to carry out a militant struggle to recoup wages and benefits lost through union-imposed contract concessions over the past 40 years.
The inflation report revealed that consumer prices were 2.9 percent higher than in June of 2017, wiping out the tepid 2.9 percent average increase in workers’ wages over that period. The large majority of workers who fall into the category of production and non-supervisory employees suffered an actual cut in real wages. They lost 0.2 percent in June, following a similar decline in May.
The year-over year 2.9 percent rise in the CPI in June was the fastest pace in more than six years. The price surge was led by energy commodities. Gasoline prices rose a seasonally adjusted 0.5 percent in June from the previous month, bringing the 12-month rise to 24 percent. The average price for a gallon of gasoline rose to $2.89 last month, the highest price since June of 2014.
Shelter and rent costs were 3.4 percent higher than a year earlier, and medical services were up 2.5 percent. Food prices rose 1.4 percent. Meals at restaurants and cafeterias rose 2.8 percent over the past year.
There is little or no precedent for workers’ wages stagnating or declining under conditions of low official unemployment and an acceleration of economic growth. Unemployment, now officially at 4 percent and expected to drop further in the coming months, is at its lowest levels since the 1960s.
Corporate profits are setting new records. JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup both reported record quarterly profits on Tuesday. JPMorgan, the biggest Wall Street bank, posted a second quarter profit of $8.32 billion, an increase of 18 percent over the same period last year. Citigroup, the fourth largest US bank by assets, reported a second quarter net income increase of 16 percent, to $4.49 billion.
Both banks profited massively from the Trump tax cut for corporations and the rich enacted in December, as have corporations more generally. Citigroup said its effective tax rate in the second quarter was 24 percent, down from 32 percent a year ago. The Treasury Department reported Thursday that government tax receipts fell 7 percent in June, mainly due to a 33 percent drop in gross corporate taxes.
The tax cut is fueling a rapid growth of the federal budget deficit, which will be used to justify an intensified assault on what remains of social programs, including basic entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.
The decades-long suppression of wages, which accelerated after the 2008 financial crash and continues today, has provided the economic basis for the historic rise in corporate profits and stock prices, and the accompanying record growth of social inequality.
The Wall Street Journal on Friday quoted David Kelly, chief global strategist at JP Morgan Asset Management, who wrote in a note to clients this week: “Wage growth remains surprisingly weak. The remarkable ability of firms to lure more workers back into the labor force and get stronger productivity gains from them without raising wages is a clear positive for profits.”
The attack on workers’ real wages via inflation will only accelerate under the impact of Trump’s trade war tariffs. Trump’s first tariff this year targeted imported washing machines, and the CPI report revealed that the cost of laundry equipment has jumped 13 percent over last year.
The Journal cited Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, as noting that Chinese products subject to the $200 billion in newly proposed tariffs account for almost 6 percent of the core CPI, meaning the proposed 10 percent levy will lift the index by up to 0.6 percentage points.
Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve is citing the low official jobless rate and the rise in inflation to justify a more rapid increase in interest rates, in the name of preventing the economy from “overheating.” This is above all aimed at preventing the development of a wages movement of the working class by slowing economic growth and hiring.
How is the anomaly of wage stagnation amidst relatively low unemployment and accelerating economic growth to be explained? It is the outcome of a decades-long social counterrevolution, carried out by both parties of American big business. This ruling class war on workers entered a new stage following the financial crash of 2008. That breakdown of world capitalism, centered in the United States, was used by the ruling elite to carry out a radical restructuring of social and economic relations, to the detriment of the working class.
The Obama administration oversaw an expansion of the bank bailout and the pumping of trillions of dollars into the financial markets to enable the financial oligarchy to recoup its losses and increase its plundering of the social wealth. This included the slashing of wages, beginning with the across-the-board 50 percent wage cut for new-hires in Obama’s auto bailout of 2009, along with massive cuts in health care, education and pensions. Virtually all of the decent-paying jobs that were destroyed in the Great Recession were replaced by part-time, temporary and low-paying jobs.
The key factor in this process has been the suppression of the class struggle, and the chief instruments for strangling the resistance of workers are the trade unions. They have held strike activity over the past decade to the lowest level since the government began compiling statistics in 1947.
But there are increasing signs that the working class is seeking to break the grip of these corporatist syndicates in order to wage a serious struggle to recoup its losses. All of this year’s statewide teachers’ strikes were organized by rank-and-file educators who used social media to overcome the opposition of the teachers’ unions. However, the unions were able to gain control of the struggles in order to isolate them and shut them down without meeting any of the teachers’ demands.
The hostility of the unions to a struggle for wages, benefits and decent working conditions has been demonstrated once again with the announcement Tuesday by the Teamsters union that it has agreed to indefinitely extend the July 31 strike deadline at United Parcel Service. Last month, more than 93 percent of the 230,000 UPS workers voted to authorize a strike at the end of this month.
The best efforts of the unions and their allies in the Democratic Party will not in the end succeed in blocking the emergence of mass working class struggles. Workers are being radicalized and impelled into struggle not only by the attacks on their living standards, but also by the naked criminality of the Trump administration, its assault on immigrants and democratic rights, and the war-mongering of both Trump and his Democratic Party rivals.
The militant mood is indicated by the fact that workers are increasingly unwilling to settle for token sops and are instead calling for substantial wage increases. The Arizona teachers included in their strike demands a $20,000 wage increase.
Both past and current experience has demonstrated that workers cannot recoup their losses, let alone make new gains, without rebelling against the trade union apparatuses. They need to establish their own, independent and democratic organizations of struggle. The Socialist Equality Party urges workers across the economy to form rank-and-file committees independent of the trade unions and the big business parties to coordinate and link struggles over wages, social services and democratic rights both nationally and internationally.
At the same time, the working class requires a new political strategy to prevent any gains in wages and benefits given by the corporations and the government with one hand, under mass pressure from below, from being taken back with the other in the form of inflation and cuts in social programs. The struggle against social inequality, poverty, authoritarianism and war requires the fight for a workers’ government to expropriate the corporate-financial oligarchy and replace the capitalist profit system with socialism.

13 Jul 2018

OWSD Elsevier Foundation Awards for Early-Career Women Scientists in Developing Countries 2019

Application Deadline: 23rd September 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible African Countries: Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo Dem. Rep., Congo Rep., Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, São Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

To be taken at (country): USA

About the Award: Launched by The Elsevier Foundation, TWAS and OWSD, the Awards reward and encourage women working and living in developing countries in the early stages of their scientific careers. Awardees must have made a demonstrable impact on the research environment both at a regional and international level and have often overcome great challenges to achieve research excellence.
The award has an important impact on local research cultures. Previous winners say the awards have had a powerful effect, enhancing the visibility of their past work and creating new opportunities for the future. The awardees are powerful role models for young women who are contemplating whether to remain in an environment that is often hostile to their needs and experience.
Nominations are invited from senior academics, including OWSD members, TWAS Fellows, ICTP visiting scientists and staff, national science academies, national research councils and heads of departments/universities both in developing and developed countries.

Offered Since: 2012

Type: Award,Research

Eligibility: The nominee must be a female scientist; have received her PhD within the previous 10 years; and have lived and worked in one of the following developing countries during the three years immediately prior to the nomination.

Selection Criteria: The competition will be judged by a distinguished panel of international scientists, including members of TWAS, OWSD and ICTP, and chaired by OWSD. The assessment will be based on achievements in the field, with particular attention paid both to the nominees’ contribution to capacity-building in their region, as well as international impact.

Number of Awardees: 5 Awards. One woman is awarded for each of five regions in the developing world: Latin America and the Caribbean; East and South-East Asia and the Pacific; the Arab region; Central and South Asia; and Sub-Saharan Africa (see the list of countries in Africa above)

Value of Award: Each winner receives a cash prize of USD 5,000 and an all-expenses-paid trip to attend the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting (14-18 February 2019 in Washington, 13-17 February 2020 in Seattle, 11-14 February 2021 in Phoenix). Lasting 5 days, the event is packed with networking opportunities. The winners receive their award at a special networking ceremony, as well as opportunities to attend workshops and sessions at the AAAS meeting, visits to local laboratories or institutions, and a celebratory dinner organised by the Elsevier Foundation.

Duration of Award: Not stated

How to Apply: Nominations are invited from senior academics, including OWSD members, TWAS Fellows, ICTP visiting scientists and staff, national science academies, national research councils and heads of departments/universities both in developing and developed countries. Please note that self-nominations are not accepted. Nominations must be made online; they must include the candidate’s curriculum vitae and full list of publications and be accompanied by two reference letters plus an additional supporting statement by the nominator (who cannot be one of the referees).
Visit Awards Webpage for details

Award Provider: The Elsevier Foundation

Digital Earth Fellowship for Artists and Designers in Africa or Asia 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 25th July 2018

Eligible Countries: African and Asian countries (see list below)

About the Award: Digital Earth is a six-month fellowship for artists and designers based in Africa or Asia working across a variety of media who would like to investigate our current technological reality. It is a unique research support program that helps experienced artists to reflect, research, experiment and produce work. The final results will be exhibited in a roaming exhibition.
The geographical focus of the fellowship is on the entanglement of old and new routes that connect Asia to Africa, crossing the Middle East and Central Asia. Today these routes are crossed by goods, people and data at speeds faster than ever, through a circuit of ports, mines, airports, refineries, high speed railways, fiber optic cables and mobile antennas.
Examples of possible research topics are: the infrastructure of Mongolian crypto-mining, the performativity of the robot-ports on the Siberian coastline, the soundscapes of the coltan mines in the heartlands of Congo, the cultural protocols of free port zones, the esthetics of satellite imagery, the agency of machinic vision, the political imaginations of geoengineering projects – and more.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Projects should be based in one of the following countries in Asia or Africa below.

Selection: Your application will be assessed by a selection committee on the basis of your research proposal; this includes the quality of your work, your visual and reflective skills. Also, the committee will look into the relevance of your proposal to the research outline of Digital Earth. A balance will be sought between applicants from different geographic locations.

Number of Awards: 15

Value of Award: The fellowship consists of a monthly stipend for work and production costs, mentorship and other various resources.

Duration of Programme: 6 months (September 2018 until February 2019)

Eligible Countries: : Afghanistan, Algeria, Armenia, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Benin, Brunei, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic (CAR), China, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial
Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini (formerly Swaziland), Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Russia, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Korea, Somalia, South Africa, South
Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.


How to Apply: 
  • Please make sure to read all the requirements and conditions described on our website:
    www.thedigitalearth.org before submitting an application.
  • Apply digitally, by emailing an application (no later than 25 July 2018 (23.59, CEST)) to: info@thedigitalearth.org.
Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Hivos

Lutheran World Federation (LWF) Scholarships in Theology, Diaconal and Development for Developing Countries 2018

Application Deadline: 1st October 2018.

Eligible Countries: Developing countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.

About the Award: Through the LWF scholarships program LWF works alongside its member churches in developing their capacity to serve effectively in their contexts. The scholarship program helps churches to acquire qualified personnel for spiritual care and diaconal work. The main criteria for a candidate approval is the church’s corresponding need to increase its human and institutional capacity, either in areas of theology or diakonia/development.

Type: Undergraduate, Masters, PhD/Postdoctoral, Research

Eligibility: 
  • Church affiliation of the candidate: Only applications from active members of LWF member churches are considered. All applications must be endorsed and submitted by the church. No applications submitted by individuals will be considered.
  • Nationality of the candidate: Only candidates from developing countries are eligible for scholarships in fields of diakonia/development. The theological scholarships are, in principle, open to candidates from all regions and countries.
  • Age limits: Only candidates up to a certain age are eligible for LWF scholarships, depending on the pursued degree:
    DegreeMaximum age at the time of application*
    Bachelor degrees35
    Master degrees40
    Doctorate45
    Post-doctoral/research50
    *Special considerations:
    • For candidates who are church employees at the time of application, age limits may be exceeded by up to 7 years for female candidates and up to 5 years for male candidates.
    • For candidates who are actively engaged in the church’s theological or diaconal work at the time of application, age limits may be exceeded by up to 5 years for female candidates and up to 3 years for male candidates.
    • Relatively higher consideration is made for female candidates due to social and cultural factors which cause them to pursue studies later.
Selection Criteria: 
  • HICD needs of the church: The proposed training field and degree has to respond well to the human and institutional capacity development needs of the church. The requesting church must demonstrate convincingly how a given application would meet a specific and crucial personnel need in its overall ministry in church and society.
  • Current and future position of the candidate: All candidates are expected to have been in the service of the church and/or community as employees or volunteers. There has to be a clear commitment by the church to engage the candidate as employee or volunteer in an area related to the proposed training after completion of the candidate’s studies/training.
  • Quality of the application: The candidate must demonstrate convincingly his/her commitment, ability and motivation to pursue the training and to support the church afterwards (good educational and professional qualifications, recommendations and certificates, convincing character).
  • Study place. The LWF encourages candidates to study in their home country or home region. In case a study or training program abroad is proposed, convincing reasons must be given in the application.
  • Gender and youth quota: At least 40% of the approved candidates will be female; at least 20% will be youth below the age of 30 years. These quotas will not only apply to the overall approvals, but also to each church and region.
  • Regional balance: The LWF seeks to ensure that candidates from different regions, countries and churches are being supported.
Number and Value of Awards: In total, 50-80 scholarships will be awarded for studies in diaconia and development and 20-25 for theological studies. Additional funding is available for short-term training of up to six months in the areas of diakonia and development. An endorsement by the respective LWF member church is required.

Duration of Programme:  
  • Regular scholarships for study programs of at least 1 year: The candidates are approved for at least 1 year of support to take up or complete their proposed study program. For candidates who have already started with their study program, this means that the study program has to last for at least 1.5 years at the time of application, hence 1 year at the time of approval.
  • Short-term scholarships for training of up to 6 months: The candidates are approved for a short-term training which may last up to 6 months. This may include training courses, workshops, exchange programs or research projects which respond to the needs of the applying church. Application forms and selection criteria are the same as for regular scholarships.
How to Apply: 
  • Application Form for LWF Scholarships: The application form has to be filled in by both the candidate, his/her congregational pastor and the head office of the endorsing church. The Step-by-Step Guidance on How to Complete the Application Form should be read carefully beforehand.
  • Attachments to the Application Form: Applications are considered incomplete without attachments.
  • Human Resource Capacity Profile of the Applying Church: Each applying church is supposed to provide information on its overall human resource needs by completing or updating the form.
maximum of 5 applications per church may be submitted. They should be sent as a scan to scholarships@lutheranworld.org; the hard copies should be sent to:
The Lutheran World Federation
Department for Mission and Development
Diakonia and Development Desk
P.O. Box 2100 CH-1211 Geneva 2
Switzerland


Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Lutheran World Federation (LWF)