Brexit crisis prompts calls for national unity government

Robert Stevens

Following parliamentary votes on customs and trade legislation so close as to threaten Theresa May’s premiership, calls have been made from pro-European Union (EU) sections of the Conservative Party for a national unity government to break the deadlock over Brexit.

Divisions over Brexit cut across all existing party lines. Around 10 Labourites have consistently voted with the Tories’ hard-Brexit wing, while a more substantial section of the party’s MPs are united with the soft-Brexit/pro-Remain wing of the Tories—not just in seeking to preserve UK access to the EU’s customs union and single market, but also ensuring that the crisis facing May’s government doesn’t precipitate a general election and a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn.

The votes in Parliament Monday and Tuesday were on amendments authored by the Tories hard-Brexit wing to quash the soft-Brexit agreement nominally reached by May with her cabinet just days earlier. More than 10 pro-EU Tory MPs voted against the government, leaving May reliant on four pro-Brexit Labour MPs and another former Labour MP who votes as an Independent for a majority.

Speaking to BBC Radio Four’s “Today” programme Wednesday, pro-EU Tory rebel Anna Soubry called for a cross-party “government of national unity.” She denounced the threats by party whips that failure to get the legislation through would result in a no confidence vote in May that would open the way for a Corbyn government.

Soubry told the BBC she would support May in a vote of no confidence but, “Problem is, I don’t think that she’s in charge any more. I’ve no doubt [leader of the hard-Brexit faction and leadership contender Jacob Rees-Mogg] is running our country.”

Also endorsing moves towards a national unity government are leading Tories such as Dominic Grieve and Nicholas Soames.

Soubry’s call is directed first to Labour’s right-wing, which last summer sought Corbyn’s removal as leader on the basis that he had not fought hard enough for the party’s pro-Remain position in the Brexit referendum. But she also counts on an attempt to either ameliorate the impact of Brexit or overturn the referendum result by winning the support of the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru—the Party of Wales.

She was obliged, however, to address widespread fears within ruling circles that May’s downfall would end with Corbyn in Number 10. Despite Corbyn’s constant retreats in face of his right-wing and the “charm offensive” conducted by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell in the City of London, dominant sections of big business still fear that such a change in government would become a focus for opposition to austerity among workers and youth that Corbyn would be unable to control.

Labour has the “old Trotskyists in charge,” Soubry declared, so “I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it, and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP [Scottish National Party] and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost.”

Soubry has established intimate relations with the Blairites. In March, she co-authored an article with Chukka Umunna as co-chairs of the All Party Parliamentary Group on EU Relations in the London Evening Standard,stating, “We reside in different political parties and rarely inhabit the same voting lobby in the House of Commons but on Brexit we are as one. An issue that continues to divide our country also forges new alliances and a determination to put the interests of the country over and beyond traditional tribal politics and party loyalty.”

A month later, both attended the launch event of the “People’s Vote,” a campaign calling for a second referendum on any final Brexit deal between the UK and EU.

The campaign for a People’s Vote is seen by its initiators as a mechanism for avoiding a Corbyn government. At its launch, Umunna made an appeal to the Tories saying, “We need more Conservative members of Parliament to be as brave as Anna and many others who defied the whip and put their country before their party."

The Liberal Democrats—who explicitly call for Brexit to be stopped—signalled that they would be onboard in any national unity government. Speaking to the Business Insider web site, party leader Vince Cable said he was preparing for a “radical” shift in British politics, as “[t]here are large numbers of Labour MPs and quite a lot of Tories who are just bitterly alienated by their own people. I can’t see the present system can be kept going. In the New Year, new groups may emerge … my instincts are that if they’re aligned with us on basic values, we can work with them.”

Jonathan Edwards, of Plaid Cymru, said of “maintaining our place in the single market and the customs union … if making it happen requires entering into an all-party government, so be it.”

The Times noted that Ian Blackford, the SNP’s Westminster leader, “did not rule out taking part.”

Several leading figures in the pro-Corbyn pressure group Momentum are campaigning to change Labour’s position on Brexit to back a “People’s Vote”/second referendum on EU membership if Parliament rejects whatever is agreed between May and the EU next year. A petition to secure a discussion on the issue has almost reached the required 4,000 signatures. They have been afforded friendly coverage by the Financial Times.

The FT produced a video citing the comments of Alison McGovern, described as a “leading Remain Labour MP on the right of the party,” that a “lot of parts of the Labour Party, Momentum included, are now thinking that they should have a say on the Brexit deal, and the British public should have a say. … I think people are wondering if the House of Commons can’t sort it out because it’s a hung parliament, maybe we need to go back to the British public.”

W ith Labour now five points clear of the Tories in a YouGov poll , Corbyn is preparing for a snap election. He has called a shadow cabinet meeting for next week to outline a draft election manifesto and draft a Queen’s Speech containing up to 35 bills.

To counter this, the Blairites are doing everything to destabilise his leadership—relaunching their bogus campaign alleging that Corbyn and his supporters are anti-Semitic. This week, leading Blairite Margaret Hodge cornered Corbyn behind the Speaker’s chair in Parliament and screamed in his face, “You’re a fucking anti-Semite and a racist.”

Hodge carried out her attack just minutes after Tuesday evening’s Brexit vote. The following morning, Blairite warmonger John Woodcock resigned as a Labour MP to stand as an independent. He had become an MP, his resignation later declared, “[T]o promote a credible alternative government … through strong defence and national security. I now believe more strongly than ever that you [Corbyn] have made the Labour Party unfit to deliver those promises and would pose a clear risk to UK national security as prime m inister.”

May remains in office, but this is a pyrrhic victory, with the ruling party split asunder and under siege.

May has pinned her hopes on a set of proposals for a “soft Brexit” that have already been undermined by her compromises with the Brexiteers. The EU’s Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier complained that parts “contradict the guidelines of the EU council, the heads of government and state, namely the indivisibility of the four freedoms and the integrity of the single market.”

He warned, “There is not a lot of justification for the EU running the risk of weakening the single market.”

Indian elite alarmed as Maldives gravitates toward China

Rohantha De Silva

Recent developments show how the Maldives, a tiny country of 1,000 coral islands and around 400,000 people, spread across 35,000 square miles of the Indian Ocean, has become embroiled in the escalating geo-political struggle between the major regional and global powers.

Sharp tensions have been created in the region by Washington’s military-strategic offensive against China. India has become a frontline state in US preparations for war against China in order to re-assert Washington’s post-World War II supremacy.

The Maldives, which had affirmed an “India First” policy a few years ago, is now developing close relations with China. Underscoring the downward spiral of relations with India, Maldives is the only country in the region that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has not visited since his election in 2014.

The Indian ruling establishment is seriously concerned. According to a July 8 report in the Hindustan Times, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj held a meeting with India’s South Asia ambassadors to discuss how to counter growing Chinese influence, including in the Maldives.

The July 3 meeting, held on the sidelines of a Head of Missions Conference, discussed India’s “three-pronged” approach to deal with China’s presence in what New Delhi regards as its neighbourhood. New Delhi will “track Beijing’s activities carefully; pursue its own projects and commitments; and educate and advise neighbours on the consequences of engaging with China,” the newspaper reported.

The presentation on Maldives “focused on how there was a conscious attempt by the regime in Male to erase the Indian footprint altogether and China had gained tremendous leverage with investments, already made or in progress, in an airport, bridge, islands and port.”

In another setback to India, the Maldives signed an energy deal with India’s arch-rival Pakistan, the Maldives Independent reported on July 8. Though the agreement’s details remained unclear, the report said it was struck between Maldives STELCO (State Electricity Company) and Pakistan’s WAPDA (Water and Power Developing Authority).

Pakistan’s power sector heavily relies on Chinese expertise, resources and finance to build and operate coal-powered power plants, hydro-electricity stations and wind farms. Because of these ties, Beijing is assumed to support the Maldives agreement.

The strained relations with India were displayed on June 5, when the Maldives government asked India to remove a “gift” naval helicopter from Laamu atoll, where China is considering building a port. Maldives wants New Delhi to remove another “gifted” chopper by the end of this month.

Together with the two helicopters, New Delhi had stationed six pilots and over a dozen ground personnel, creating a small military foothold in a strategically significant area of the Indian Ocean.

An Indian government official told the Times of India on June 5: “Even Addu (the location of the other Indian chopper) is significant as it is located at the Equatorial Channel and close to Diego Garcia. It seems Male wants to rid both these strategic locations of any Indian footprint.”

Diego Garcia is a critical US base in the Indo-Pacific, hosting deep-water naval and long-range air force facilities, as well as up to 5,000 troops.

The Times of India also reported a delay in work on an Indian-funded police academy in the Maldives. The Maldives immigration department is holding up new work permits for skilled Indian personnel whose presence New Delhi considers essential for the project. Hundreds of Indians working in resorts, hospitals and colleges in the Maldives also have been denied work visas for the past few months.

Relations with India have been strained since February, when Maldives President Abdulla Yameen imposed a 45-day emergency and arrested two Supreme Court judges, including the chief justice. Under pressure, the remaining judges overturned previous court orders granting freedom to arrested opposition leader and former president Mohamed Nasheed along with eight other political leaders.

India has called for democracy to be “restored” in Maldives, i.e., the release of opposition politicians, so that Nasheed can contest coming presidential elections. However, the Yameen administration has intensified its persecution of the opposition. Maumoon Abdul Gayoon, another former Maldives president, was sentenced to prison for one year and seven months, together with former Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed, for plotting to overthrow the government.

Nasheed, who was ousted in 2012, is backed by the Western powers, and India wants their intervention to secure their grip over the Maldives. Pointing to the Yameen government’s close relations with China, Nasheed has called on India and the Western powers, particularly the US, to help him to return to office so he can reorient Maldives’ foreign policy.

In 2016, Nasheed was given asylum in Britain, where he had gone for medical treatment. During a June 4 press conference in Colombo, he accused China of dragging the Maldives into a debt trap. He said the total loans for infrastructure projects by China’s Exim bank should be “easily more than $US2.5 billion” and roughly equivalent to Maldives’ gross domestic product.

Nasheed’s selection of Sri Lanka to hold the press conference underscored his pro-Western line. Washington and India orchestrated a “regime change” operation in Sri Lanka via the January 2015 presidential election, installing a government with a pro-Washington foreign policy. They worked behind the scenes to bring President Maithripala Sirisena to office because of former President Mahinda Rajapakse’s economic and political ties with China.

Beijing is forging close relations with the Maldives as a part of its efforts to counter Washington’s moves to encircle China. More broadly, Beijing has developed its massive “One Belt, One Road” project to link China to Europe, as well as Africa, by land and sea. Washington regards this infrastructure program as a serious challenge to its global power.

China has invested heavily in the Maldives and is the biggest source of tourists to the archipelago, which relies heavily on tourism. The Maldives has joined the Eurasian infrastructure initiative and signed a trade agreement with China.

Maldives occupies a strategic expanse of the Indian Ocean, near the southwest tip of India, and close to important sea lanes from the Middle East and Africa to East Asia, South East Asia and Australia. In particular, these routes provide China, as well as Japan, South Korea and India, with access to Middle Eastern oil, placing the archipelago at the centre of an explosive conflict.

Report exposes rise in alcohol-related deaths among Millennials in US

Isaac Finn

A study published last Wednesday in the British Medical Journal exposes the devastating and long-lasting impact of the 2008 economic crisis on the rise of deaths related to alcoholism, cirrhosis and liver cancer among 25- to 34-year-olds within the United States. The increase is one part of a rising number of “deaths of despair” caused by suicide and drug and alcohol abuse, which have contributed to declining life expectancy in the US.

The study, entitled “Mortality due to cirrhosis and liver cancer in the United States, 1999-2016: observational study,” was written by University of Michigan Medical School assistant professor and liver specialist Dr. Elliot Tapper and fellow professor Dr. Neehar Parikh. The two liver specialists drew extensively from federal data in death certificates and from the US Census Bureau.

The report’s findings include a decline in cirrhosis-related deaths among a number of subgroups within the population between 1999 and 2008 followed by a reversal of this process among nearly all groups between 2009 and 2016. This data is particularly shocking since medical treatment for leading causes of cirrhosis, a condition where the liver does not function properly due to damage, such as hepatitis C, have been developed. As a result, the growth in cirrhosis has largely come from alcoholic liver disease and non-alcoholic liver disease.

The total number of deaths from cirrhosis was 460,760 throughout the entire period covered in the report, with the annual total increasing by 65 percent from 1999 to 2016. The authors note, “Deaths due to cirrhosis are expected to triple by 2030.”

According to the study 25- to 34-year-olds were particularly hard-hit and experienced the highest average annual percentage change in death from cirrhosis, increasing by 10.5 percent in the period between 2009 to 2016. It also clarified that whites and Native Americans had the most rapid increase in mortalities compared to other identified ethnic groups.

There was also a 2.1 percent increase in deaths caused by hepatocellular carcinoma, a form of liver cancer, over the period covered in the study. Similar to cirrhosis, deaths from hepatocellular carcinoma should have likely decreased since the principle cause—hepatitis B—is easily treatable. Unlike cirrhosis, however, deaths from hepatocellular carcinoma had been on the decline among younger sections of the population but have risen among individuals older than 55.

The authors explicitly state that the rise in cirrhosis and hepatocellar carcinoma is likely caused by the devastating conditions facing workers and youth. They note in the study, “Given that worsening trends began after 2008, a year marked by the global financial crisis and a subsequent economic recession in the USA, a differential economic impact on specific states may explain some of the results.” They also note that rise in both cirrhosis and liver cancer is disproportionately impacting young men compared to older women, which would back up their claim that it was related to economic instability.

“We hypothesize that there may be a loss of opportunity, and the psychological burden that comes with that may have driven some of those patients to abusive drinking,” Parikh told NPR.

Other physicians have concurred with the study’s findings, such as liver specialist Dr. Sumeet Asrani, who noted, “It fits with what we see in practice. We’re seeing younger and younger patients with alcoholic liver disease.”

The development of cirrhosis at such a young age, however, reflects the devastation of an entire generation of young workers that do not see a future for themselves, or feel that their only escape from their difficulties is through drugs or alcohol.

A recent British Medical Journal editorial pointed out that more than 64,000 people died in 2015 from drug overdose, with a 137 percent increase in fatalities from drugs between 2000 to 2014. This is the outcome of the opioid crisis that is devastating large sections of the US, which is the direct result of deindustrialization and a conscious policy of pharmaceutical companies flooding impoverished areas with cheap pills.

Similar sentiments of despair find expression in the rise of suicides among 10- to 19-year-olds by more than 12 percent between 2013 and 2016. Suicide rates have also increased among the general population by 25 percent between 1996 and 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The rise in suicides and drug and alcohol related deaths is a stark indictment of the entire capitalist system and its failure to provide opportunities for a new layer of youth as they are starting their adult life. These failures have found a depressing expression in the last period is due largely to the artificial suppression of the class struggle by the pro-company unions. The eruption of mass workers struggles will allow this dissatisfaction to find a progressive expression as young workers and students take up the fight for jobs and decent living standards.

Australia’s “foreign influence” register will attack basic democratic rights

Mike Head

Australian Attorney-General Christian Porter flew out to London and Washington this week for what the Australian described as “high-level talks with his counterparts” on implementing the Turnbull government’s planned “foreign influence” register.

Porter’s trip came just over two weeks after the Liberal-National Coalition government, assisted by the Labor Party opposition, pushed two sweeping anti-foreign interference bills through parliament in just three days.

One, the Espionage and Foreign Interference (EFI) Act, inserts a host of new or expanded offences into the federal Criminal Code, aimed at criminalising political activity conducted in partnership with overseas or international organisations.

The other massive piece of legislation is the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme (FITS) Act. Running to 72 pages, it provides for the establishment, within 12 months, of what will become a highly-publicised register of alleged facilitators of “foreign meddling.”

Porter’s visit underscores the source of the pressure—especially from the US political and military-intelligence establishment—to ram the bills through in just three days, from June 26 to June 28, as well as the close collaboration being undertaken on the establishment and targeting of the public register.

Among the first individuals and entities likely to be compelled to register are those accused of links with China or Russia, the two countries named by January’s US National Defense Strategy as major threats to American global hegemony and against which preparations for war must therefore be made.

This axis has been signalled already by a report in last weekend’s Australianidentifying some of the earliest targets for the register. “Entities such as Chinese state-owned corporations or foreign-language media outlets such as Russia Today would be required to self-report,” the newspaper asserted.

Against a background of anti-China propaganda being pumped out by the US-connected intelligence agencies, the political elite and the corporate media, those at the top of the list could include former Foreign Minister Bob Carr, who currently heads the Australia-China Relations Institute (ACRI) at the University of Technology Sydney, which is partly funded by a Chinese-Australian billionaire.

Others likely to be compelled to register include ex-Trade Minister Andrew Robb, who represents Landbridge, a Chinese-based company that holds the lease over the civilian port in Darwin, the strategic capital of the Northern Territory. In fact, the FITS Act contains provisions imposing special registration requirements on former ministers, senior officials and members of parliament.

However, an examination of the FITS Act shows that the register’s dragnet will extend far further, threatening entire aspects of political life. This will affect the basic democratic rights of millions of Australians, especially members or supporters of political parties, lobby groups or other organisations opposing official policies, including the drive to war itself.

The FITS Act will require registration by all individuals and organisations deemed to collaborate with overseas entities in any political activity. It has serious criminal consequences, with up to five years’ jail for those who fail to register or comply with complex and ongoing reporting requirements. This includes “recklessly” failing to register, that is, merely being aware of a risk of needing to register but deciding that registration is not necessary.

Anyone who fails to register, even if inadvertently, can be compelled to do so by an arbitrary “transparency notice” issued by the Attorney-General’s Department. No procedural fairness, that is due process, is required in issuing notices, and there is no right to sue for defamation if a person is incorrectly branded a foreign agent.

“Registrable activities” include “parliamentary lobbying,” “general political lobbying” and “communications activity for the purpose of political or governmental influence.” This covers virtually every political activity and any publication, in print or online, deemed to have a political purpose.

People must register if they undertake such an activity “on behalf of” a “foreign principal.” These requirements are vague in their scope. “On behalf of” includes “under an arrangement”—an amorphous concept—as well as “in the service of,” “on the order of” and “under the direction of.”

“Arrangement” is broadly defined in section 10 to include a contract, agreement, understanding or other arrangement of any kind, whether written or unwritten.

The forbidden activities could extend to elucidating a foreign country’s position on a contested issue, such as China’s on the disputed South China Sea territories, or opposing involvement in a US-led military confrontation with China.

“Foreign principal” is defined to mean not only a foreign government or foreign government-related individual or entity, but also a “foreign political organisation.” That includes a “foreign political party” and a “foreign organisation that exists primarily to pursue political objectives.”

This extends to groups whose major purpose is to pursue political objectives, not just parties seeking election or engaged in parliamentary lobbying. As a result, a political party or politically-active group with international connections or affiliations may be forced to register.

By comparison, the definitions of foreign government-related individuals and entities are more narrowly drawn. They cover those “accustomed, or under an obligation (whether formal or informal), to act in accordance with the directions, instructions or wishes of the foreign principal.”

Media commentators have dubbed these provisions “China clauses” because they are particularly designed to capture people working for, or with, Chinese state enterprises or private Chinese companies that are alleged to be under Beijing’s influence.

The focus on political organisations is also in contrast to exemptions granted for “commercial and business pursuits,” as well as for churches, registered (non-political) charities, legal advice, current members of parliament, artistic activities, industrial and professional associations and trade unions.

Individuals and organisations must register for each “foreign principal” on whose behalf they undertake “registrable activities.”

But it is not yet clear exactly what details they must provide to the register. The FITS Act hands intrusive powers to the register’s secretary to require “any information or documents.” Will that include names and addresses of members? Information about overseas co-thinkers?

How much information will be made public is also unclear. According to the government: “Some scheme information will be made publicly available (mainly, the names of registrants and foreign principals and descriptions of the registrable activities).”

The reporting requirements are onerous. Registrants must “promptly report” any material changes affecting their registration, “promptly report” registrable activities, keep “proper records” and renew registration annually.

The secretary’s powers extend beyond the actual registrants to any person deemed to have “relevant” information: “The secretary has power to obtain information from any person if the secretary reasonably believes the person has information relevant to the scheme.”

It is a criminal offence not to comply with a notice from the secretary requiring information. Criminal offences also apply for failing to fulfil responsibilities under the scheme, providing “false or misleading” information or “destroying records.”

In addition, it is quite possible that someone who failed to register could be charged with a “foreign interference” offence under the EFI Act, punishable by up to 20 years’ jail, for “covertly” collaborating with an overseas group or individual to seek political change.

Porter’s rush to London and Washington for behind-the-scenes consultations on finalising the powers and operations of the planned register is just as revealing as the near-record pace with which the government and the Labor Party jointly rammed the bills through parliament.

Israeli parliament passes apartheid-style “Nation-State” law

Bill Van Auken 

The Israeli parliament, the Knesset, Thursday passed a so-called “Nation-State” law that enshrines the de facto apartheid-style discrimination and segregation practiced against the country’s Palestinian citizens in a quasi-constitutional Basic Law.

Backed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing ruling coalition, the law passed by a vote of 62 to 55, with two abstentions.

Palestinian legislators, who tore up copies of the law and shouted out protests that it was an act of racism and apartheid, were forcibly evicted from the Knesset.

After the law’s passage, Netanyahu called it “a pivotal moment in the annals of Zionism and the State of Israel.”

The legislation has been a hobby horse of the Zionist right for at least half a decade. Netanyahu mounted an aggressive campaign to get it passed before the end of the Knesset’s current session, as a means of shoring up support among his rabidly nationalist base in advance of November elections, and distracting from Israel’s deepening social crisis and the multiple corruption scandals implicating him and his wife Sara.

On a more fundamental level, the legislation constitutes a warning that the Israeli state is rapidly dispensing with any pretense of commitment to democracy or equal rights and is preparing to carry out massive crimes against the Palestinian people, even as it steps up its open preparations for a military confrontation with Iran.

Several thousand Israelis marched through the main streets of Tel Aviv on Saturday night to express their opposition to the reactionary “Nation-State” law.

The law restricts nationality rights to Israel’s Jewish as opposed to Palestinian citizens. It states that “The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.” It goes on to declare Jerusalem “complete and united” as Israel’s capital and it strips Arabic of its status as an official state language, granting this status to Hebrew alone.

It also includes a clause stating, “The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.”

Other elements include endorsement of boilerplate symbols of nationalism, from the Israeli flag to the national anthem and the Menorah.

Nowhere does the document affirm equal rights for all citizens, nor, for that matter, make any reference to non-Jewish citizens of Israel—the overwhelming majority of them Palestinians, along with Druze, Bedouin and some Russians—who number some 1.8 million, or approximately 20 percent of the population.

An earlier version of the legislation had explicitly endorsed the creation of “exclusive” Jewish-only communities and instructed the Israeli courts to rule according to Jewish ritual law in cases where there existed no legal precedent.

This was then replaced, under pressure from some of Netanyahu’s allies, by the somewhat vaguer reference to the “development of Jewish settlement as a national value.” In practical terms it retains the same meaning, backing the creation, with state support, of Jewish-only communities within Israel, just as in the occupied West Bank, through the isolation and expulsion of Palestinians.

Even without enshrining this form of apartheid in Basic Law, the reality is that before the legislation was passed, over 900 places in Israel—approximately three-quarters of all townships in the country—already have excluded non-Jews from living within their municipal borders. Palestinians are relegated to poorer areas which are systematically denied equal access to basic services, education, health and housing.

Hassan Jabareen, the general director of the Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel issued a statement after the passage of the legislation, declaring: “The Jewish Nation-State Law features key elements of apartheid, which is not only immoral but also absolutely prohibited under international law. The new law constitutionally enshrines the identity of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people only—despite the 1.5 million Palestinian citizens of the state and residents of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights—and guarantees the exclusive ethnic-religious character of Israel as Jewish. By defining sovereignty and democratic self-rule as belonging solely to the Jewish people—wherever they live around the world—Israel has made discrimination a constitutional value and has professed its commitment to favoring Jewish supremacy as the bedrock of its institutions.”

Among those voicing opposition to the legislation was Israeli President Reuven Rivlin, who rarely intervenes in political debates. He warned that the law could discredit Israel and “be used as a weapon by our enemies.” His concern is that it makes explicit in law the abuses that are already taking place in practice.

Expressing the virulent racism of the measure’s Likud supporters, Knesset member Miki Zohar responded: “Unfortunately President Rivlin has lost it,” adding that he had “forgotten his DNA.”

The spinelessness of Netanyahu’s parliamentary opposition was summed up by Labor Party leader Isaac Herzog, who told the Knesset: “The question is whether the law will harm or benefit Israel. History will determine. I really hope that we won’t find the fine balance between a Jewish and democratic state to be hurt.”

In a measure of how far Israeli politics have shifted to the right, Likud member Benny Begin, the son of Menachem Begin, leader of the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, founder of Likud, and the prime minister who bombed Iraq and invaded Lebanon, was one of the two abstentions. He warned that opposing the nation-state to equal rights created conditions for the growth of extreme nationalism and social tensions.

American Zionist organizations also expressed trepidation about the law’s passage. The American Jewish Committee issued a statement declaring that the law “put at risk the commitment of Israel’s founders to build a country that is both Jewish and democratic.” Another US pro-Israel group said that the law created “barriers” and “challenges” in countering demands for sanctions against Israel.

The turn toward implementing apartheid-style law is being taken under conditions in which the Israel Defense Forces has concluded that the combined Palestinian population of Israel, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Syria’s Golan Heights is already equal to Israel’s Jewish population. Other sources estimate that Israel and the occupied territories, taken as a unit, will have a Palestinian majority as soon as 2020.

This demographic reality has long posed the impossibility of maintaining an Israel that is both a Jewish and a democratic state. The “Nation-State Law” makes clear that the path being chosen is to dispense with the pretense of democracy and equal rights and to embark on a renewed campaign of massive ethnic cleansing.

Netanyahu’s government has been emboldened to take such measures by the unconditional support granted by the Trump administration, which, in violation of international law and longstanding US policy, recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the American embassy there in May.

Washington has sought to forge an anti-Iranian axis with Israel, Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf oil monarchies. It has backed Israel’s military assault on the people of Gaza, which has seen the heaviest bombing since 2014 even as the IDF shot to death at least 138 unarmed protesters and wounded at least 15,000 on the Gaza-Israel border.

The passage of the bill came on the same day that Israeli demonstrators holding signs reading “Never again” and “Shame on you” confronted Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban outside the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial. The protesters condemned Orban, with whom Netanyahu has established close relations, for his open appeals to anti-Semitism and his embrace of the World War II-era dictator Admiral Milos Horthy, who collaborated with the Nazis in the extermination of Hungarian Jews.

The alliance between Orban and Netanyahu is founded not merely on the Hungarian government’s support for Israel, but on a common outlook of right-wing nationalism. Zionism itself had its origins as a peculiar expression of the retrograde ethno-nationalism that emerged in eastern Europe in the latter part of the 19th century, which was based not on universal democratic principles, but rather on exclusivist conceptions of racial, religious and linguistic hegemony in a region marked by ethnic and linguistic diversity. Ironically, a movement that claimed to stand for the liberation of Jews found substantial common ground with anti-Semites and right-wing nationalist precursors of German fascism.

The return by Israel’s Zionist state to these reactionary foundations is part of a broader international trend that has seen the rise of right-wing, xenophobic and anti-immigrant governments and parties in Europe and elsewhere.

The inevitable result will be an explosion of social struggles. Neither Palestinian nor Jewish working people have any national way forward. In the end, an exclusively Jewish state of Israel will prove no more viable than the Bantustan-style mini-state proposed for Palestinians under the moribund “two-state solution.”

The only solution to the malignant contradictions of Israeli society lies in uniting Arab and Jewish workers across all national boundaries in a common struggle against capitalism and for a Socialist Federation of the Middle East.

Scuola Normale Superiore (SNS) Fully-funded PhD Scholarships for International Students 2018/2019 – Italy

Application Deadline: 24th August 2018

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International and Italian citizens

To be taken at (country):  Italy

Fields of Study: PhD Program in the following fields: Astrochemistry, Global History and Governance, Transnational Governance.

Type: PhD

Eligibility: Applications are invited from candidates who, irrespective of their citizenship, have an Italian laurea magistrale (MA/MS degree) or an equivalent degree awarded abroad, or who expect to have obtained the degree required for admission by 31 October 2018 – failure to obtain the degree by this date will disqualify the candidate for admission.
Admission to the selection process is restricted to candidates who:

• were born after 31 October 1988;
• have no past criminal charges resulting in a prison term of more than three years;
• have not been subject to the disciplinary measure of “expulsion” as specified in the didactic regulations of the SNS;
• are not in possession of a research doctorate issued by an Italian university, and in any case have never benefitted from a scholarship for attending a research doctorate course in Italy.

To apply for the scholarship in collaboration with the Istituto di Nanoscienze del Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR-NANO), candidates:

• shall, at the time of the application deadline, be in the first four years (full-time equivalent research experience) of their research careers and not yet awarded a doctoral degree;
• should not have resided or carried out their main activity (work, studies, etc.) in Italy for more than twelve months in the three years immediately prior to the time of the application deadline.

Admission interviews can be conducted in Italian or English; the admission interview for the PhD course in “Political Science and Sociology” and “Methods and Models for Molecular Sciences” must be conducted in English. The candidate’s level of competence in the Italian and English language must be stated in the application, with reference to the EUROPASS language grid

Selection:

• The selection is based on candidates’ qualifications and interviews.
• The candidates’ level of competence, talent, motivations and inclination towards scientific research will be assessed on the basis of their qualifications and research project, and through an interview.
• Candidates are admitted to the interview on the basis of an evaluation of their qualifications and of a research project in Italian or English (about 20,000 characters, spaces included). The research project must reveal the candidate’s scientific interests and their cohesion with the scientific guidelines promoted by the SNS, but it will not be a determining factor in the subsequent choice of the thesis. The project must show the candidates’ full awareness of the state of the art in the selected scientific field, and their competence in the research methods in use within that discipline; it must also include an adequate bibliography.
• All classes are in English. The courses in “Cultures and Societies of Contemporary Europe”, “Literature, Art and History in Medieval and Modern Europe”, “Philosophy”, and “Classics” are both in Italian and English.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: All students admitted to the PhD program receive full financial support. This includes tuition, fees, free meal, and a cost-of living scholarship.  All students will be assigned further funding for their research activity and travel.

Duration of Program: The courses are usually 3-4 years. All courses will start on 1 November 2018.

How to Apply: 

• The online procedure will be activated within the section dedicated to the call on the SNS web site, at the address http://phd.sns.it/
• It is important to go through the Application details on the Program webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Scuola Normale Superiore

Facebook Community Challenge for Developers Worldwide (USD $30,000 Prize) 2018

Application Deadline: 26th July, 2018 at 00:00 ^(GMT)

Eligible Regions: 7 regions:(i) North America, (ii) Latin America, (iii) the Asia Pacific, (iv) India, (v) Sub Saharan Africa, (vi) Middle East/North Africa, and (vii) Europe.

About the Award: To enter this challenge, use at least one Facebook developer product to build applications that help bring communities together.  You might decide to craft an awesome Messenger experience, help community leaders strengthen and grow their audience, or integrate your own technology with Facebook’s large reach.
In addition, bonus prizes are available for exceptional solutions that fit into the community categories that (i) bridge on and offline experiences, (ii) build and grow community, or (iii) drive engaging communities.
Facebook’s mission is to give people the power to build community. We know that innovation can come from people of all backgrounds, from all kinds of places. So, we want to invite you, developers, to join us in this journey by building software applications that strive towards this mission.

Type: Entrepreneurship, Contest

Eligibility:

•  Build software applications that help bring communities together and use at least one Facebook developer product.
• To compete for optional bonus prizes, developers are invited to build solutions across one of the three community categories (i) bridge on and offline experiences; (ii) build and grow community; and (iii) drive engaging communities.

Value and Number of Awards: 

•  First Place – Global Round: $30,000 USD
•  Second Place – Global Round: $20,000 USD
•  Third Place – Global Round: $10,000 USD
•  Best Pre-Existing, Updated Solution – Global Round: $7,000 USD
•  First Place – Regional Round (7): $7,500 USD awarded in each region
•  Second Place – Regional Round (7): $5,000 USD awarded in each region
•  Third Place – Regional Round (7): $3,500 USD awarded in each region
•  Best Pre-Existing, Updated Solution – Regional Round (7): $3,000 USD awarded in each region
•  Bonus Prize: Best solution to Bridge on and offline experiences: $10,000 USD
•  Bonus Prize: Best solution to Build and grow community: $10,000 USD
•  Bonus Prize: Best solution to Drive engaging communities: $10,000 USD

How to Apply: Submit the Following:

• Demo video. (hosted on YouTube, Vimeo, or Youku). Your video should be around 2 minutes, including a demo of your working application via a step-by-step visual demo, and be available in English. Be sure to explain how the Facebook products used enhances the experience of your solution!
• Images. Please submit at least one image/screenshot of your application.
• Access. A way to access your working application for judging and testing by providing a mobile test build, a link to a live website, or a demo site where the application is deployed.

How to Enter: 

1. Register for the hackathon on Devpost.
2. Build software applications that help build community and incorporate at least one Facebook developer product.
3. Submit solutions to your region (North America, Latin America, Asia Pacific, India, Sub Saharan Africa, Middle East/North Africa, Europe) by selecting your region on the submission form.
4. If you build a solution that fits a specific community theme, select the bonus prize category on your submission form. You will be required to explain how your solution fits the community’s needs.
5. Create a video about two minutes long that demonstrates your solution’s features and functionality.

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Facebook

One World Scholarship Programme in Austria for Developing Countries 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 31st July 2018

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Austria

About the Award: The One-World-Scholarship-Programme is a partial scholarship aimed at students from Africa, Asia and Latin America who have come to Austria on their own initiative, in order to complete their education.
Prospective awardees are required to focus on questions related to development in their studies and research.

Field of Study: Possible fields of specialisation are poverty reduction, social justice, global migrations, gender equality, climate change, sustainable use of resources, food security, renewable energies, environmental protection, sustainable tourism, urbanisation, health, human rights, democratisation, good governance, fighting corruption, conflict prevention and resolution, international relations, intercultural dialogue. This list should provide applicants with an idea of relevant topics, it is, however, not exclusive.

Type: Masters, PhD

Eligibility: 

• nationality of a non-European developing country
• admission to a Master or PhD programme at a university or university of applied sciences in Salzburg or Tyrol
• for PhD students: approved disposition
• age limit: Master studies max. 30 years (mothers: 35 years), PhD studies max. 35 years (mothers: 40 years) at the time of application
• residence permit “student”

The scholarship will contribute to exercise the right to education for those critical and intellectual young people who encounter poor conditions in their home countries. These aspects still apply more strongly to women. Regarding applications from equally qualified individuals, priority is given to female students.

Selection Criteria:

• Financial need: We consider own income, savings, other means of support, profession and income of parents in order to select students who would hardly be able to successfully finish their studies without financial support.
• Evidence of good progress in studies: Good study progress documented by transcript of records of current and past studies. In programmes without entry exams, students who have already completed at least one semester at an Austrian university have a distinctive advantage.
• Interest in development and according specialisation in studies: Prospective awardees are expected to show a strong interest in development related issues, which is supposed to be reflected in the choice of study fields, prior work experience, voluntary activities etc.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Partial grants.
No scholarships are awarded for:

• studies at private universities
• postgraduate study programmes (“Lehrgänge”, e.g. “Universitätslehrgang” or “Fachhochschullehrgang”) or other non-degree certificate programmes
• applicants  with a residence title other than “student”
• non-degree programme students („außerordentliche Studierende“)
• short term visits and exchange programmes

How to Apply: 

• Please send your complete application documents to astrid.schmid (at) aai-salzburg.at using a free data transfer such as wetransfer or sendspace
• After your application has been reviewed, you will be invited for an interview (in person or via skype)
• The decision is taken by the scholarship committee in mid August. You will be informed about the decision shortly after.

Application Form Master
Application Form PhD

Visit Programme Webpage for Details 

Award Providers: Afro Asiatisches Institut Salzburg

The West’s Potential Symbiotic Contributions to Freeing a Closed Muslim Mind

Rajai R. Masri

The inherited distorted Islamic narratives forming the general discordant epistemology governing a Muslim’s thinking process and attitude is reinforced in acts by the Arabs of misperceived self- defense and assertion of identity warranted by Western Oligarchs’ “Politics of Expediency” in the hegemonic drive for the control and the dominance of Arab world post WWI.

Posing as the avaricious predators with utterly narrow Machiavellian objectives – short of any well-intentioned benevolent plans and programs in the service of the freshly newly colonized Arabs – the far much advanced and domineering West only compounded the sense of a lingering mistrust; alienation; self-victimization and pent up negative sentiments by the colonialized Arabs.

Thus, what could have been an opportune occasion – other things being equal – for the progressive West to take the generally backward Arab and Muslim worlds by hand on a benign journey of embarking on a genuine far-reaching benevolent socio-economic and socio-political development turned around into a bonanza of a plan of Western colonialist powers exploitations and crude military dominance.

Fresh out of four centuries of Ottoman Rule where the Arab world receded further into social, economic and political backwardness in full contrast to a Western World that was in the interim experiencing and drawing the benefits of four centuries of renaissance touching on every aspect of a human’s life culminating in the immersion in the blesses of the age enlightenment; the Western powers, the domineering Western oligarchs, could very well have engaged in confidence-building measures with the Arab and Muslim worlds that could have ensued in genuine symbiotic plans for development touching on all aspects of peoples’ lives.

Islam, as a religion, as true of all backward and illiterate masses, represented to the Arabs and Muslims at the time the sole avenue for meagre knowledge, social cohesiveness and the assertion of identity in the absence of any other meaningful and viable alternatives in the midst of the ravages of intensifying bewildering vying geopolitical schemes and ambitions.

The Arabs and the Muslim Worlds were in dire need to shed archaic and stale social systems, foremost religious narratives and narrowly interpreted Islamic teachings, and embark on a meaningful social and political developments that the Western democracies were in the best position to render and assist in the implementation.

The Arab world needed the lull, the time and space to engage in deep self-introspection process; needed a profound revamping of Islamic beliefs and ethos, as the Laic West was in the best situation to genuinely extend guidance and support.

However, most tragically in the broader historic purview and the prospects of future International relations, the Oligarchs of the Western powers, sought, in the typical narrow purview of politicians pinned down on the “Politics of Expediency;” the Western planners started dealing freshly anew with the Arab world from where the historic Crusaders left, nearly seven centuries earlier.

Actually, sadly ironically, it was widely alleged that when the French General Henri Gouraud – appointed as representative of the French government in the Middle East and commander of the French Army of the Levant upon the end of WWI – visited the tomb of Saladin in Damascus, General Henri Gouraud exclaimed, “Here we come back, Saladin*.” This, following on the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement to divide the spoils, the remains of the Ottoman Empire of the Arab world patrimony between the British and France; seems, sadly to have summed up the narrow schemes and interests of the Western powers’ return this time to the Middle East.

The Arab world was in dire need for deep socio-political reforms in emulation of a prosperous West. Much the Western powers could have done to cause a huge jumpstart to causing this to happen had the Western oligarchs and narrow-minded political planers not started from the lingering old exclusivist divisive paradigm of the “They” and “Us;” designating, as currently the case with the American neoconservatives and the Trump Administration, the entire Arab and Muslim worlds in the single brush, without exaggeration, of the “Enemies” of “West.”

The West in the experience of the colonization of the Levant and Mesopotamia, the Sykes-Picot Plan, have foregone a major historic potential turning point, a historic opportunity of all proportions, to advance the causes of a more lasting peace between civilizations; the cause of cultural dialogue and open international relations between the West and the Arab world, rather between all nations of the world.

In hindsight, it is not all that farfetched to assert the “Divide and Rule” in the service of narrow exploitative colonialist agenda was the sole interest and sole objective of the Western powers in the Middle East.

The fragmentation of the Middle East into mini-states under the control of the Western powers began with earnest with the appointment on the head of each newly created local political entity of lackey local rulers with strings attached. No plans were genuinely put forward by the supposedly enlightened Western powers to develop truly representative functioning democracies in the region leaving new appointed Middle East political regimes to rule by decree and at the whims of the absolute rule of appointed local leaders.

Islam, as represented by the clergy and religious institutions, remained exclusivist in its central doctrine and distorted historic narratives; archaic interpretations precluding the development of a Muslim’s mind and modern social institutions. However, the local temporal authority, the vassal of Western powers, thrived in the conduct of their absolute rule on the close alliance they forged with the clergy stifling meaningful development of the political and social life in the Middle East.

The creation of Israel on the back of other people, the Palestinians, came in fulfillment to promises by the West, the Balfour Declaration, and the active support of the entrusted British Mandate under the League of Nations in 1922. The anomalous creation of Israel on the force of massive dispossessions and exodus of the indigenous Palestinians contributed to protracted conflicts and wasted scarce national resources best had been allocated for the socio-economic and socio-political developments of the Arab people and the Arab world.

Ironically, and instead of the enlightened West engaging in assisting the Arabs to embark on religious reform, Islamic reform, the Western powers manipulated the concept of Jihad, holly war, enticing, actively, Muslim extremists to advance narrow Western political agendas giving further rise to Islamic Extremism and the closing of the Muslim Mind.

Invoking Jihad as a powerful motivator, the West gave rise to “Al-Qaeda” to serve the fall of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. However, most bizarre, is the support the West, by all different indirect means, gave to the current Jihadist Salafists hordes in the destructive and still lingering wars in Syria, Libya, Iraq and Yemen.

Turns of political events that followed, most tragically, only contributed to the Arabs’ continuing slide into the unfathomable abyss; this, as the rift between the West and the Arab world only widened, especially with the privileged position enjoyed in the political and strategic decision-making of the Zionists sympathisers in West.

* Saladin was the Muslim Kurdish leader who defeated the Crusaders in the decisive battle of Hittin recapturing Jerusalem in 1187 C.E. However, the Crusaders remained in the Levant another century later until 1297 C.E.

Ethiopia’s Peaceful Revolution

Thomas C. Mountain

The uniquely African Empire of Ethiopia has seen itself launched into a peaceful revolution that promises to transform one of the planets poorest countries into a modern peoples democracy.

Being that I have spent my entire life living by the principle of “political power grows from the barrel of a gun”, or as Marx said, “Force is the midwife of change” to see a peaceful revolution next door in Ethiopia is almost to much to grasp hold of. I first thought this was a “soft coup” by the Americans, but this is much more than that. American acquiescence was necessary, but the new government lead by Dr. Abiy Ahmed has started what can only be called a revolution.

Prime Minister Abiy, elected such by a parliament 100% appointed by the former regime is young, charismatic and has put forward a program of change that is remarkably similar to what Eritrea’s President Issias Aferworki has been saying for the past 25 years and more. Calling on all Ethiopians the good Doctor, past soldier, intelligence officer and for the past 8 years a politician, is urging his country men and women to learn from socialist Eritrea next door.

He has suggested the Ethiopian diaspora emulate the Eritreans and start donating $1 a day to their homeland. National service and national education training centers such as Eritrea’s Sawa are being discussed. And of course, if Ethiopia is really to begin to break with its history of debt bondage and beggary, the Ethiopian diaspora, like the Eritreans, will have to start paying an income tax on their foreign earnings of 2%. Eritrea, 4 million population, gathers $300
million a year or more from its diaspora so Ethiopia should be able to make a serious dent in its budget deficit by introducing the 2% income tax.

P.M. Abiy’s task is a giant one, for Ethiopia is a big country with many different ethnic groups and like Eritrea next door roughly half muslim and half christian. A divide and rule policy of instigating ethnic based conflict by the previous regime has left the country burnt and bleeding, with almost a million people internally displaced. On top of this almost perennial droughts and famines have wracked the land, brought on by western industrialization induced climate change.

Ethiopia should be a thriving country with a well off citizenry for it has rich lands, lots of water, minerals and even energy. The problem has been its leaders this past century starting with Haile Sellasie, “Emperor”. His claim to power was based on his grandfathers use of Italian supplied firearms to conquer and loot their neighbors, mostly the Oromo, of whom the new PM derives from. Once in power having completely subjugated the Oromo, amongst others, Haile Sellasie turned
his eyes toward the coast and the dream of having his own port on the Red Sea. This meant annexing the Italian colony of Eritrea with its much more advanced economy and of course, the ports of Assab in the south and Massawa in the north.

The violent subjugation of Eritrea is central to the modern history of Ethiopia and todays Ethiopians see the recent development of peaceful relations as god’s blessing.

The Eritreans fought a 30 year independence war which helped trigger the overthrow of Haile Sellasie, and eventually would see the Eritrean rebel army defeat Haile Sellasie’s replacement Colonel Haile Mengistu Mariam’s army and drive him into exile in ZImbabwe.

The Eritreans left their erstwhile allies the Tigrayan rebel army i control of Ethiopia and returned to their main task of establishing their newly independent country. When two years later the Eritreans formerly declared their independence and joined the UN the Tigrayan dominated government did its best to sabotage international recognition for with independence came loss of control of its main port of Assab. Never mind Eritrea gave Ethiopia rent free use of Assab, the prestige lost in losing Eritrea to independence drove the new Ethiopian government controlled by the ethnic minority Tigrayan regime to reignite Ethiopian national chauvinism and eventually, just seven years after Eritrean independence, a new war of conquest was launched in 1998.

After three years of particularly bloody warfare, probably the last major land war in history, and 123,000 Ethiopian dead alongside 19,000 Eritrean martyrs (these are the official government figures) with 1.4 million Eritreans internally displaced by the Ethiopian invasion (40% of Eritrea’s population) has left both countries peoples indelibly scarred. Following the defeat of the Ethiopian invasion the Tigrayan regime began what came to be known as No War No Peace on Eritrea’s
border, every few years sending division strength military incursions into Eritrea forcing Eritrea to maintain a large army of national service military on active duty in its trenches along the border.

The main player in all of this, and something almost entirely excluded from mention by the MSM, has been Pax Americana, with the Clintonites and their kissing cousin Barack Obama dominating the list of criminals who instigated and supported these past 25 years of conflict in the Horn of Africa.

Today’s revolution in Ethiopia has ended all this and with a young, dynamic leader, only 42 years old and sounding like a younger version of Eritrea’s Issias Aferworki, speaking the language of peace and love, communal and national harmony and cooperation, is still having to deal with violent outbreaks ie attacks on former regime leaders businesses and properties, communal violence in the south, and continued resistance by former regime supporters still occupying administrative post in Oromia and Afar.

Dr. Abiy is promising a future, and outlining inspiring plans on how to achieve it beginning with peace with his neighbors and the end to communal strife in Ethiopia. He speaks directly to the hearts and minds of all Ethiopians in a way almost religious, addressing the importance of loving oneself and ones neighbors instead of relying on the gun to define society. Now I am not a romantic or religious but his words strike a cord with all people of good heart and gives one
hope that here in one of the most strife torn, famine wracked places on the planet there is hope.

Of course it takes unity and hard work, something Dr. Abiy uses Eritrea and Eritreans as role models for the Ethiopian people, going so far as to only half jokingly declare himself Eritrea’s unofficial foreign minister the better to fight the lies being spread about our country.

Eritrean President Issias Aferworki has visited Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa and sealed the deal so to speak, demonstrating to the Ethiopian people his and our entire country’s sincere desire for peace and friendship between both of us, all to similar and all too different.

As Dr. Abiy continues his path of independence and close relations with Eritrea expect to see a growing wave of criticism, maybe even demonization, once his “honeymoon” period with the western media goes stale and the anti socialist zealots in the west raise a hue and cry alleging “lack of democratic process” and alleged “human rights abuses”.

Towards the end of his speech at the unity music concert in Addis Ababa on Sunday, July 15, Dr. Abiy, in addressing the problems facing the country told his listeners, almost entirely under 30, not to worry, “Issias is leading us” as in Eritrean President Issias Aferwerki.

It hasn’t taken long for the cat to get out of the bag so to speak and the influence of “wedi Afom” as Dr. Abiy calls Issias, is now a matter of public record. Maybe we should be calling Ethiopia’s peaceful revolution a “Soft Coup” by Eritrea.