17 Jul 2019

Talisman Sabre: US and Australia prepare for war with China

Oscar Grenfell 

Up to 34,000 military personnel from the US, Australia, Britain, New Zealand and Japan arrived in northern Queensland this week for the biannual Talisman Sabre war games which began on Thursday. Delegations from India and South Korea are observing the exercises, while 18 other nations from across the Indo-Pacific were invited.
The military drills have been treated as a non-event in the corporate press and by the state-owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Only a handful of articles have appeared, all of them treating the war games as routine and providing few details of their purpose.
To the extent that there has been any consternation in the media, it has been over the presence of a Chinese navy vessel, reportedly sent to international waters near northern Australia to monitor the exercises. Journalists and pundits have warned against “Chinese spying,” and have uncritically repeated statements from Australian Defence Force representatives, who have declared they will take unspecified “counter-measures.”
The silence of the media and all of the official parties, including the Greens, is aimed at keeping the population in the dark about the real purpose of Talisman Sabre: to drill for an offensive US-led war against China that would rapidly threaten a global nuclear conflagration.
The USS Ronald Reagan in Brisbane [Credit: @TalismanSabre Twitter]
The first Talisman Sabre exercise was held in 2005. They have expanded substantially since 2011. In that year, the Greens-backed Labor government of Julia Gillard agreed to integrate Australia into the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia”—a vast US military build-up throughout the Indo-Pacific region directed against China.
The military drills have been based upon the Pentagon’s AirSea Battle doctrine, under which conflict with China would involve a massive military bombardment, accompanied by the blockading of key shipping lanes in the Pacific through which the bulk of Chinese trade passes. Talisman Sabre has largely focused on preparations for imposing such a naval blockade around the straits of Sunda, Lombok and Malacca.
This year’s exercises are being held amid open diplomatic and economic clashes between the US and China, and the emergence of flashpoints around the world for a broader conflict.
For the past year, the Trump administration has been imposing trade war measures on China that are unprecedented in the post-World War Two period. In US and Australian foreign policy circles, there is an increasingly open discussion of the need to counter growing Chinese influence in the Pacific, and internationally, including through military means.
In line with this ratcheting-up of tensions, the 2019 Talisman Sabre exercise is the largest that has been held. The drills were already the second-biggest war games in the world.
An official statement on the “opening ceremony” of Talisman Sabre last Monday reported that Defence Minister Linda Reynolds “said the exercise was designed to enhance combat readiness and interoperability between the Australian and United States Armed Forces.” Reynolds’ reference to “combat readiness” made clear that the exercises are about preparing for war.
This year, Talisman Sabre is reportedly focusing on rehearsing US plans for the invasion and seizure of an island in the Pacific that would be a base for amphibious operations throughout the region and for sustaining an attack on land positions. Such an operation would also be aimed at taking control of shipping lanes. The most obvious targets are Chinese-controlled islets in the South China Sea, which could provide a base for launching operations against key military bases in southern China.
This is based on a new “operating concept” developed this year by the US navy and marines dubbed “expeditionary advanced base operations.” Brigadier General Stephen Liszewski, director of operations for the Marine Corps, told the US National Defense magazine in May that this was “all about distributing lethality across the battle space in support of a larger maritime campaign.”
Liszewski said such a base could “be used as a forward arming and refueling point for aircraft from the joint force.” According to National Defense it “could also be used as sensing platforms to collect intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance information, or as strike platforms to achieve sea control.”
The Marine Times noted that the tactic was first tested by the US Marines in exercises in the Pacific in March this year. It bluntly declared: “That fighting concept, known as expeditionary advanced base operations, or EABO, will see Marines spread thinly across the vastness of the Pacific Ocean, operating from small bases—a tactic that will help Marines stay alive in a high-end fight with China.”
A solider participating in a HIMARS drill [Credit: @TalismanSabre Twitter]
A crucial part of the plan is known as HI-RAIN. This involves rapid artillery raids conducted by HIMARS rocket launchers transported by C-130 military aircraft. Such raids will be trialled during Talisman Sabre.
US Army Major Daniel Graw, Division Assistant Fire Support Coordinator, 3d Marine Division, told Defence Connect: “What we are demonstrating is the capability of the US Marine Corps, US Air Force and US Army to come together with different aircrews and different HIMARS units, quickly build a plan, deploy on C-130s, travel great distances by air, land, rapidly deliver long-range precision fires against enemy targets, and depart their firing location prior to detection.”
Among the US military assets participating in the games is the Strike Group, led by the U.S. Nimitz-class supercarrier USS Ronald Reagan. The USS McCampbell, an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer, is also participating, along with the USS Wasp, USS Green Bay and USS Ashland, which make up the Wasp Amphibious Ready Group.
HIMARS exercises [Credit: @TalismanSabre Twitter]
In a particularly provocative move directed against China, Japan was invited to dramatically expand its participation in this year’s exercises. It has sent a helicopter destroyer, JS Ise, and tank landing ship, JS Kunisaki, to take part. Japan, which invaded China in the 1930s and 1940s, has been encouraged to remilitarise by Washington as part of its confrontation with Beijing.
Successive militarist governments in Tokyo have deliberately ratcheted-up tensions with the Chinese regime, including by stoking disputes over unoccupied rocky outcrops in the East China Sea. At the same time, they have moved to scrap nominally pacifist clauses in the country’s post World War II constitution, in a clear threat of war against China.
The silence of the Australian media and political establishment on the preparations for conflict in the Indo-Pacific makes clear that the entire ruling elite is committed to militarism and war, amid the deepest crisis of world capitalism since the 1930s.
The media, the intelligence agencies, and all of the official parties, including the Greens, have sought to overcome mass anti-war sentiment by covering up the threat of conflict and waging a McCarthyite campaign against supposed Chinese influence in Australia.
The immense dangers revealed by Talisman Sabre underscore the critical importance of the fight being waged by the International Committee of the Fourth International and the Socialist Equality Parties around the world to build an international anti-war movement of the working class directed against the source of conflict, the capitalist nation-state system.

13 Jul 2019

German Development Bank (KFW) Masters Scholarships 2019/2020 for East African Students

Application Deadline: 1st August 2019, 17:00 hours, East Africa Time

Eligible Countries: East African Communities (EAC)

To be Taken at (Country): EAC Partner State other than their country of citizenship

Field(s) of Study: 1) Mathematics, 2) Engineering, 3) Informatics, 4) Science, 5) Technology and 6) Business Science.

About the Award: Applications are invited for the above named scholarship programme supported by the German Development Bank (KFW) in collaboration with the East African Community (EAC) and implemented by the Inter-University Council for East Africa (IUCEA). The goal of this initiative is to contribute towards training leaders that will foster EAC regional integration.
Applicants are expected to study in countries other than their own in selected universities and programmes. Successful applicants will  be offered a comprehensive package including scholarships for the masters programmes, internships, mentoring, networking events and further leadership training activities. The scholarship will support masters students in Mathematics, Engineering, Informatics, Science, Technology and Business Science programmes. IUCEA hereby invites applications from students who are citizens of the East African Community (EAC) Partner States to apply for the KFW funded Masters Scholarships.

Type: Masters

Selection Criteria: The following criteria is mandatory. Students should:
  • Be citizens of a partner state of the East African Community;
  • Possess the required academic qualifications for admission to the programme
  • Submit a well written motivation letter in English elaborating on the following:
  1. Motivation for wanting to pursue a the Masters Programme chosen in section 2 above
  2. Foreseen professional engagement in EAC Integration agenda after completing the Masters
  3. Expect application of the acquired skills and knowledge from the Masters Programme to contribute the EAC Integration Agenda
  4. Personal professional and academic vision in the next 5 to 10 years
Note: Please note that all the above should be covered in one letter of not more than 500 words
  • Be below 35 years of age
  • Have applied to study in an EAC Partner State other than their country of citizenship
Number of Awards: The financial cooperation arrangement shall finance the first three cohorts of approximately 157 masters students over their full study time of 2 years. After the first cohort has completed the studies, an independent evaluation of the level of attainment of the objectives of the project will be carried out, with the desirable impact being assessed.

Value of Award: Masters students shall be given a fixed amount of money to cover living as well as costs for teaching and research materials. The students shall be required to apply to study in an EAC Partner State other than their own.

Duration of Award: 2 years

How to Apply:
  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Visit Award Webpage for Details

AUC-UNDP African Young Women Leaders Fellowship Programme 2019

Application Deadline: 1st August 2019 (Midnight New York, USA)

Eligible Countries: African Countries

To be Taken at (Country): UNDP at Headquarters in New York or in a regional or country office

About the Award: Do you want to work to advance the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals?
Do you want to fight poverty and ensure sustainable development?
Do you want to lead change and develop your skills to do so?
If so, we invite you to apply to the African Young Women Leaders Fellowship Programme – a partnership between the African Union Commission (AUC) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
This exciting partnership aims to build a new generation of young African women leaders and experts to serve Africa and the world in designing and implementing development programmes in the context of the SDGs and Agenda 2063.
We are looking for 20 young African women who are ready to take up a fellowship assignment for 12 months starting from October 2019.

Type: Fellowship

Selection Criteria: To be considered for the African Young Women Leaders Fellowship Programme, applicants must meet the following requirements:
  • National of an AU Member State
  • Aged below 34 years at the date of application
  • Hold a Master’s degree or equivalent in Economics, Political Science, Business Administration, International Relations/Development, or other relevant fields
  • Maximum 1 year of working experience in research, analysis and programme/project development, implementation and management
  • Available in 2019/20 to dedicate 12 months for a fellowship programme and available to participate in an induction workshop in Addis Ababa from October 2019.
  • Willing to live and work outside their country of residence
  • Proficiency in at least one AU working language (Arabic, English, French, Portuguese) and working knowledge of English
  • Understanding of, and interest in, poverty eradication, sustainable structural transformation, the SDGs and Africa’s Agenda 2063
  • Capacity to gather comprehensive information on complex problems or situations, evaluating information accurately, analysing and identifying key issues and solutions
Desirable experience:
  • initiative, client-orientation, and working in teams, and complex and time-pressured contexts, field experience in an African country
  • experience in developing technical proposals
  • leadership, innovation and technology and setting up networks/hubs/hangouts
Number of Awards: 20

Value of Award: The Fellowship Programme will cover expenses related to travel and medical insurance. In addition, each Fellow will be paid a stipend to cover accommodation and living costs at the respective duty station.

Duration of Award: One-year Fellowship starting 1st oct 2019

How to Apply: Your application must be in English and must include include the following (to be scanned and uploaded as one document):
  • A detailed CV
  • A one page motivation letter highlighting why you would be an outstanding candidate, your strengths and how your participation in the Programme would contribute to your future career
  • A short essay of not more than 1,500 words (3 pages single spaced) detailing your innovative solution to a complex development problem – youth unemployment.  Describe the nature of the problem, what are the underlying causes, who is responsible for solving this problem, what your innovative solution is and how you would implement it.
  • Copies of your academic degrees
  • 2 professional references
Applications which do not include the above documents will not be taken into consideration.
Please note that only longlisted candidates will be contacted. If you have not been contacted by 1 September, your application has not been included into the long-list of candidates.
Longlisted candidates will be invited to a video-interview and if successful will be included into a roster.
Short-listed candidates will be invited for a follow-up interview with the hosting UNDP headquarters or regional office.
We will make an offer to the 20 most successful and talented candidates to join the African Women Leaders Fellowship Programme

Visit Award Webpage for Details

UN Trust Fund to End Violence against Women 2019

Application Deadline: 31st July 2019, 23:59 EST.

Eligible Countries: See below

About the Award: The UN Trust Fund’s Call for Proposals, now open, is for projects to prevent and end violence against women and girls under the Spotlight Initiative in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa. This Call for Proposals, which is available in three languages, accepts multi-year grant applications for up to USD 1 million in English, French and Spanish.

This call is open to applicants in the following categories of target countries:
  1. Latin America: Single Country Project Proposals from Argentina, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico
  2. Sub-Saharan Africa: Single Country Project Proposals from Cameroon, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Mali, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe
  3. Multi-Country Project Proposals from all other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa: Countries under category 2 are not eligible for multi-country project proposals.
Type: Grants

Eligibility:

  • Women-led and women’s rights organizations that have specialized knowledge, expertise and track record of working on women’s human rights and prevention and/or elimination of violence against women and girls. Applications from women’s rights, women-led, and small women’s organizations will be prioritized, in recognition of them being the driving force of the ending violence against women agenda, as well as being at the forefront of reaching women and girls’ survivors at the grassroots level. Women’s funds are also encouraged to apply to expand the reach of the funding to a broader cross-section of civil society.
  • Legal and Operational Status The applicant or one of its implementing partners must be legally registered in the country of project implementation. If the applicant is not registered in the country of project implementation, a locally registered implementing partner must be identified when submitting the application for the call for proposals. Women’s funds are eligible to apply if they submit an application in partnership with one implementing partner registered in the country of project implementation. In the case of multi-country projects, one of the implementing partners will be required to be registered in one of the countries of implementation.
Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award:
  • 3-year grants of US$ 50,000 to US$ 150,000 for small civil society organizations
  • 3-year grants of US$ 150,001 to US$ 1 million for all other civil society organizations
How to Apply: Click here to apply
  • It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.
Visit Award Webpage for Details

African Investigative Journalism Conference Fellowships 2019 for African Journalism Students (Fully-funded to AIJC in Johannesburg, South Africa)

Application Deadline: 8th August 2019

Eligible Countries: Countries in Africa

To be taken at (country): Johannesburg, South Africa

About the Award: The African Investigative Journalism Conference (#AIJC19) is the premier annual gathering of African investigative journalists – a three-day international conference for and about investigative journalism. It involves skills training, networking, promoting, collaboration and in-depth accounts of major investigative stories. It is hosted by the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
This year’s conference will feature more than 50 speakers in workshops, panel discussions and networking sessions, as well as skills training in areas such as advanced data analysis and security. Key speakers include award-winning journalists from across the world, and Africa’s best. This is a chance to hear and meet those leading the field and enhance your skills with the latest tools and tips.
With the support of our sponsors, GIJN and Wits Journalism are offering fellowships to both established and young promising journalists in developing and transitioning countries to participate in this prestigious event. Competition is keen so you need to convince us that you’ll make great use of the training GIJC17 offers. 

Type: Fellowship, Conferences

Eligibility: 
  • Open to full-time print, online, television, video, and multimedia journalists from SADC Countries.
  • Only students currently in their final year of an undergraduate journalism degree, honours or master’s degree in journalism are eligible to apply for a bursary to attend the conference.
Number of Awardees: 10

Value of Fellowship: 
  • In 2019, AJIC19 have 10 fully-funded places for journalism students from the SADC region (Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, eSwatini, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe).
  • The bursary covers your travel costs to the conference and return; your hotel accommodation in Johannesburg, meals, conference fees and ground transport to and from the conference.
How to Apply: Click here for the application form. Visit www.journalism.co.za/aijc19 for more information about the conference.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

OWSD Elsevier Foundation Awards 2020 for Early-Career Women Scientists in Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 29th August 2019

Eligible Countries: 
  • Africa: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Dem. Rep. Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
  • Arab Region: Djibouti, Palestine (West Bank & Gaza Strip), Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Yemen.
  • Asia and the Pacific: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Kiribati, Lao People’s Dem. Rep., Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.
  • Latin America and the Caribbean: Bolivia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay.
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.
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.

Type: Award, Research

Eligibility: The applicant must be a female scientist who has received her PhD within the previous ten years. The eligible subject fields for the 2020 awards include:
  • Civil engineering
  • Electrical engineering, electronic engineering
  • Telecommunications/information engineering / Software engineering
  • Computer science
  • Mechanical engineering
  • Chemical engineering
  • Materials engineering
  • Medical engineering
  • Environmental engineering
  • Environmental biotechnology
  • Industrial biotechnology
  • Nano technology
In addition, the applicant must have lived and worked in one of the following science and technology lagging countries above for at least 5 of the last 15 years:
Please note that an applicant, at the time of application, must NOT have an active research grant or fellowship with The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS) or have already submitted an application for a TWAS programme within the same given year. Only one application per year is possible across all TWAS and OWSD programmes. Applicants will not be eligible to visit another institution in that year under the TWAS Visiting Professor programmes. An exception is made only for the head of an institution who invites an external scholar to share his/her expertise under the TWAS Visiting Professor programmes; she may still apply for another programme.

Selection Criteria: Applications will be judged in terms of:
  • Scientific merit (eg. quality of publications)
  • International and regional impact (eg. invitations to present or chair at meetings; organization or participation on workshops; collaborations with scientists from other countries; national or regional awards received)
  • Capacity building – local, national and regional (eg. evidence of running MSc or PhD training programmes; developing and providing resources for students and young researchers; mentoring activities).
Evidence of innovation will be considered favourably.

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:
  • Cash prize of USD 5,000.
  • All-expenses-paid trip to attend the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting, which will take place on 13-16 February 2020 in Seattle.
The 5 awards will be distributed as follows: one for each of the four regions of the developing world, plus an additional ¨floating” award for an outstanding candidate from any of these regions.

Duration of Award: Not stated

How to Apply: Applications are invited from women scientists from the eligible developing countries and they must be made online.
Applications must include:
  • Candidate’s curriculum vitae
  • Full list of publications
  • At least one (preferably two) reference letter(s)
  • Endorsement statement from a senior academic scientist (e.g. OWSD members, TWAS Fellows, visiting scientists and staff of The International Centre for Theoretical Physics – ICTP, national science academies, national research councils and heads of departments/universities, both in developing and developed countries).
Please note that the endorser cannot also be a referee.


Visit Awards Webpage for details

The Inhumane Treatment of Migrants Is Not New

CP Editor


Too Many Africans?

Stephen Corry


“What are all these famines in Ethiopia? What are they about? They’re about too many people for too little land. That’s what it’s about.”
– Sir David Attenborough
The cry that the world is overpopulated is more than two hundred years old, from a period when perhaps a billion people stood on the planet. There are now nearly eight times as many and it’s become normal to blame them – us – for the ills which beset “nature.” There are just too many of us, and we’re using up too many of the world’s resources. But how true is this really? And, what should be done about it?
A series of very different numbers are needed to point to a sensible answer. The first obviously is the number of people alive in any specific region at any time. This number is, equally obviously, changing every minute as babies are born and older people die, so the second important factor is the rate at which the overall population number is growing. That’s the basis for all forecasts. Sticking with these two numbers for the moment, there’s already a surprise: The world’s population is indeed increasing, but the rate of population growth has actually been falling since the 1970s. Not only that, but the fertility rate has been decreasing too. In the Global North, the richer countries (let’s call them the “North” as shorthand), it’s now below “replacement level,” as it is in nearly half the world’s countries. If that half were cut off from the rest of the world, the population there would be shrinking. This would bring problems for them fairly quickly because there wouldn’t be enough working people to look after those not able to look after themselves, but leave that aside.
That’s not actually happening because the North’s overall population isn’t getting smaller, it’s growing, albeit slowly (at a rate of 0.7% in North America and 0.2% in the EU). That’s because people are coming in from the Global South (the “South”), the poorer countries. So, it turns out that the North – by itself – doesn’t have any more of an overpopulation problem than it has done for the last couple of generations. But rates of population growth in the South are higher than in the North and above replacement levels. Overall population numbers there are growing, so if there really is an overpopulation problem, we have to look for it in the South, which is what most environmentalists mean when they blame “overpopulation.”
Let’s bring in another factor, population density, which is the number of people per square kilometre. Taking just sub-Saharan Africa (Africa is the region with the highest fertility, so is the key example), the rate of population growth is high (2.7%) but the population density is actually very low. In fact, in every one hundred km sided square, there are half a million people in Africa compared to well over four million in England. So, Africa does not have anything like the overpopulation problem that England has. Obviously, if its population continues to grow at the same rate as now, there would be overpopulation at some time in the future, and equally obviously to those who have experienced it, the overcrowding in big African cities is shocking.
Why is the rate of population increase very low in the North but high in the South? There are many probable factors, but one thing appears to be generally true: The rate drops when standards of living rise. Individuals have children for many reasons of course but some basic principles seem to apply, people with high living standards generally feel more secure and so less reliant on a large family to care for them in infirmity or old age and they think it less likely that their children will die in infancy. Whatever the reasons – and incidentally any idea that African women don’t already know how to limit fertility is pretty silly and racist – well-off people have fewer children on average than poor ones. So while it’s true that the sub-Saharan African population is increasing quickly, it’s into an area of the world which is much less populated than the Global North.
Let’s introduce a further factor, how much people consume. This is crucial because population only becomes a problem if it’s higher than a territory can provide for without wrecking its environment. “Consumption” obviously includes far more than just what people eat, and perhaps the most important thing is how much energy is needed to produce their food, housing, transport and everything else they consume. This isn’t straightforward. To take a simple example, someone might drive an ancient and inefficient car which uses lots of polluting fuel but if they keep it for decades and never travel very far, they might use less energy, and produce less pollution, than an electric car which is frequently traded in for a newer model. The same energy goes on making a new car as running an old one for several years, and the energy needed to propel both is very broadly the same, whether the fuel comes from an onboard tank or is drawn from a power station. Of course, there are thousands of variables, but the basic point is that the more people consume, the more impact they have on the environment. There isn’t a good way to measure this, but to get some inkling we can turn to the common measure for wealth, Gross Domestic Product (GDP). To put it simply, people from countries with a high GDP are likely, as a broad assumption, to consume comparatively more than those with a low GDP.
Applying this to our example of sub-Saharan Africa, we find that the average American’s GDP is about forty times higher than that of an average African. So, Africa’s population is indeed growing quickly, that’s true, but it’s thinly populated and its consumption per head is extremely low. Whatever their aspirations, many people there never get on a plane or travel by private car, they don’t get a new washing machine or TV every couple of years, they don’t use much electricity or fossil fuel, and they tend not to throw away vast amounts of food daily.
The conclusion must be that if overpopulation is a problem because it strains the world’s resources, then the first and most efficient way to address it is not in Africa at all, it’s to reduce consumption in the North, which currently uses far more than its share of resources. Secondarily, if rates of population growth continue to fall when standards of living go up, then the easiest way of addressing that – inside Africa – would likely be to stop the massive resource outflow from the continent, and ensure more of its vast natural wealth remains with and starts fairly benefiting its natural owners.
In other words, to address “overpopulation,” the richer countries must do two things – consume less and stop stealing Africa’s resources. Both imply less for the Global North, and of course that’s the real problem with my simplified explanation. It suggests that a solution to overpopulation and the overuse of scarce resources is nothing to do with reducing the number of Africans, but simply for there to be a more level playing field between them and those of us in the North who take and consume their wealth. But as the environmental movement and its anxiety about overpopulation comes mainly from the same place, the richer countries, it’s always going to be easier and more satisfying to pin the blame on too many poor Africans and to keep a blind eye on the main culprit – in the mirror. The fact that the one blamed is mainly Black, and the one blaming is mainly white should not escape attention!
And the famines in Ethiopia referred to by Attenborough? They have actually been going on for centuries, from when the country had far fewer people. The well-publicised ones in the 1980s – which gave us the catchy and inane, “Do they know it’s Christmas?” – were largely created by abusive government policies, land and resource theft, and war. In 1984, the BBC movingly described the famine as “biblical,” which might have alerted Attenborough and others to something of the history.
Can we stop blaming overpopulation on too many Africans?

Russia and the Manipulation of the Past

Monika Zgustova


“Several trucks brought the prisoners to the wood in which they themselves had earlier dug deep pits. The prisoners were then tossed onto the ground, face down. Then they were shot.”
This massacre took place in 1937 and formed part of the Great Purge which Stalin had initiated and in the course of which at least 700,000 political prisoners were executed. Mikhail Matveyev, a member of the NKVD, the Soviet secret services and the author of the above-cited declaration, had developed a system for mass executions: the prisoners were stripped in their cells, tied up in another cell, and then they were beaten with logs until they lost consciousness. Then they were finally taken to their place of execution.
It wasn’t until 1997 that the historian Yury Dmitriyev and his team at Memorial, a well-respected NGO, found the mass graves which Matveyev had ordered to be dug. The graves, which were in the area around Sandarmokh, in Karelia, contained the remains of 9,000 corpses. In the ‘Nineties, when the pro-democracy leader Boris Yeltsin was in power, this find was held to be significant. But this is no longer the case in the era of Putin, who declared just two years ago: “An excessive demonization of Stalin is one of many ways to attack Russia.”
Not long after Yury Dmitriyev had made another valuable find in 2016 – a list with over 40,000 names of Stalin-era secret service agents – the historian was accused of using child pornography. The material offered as proof were some photos of his adopted daughter, Natalia, who was then eight years old, nude pictures of whom were found on Dmitriyev’s computer by secret police agents. At the time, Sergei Krivenko, president of the Human Rights Council of Memorial, explained to the Moscow Times: “These accusations are baseless and we all know it. The secret services invented this story to cast aspersions on Dmitriev, whose work honors the victims of Stalin’s terror.” Yury Dmitriyev clarified that Natalia was a sickly child and that he had photographed her so as to keep track of her physical development.
Since then, Yury Dmitriyev has spent long periods of time in jail; other accusations were added to the original one, which alone cost him a year in prison. While he was driving to the funeral of a friend, several months ago, he was stopped by the police and accused of trying to flee to Finland. Dmitriyev was sent to jail yet again. On top of which, he was subjected to various psychological examinations against his will.
Meanwhile, the court case made Dmitriyev famous throughout Russia and well-known people from the cultural world (including Andrey Zvyagintsev, director of the film Leviathan) signed petitions demanding that the authorities cease persecuting the historian. The poet and playwright Alexandr Gelman said: “This trial has helped us to get to know a remarkable man. Only barbarians get to know such worthwhile people in this fashion, but that’s Russia for you. In this sense, the trial has been worth it.”
What can be concluded from all this is that in Putin’s Russia Soviet methods are being used, gleaned from decades of Stalinism. In the current climate, Stalin himself emerges from the past as a hero. In surveys in which Russians are asked about who they consider to be great personages, Stalin usually takes first place. Many Russians in the Putin era have forgotten about the Gulag, a subject which is frowned upon these days. Putin wants his citizens to have a favourable view of their past.
In a conversation with Masha Gessen, I asked this journalist of Russian extraction, who currently works for The New Yorkermagazine, what impressions she had after a recent visit to Russia, where she researched the Gulags and those elderly ex-prisoners who’d survived them. “Twenty years ago,” Gessen told me, “in many places in Siberia where there had once been Gulags, monuments were erected in honor of those who had lost their lives in the Stalin era, and there were projects to found museums dedicated to the Gulag. All that’s gone now.” The journalist visited the places she’d seen 20 years ago and where she’d met many people who really wanted to remember, to keep historical remembrance alive, to build more museums and monuments dedicated to the Gulag. Back then her guide was Inna Gribanova, a geologist dedicated to historical remembrance, specializing in the Siberian camps of Kolyma. But over the last few years Inna has become a different person, Gessen told me: not only did she not do anything to found the museums that the Gulag deserves, but she now claims that the witnesses to the Gulag were exaggerating the horrors they lived through. “And on top of everything,” Gessen added, “Gribanova has become a Putin voter.” Seeing my incredulity, Masha Gessen explained: “She got tired of being socially marginalized.”
Gessen is right. During my trips to Russia I could see how the museums dedicated to the Stalinist repression and to the Gulag weren’t exactly impressive. Lack of funding is not the only reason for this negligence; there is a noticeable lack of enthusiasm amongst the people who are working in these places, as if they know that their efforts are in vain. “Russia doesn’t want to remember; it’s trying to cover up its past with grandiloquence,” Masha Gessen said, confirming my impressions.
Russia today: repression, disinformation, falsification of history. This is happening in several spheres, including that of literature. One example of this is Zakhar Prilepin, a 42-year-old writer, a former solider in Chechnya, a militant in the Russian National Bolshevik Party and one of the best known names in contemporary Russian literature. His penultimate novel, The Abode, is about the 1920s in Russia’s first, and cruelest, Gulag, the one on the Solovetsky islands. The novel’s main character is a Dostoevskian parricide who killed his father to protect his mother; the political prisoners who beleaguer this common prisoner are depicted as subtly Machiavellian, completely unscrupulous people who deliberately spread slander and sow discord. In the context of a Russia whose historical memory is being eaten away by various attempts to throw doubt on the nature of Stalin’s crimes, the novel contributes to this tendency by questioning the ethical nature of the political prisoners and by relativising their suffering.
On the Solovetsky islands, and in many other Gulags, instead of building a museum for these forced labour camps, the authorities have decided to restore the old monasteries and dedicate them to the life and art of the monks who lived there before the advent of the Gulags: all this helps to highlight the glorious Russian past and to obliterate the memory of Soviet crimes.
According to the expression of one of Russia’s best known activists, Irina Fliege from Saint Petersburg, in Russia “the past continues to exist in the present and so still hasn’t become the past”. If the past invades the present, society can never regard it as being over and is therefore unable to examine it with all its details, including the most painful ones. The manipulation of the past due to current political interests is a feature peculiar to authoritarian regimes.

If You Provoke The Entire World, Something May Happen

Andre Vltchek

The United States believes that it is so invincible, exceptional and so frightening that no one would ever dare to protest, let alone defend its people against constant humiliation, economic embargos and military threats.
It used to be like this for quite some time. In the past, the West used to bully the world before and after each well-planned assault.Also, well-crafted propaganda used to be applied.
It was declared that things are done ‘legally’ and rationally. There were certain stages to colonialist and imperialist attacks: “define your goals”, “identify your victim”, “plan”, “brainwash your own citizens and people all over the world”, and then, only then, “bomb some unfortunate country back to the stone ages”.
Now, things are slightly different. “The leader of the free world” wakes up in the middle of the night, and he tweets. What comes from his computer, tablet or phone, (or whatever he uses), is spontaneous, unpolished and incredibly dangerous. Similar in substance to what made him wake up in the middle of the night, in a first place.
He does not seem to plan; he shoots off from the hip. Today, as I am writing this essay, he has declared that he has “five strategies for Venezuela”. Go figure. Bravo!
Earlier, as he was about to land outside London, he embarked on insulting the Mayor of the British capital, calling him names. A bit like we used to do to each other, when we were five years old, inthe neighborhood playground.
He has been regularly offending Mexico, and of course Iran, China and Russia.
He basically tells the leader of the most populous nation on earth – China – to “be there”, at the G20 Summit, or else.
Whenever he and his lieutenants are in the mood, they get busy antagonizing everyone: Cuba and Nicaragua, DPRK and Venezuela, Bolivia and Syria.
Of course, the main “culprits” are always the ‘biggest bad boys’, Russia and China.
Anyone, at any time, could easily land on the proverbial hit list of President Trump, and hawks of his United States of A. It could be India (which, during ‘good submissive times’ is called by the West the “biggest democracy”, or perhaps Turkey (militarily the second mightiest NATO country).  The world had been converted into an entity which appears to be run by a bloodthirsty and unpredictable dictatorship. The world is an entity where everyone is terrified of being purged, imprisoned, starved to death, or directly attacked, even liquidated.
It was always like this, at least in the modern history of the planet. Colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism: they have many different faces but one common root. Root that has been often hidden deep under the surface.
But this time it is all in the open, raw and brutally honest.
*
Both George W. Bush and Donald Trump have one thing in common: they are honest.
Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama were both ‘suave’ presidents. They were loved in Europe, as they knew how to speak politely, how to dine elegantly, and how to commit mass murder in a ‘rational, righteous way’; ‘old-fashioned, European-style’.
The brutal, vulgar ways of W. Bush and Donald Trump,have been consistently shocking all those individuals who are pleased when things are done ‘stylishly’ and ‘politically correctly’; be it a coup or the starvation to death of millions through embargos. Or be it invasions or ‘smart’ bombing (practically, ‘smart’ meaning very far from the inquisitive eyes).
But it is not only the ‘offended sensibilities’ of predominantly European population, that matter.
The danger is that someone might take Donald Trump seriously, and respond accordingly.
In the past, verbal insults similar to those unleashed now by the US President, could easily have led to a war, or at least to the breaking up of diplomatic relationships.
And now?
In case Westerners have not realized it, yet – people all over the world are indignant. I talk to Libyans, Afghans, Iraqis, Venezuelans, Cubans, Iranians: they hate what comes from Washington; hate it with passion. They know that what is being done to them is terrorism, thuggery. But for now, they do not know how to defend themselves. Not yet, but they are thinking.
The entire world now resembles a brutal ghetto, or a slum, where a heavily armed gang controls the streets, and in fact every corner and alley.
At least in the past, subjugated people were able to hide behind decorative words and ideological pirouettes. They were able to ‘save their face’. They were sodomized in the name of ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. Now,a horrible reality is flying directly into all directions: “You will do as you are told!” “It is us who will decide.” “Obey, because we said so”. Entire proud nations are being reduced into states of slaves or even worse –lap dogs.
*
As everyone is well aware of, even lackeys and slaves often hold grudges. And abused dogs can bite.
Throughout history, slaves rebelled. True heroes came from rebellious and enslaved nations.
This, what we have now on our planet, is not good, not a healthy situation.
The more countries that are being intimidated, the higher the chances are that somewhere, soon, things will let go; collapse.
Only terrible fear, so far,assures that if a Syrian or a Libyan or an Afghan city is leveled to the ground, there is no real retaliation: urban areas in the USA stay intact.
Only incredible patience of the Russian or Chinese leaders guarantees that, so far, even as their economies are being battered by ridiculous sanctions, the two powerful nations do not retaliate and ruin the US financial system (which is only a paper tiger).
Trump dares. He tortures and humiliates more than half of the world, then looks straight ahead and laughs: “So what are you going to do now?”
So far, the world is doing nothing.
Even the proud and mighty Iran is not ‘crossing the line’.As millions of its people are suffering because of insane sanctions, the Iranian navy is not yet engaging the US battleships that are sailing very near its shores.
Even as more and more US bases are being built right next to both Russia and China’s borders, so far there are no substantial military bases being erected by Moscow or Beijing in places such as Nicaragua, Cuba or Venezuela.
*
All this may change, soon.
And the so much dreaded (by Washington) “domino effect” may actually take place.
Non-Western leaders have also their ‘bad days’ and terrible nights. They also wake up in the middle of the night, and think, want to communicate and to act.
Imagine an Iranian leader, waking up at 2AM, and suddenly feeling overwhelmed by wrath, because Iranian men, women and children are suffering, for no reason, as a result of the perverse sadism being regurgitated by the West. What if he Tweets an insult, too? What if he just orders, on a spur of the moment, to have all those obsolete US aircraft carriers and destroyers that are floating in the vicinity, be sunk? Iran can do it: everyone knows that it can! Technically, militarily, it is easy: those ships are just sitting ducks.
Then what? Will Washington nuke Iran?
Someone may say: The West is killing millions every year, anyway. Better to fight it, in order to stop it, once and for all. Others may join. And then, then what? Will Trump give orders to kill tens of millions, just to maintain control over the world?
What if the US navy vessels bump into a Russian or a Chinese ship, as they almost did in the South China Sea, recently? What if a Russian or Chinese ship sinks, dozens of sailors die. And there is a retaliation? Then what?
What if Syria has enough and begins shooting down Israeli military jets that are bombing it, and attacking North American and European ‘special forces’ that are still located, illegally, on its territory?
The US is engaged all over the world. France and the UK, too. And if you talk to the people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, you very soon realize what the real feelings towards Washington are!
If you provoke the entire world, something very terrible may happen!
Now, there is an entire coalition of powerful nations, ready to defend themselves, and also defend each other. Militarily, economically, and ideologically.
The world is not a slave of the West, or the United States. It is not a latrine.
This is the new world. Considering the horrors that were spread by the West, for many long years and centuries, Asia, Africa, “Latin America”, the Middle East and Oceania, are unbelievably patient and forgiving. But the USA and Europe should not take this tolerance for granted. They should not provoke its former and present victims.
Now, we (the people from the previously ruined part of the world) are beginning to speak up: about what is being done to us – to China and Russia, to South America and Africa, and the Middle East. With awareness comes courage. With courage comes pride.
Do not misinterpret our kindness. It is not a weakness. Not anymore. Think twice before you speak (or Tweet). Think a thousand times, before you act!

Billionaires, Vanity And Modern Democracy

Arshad M Khan

The bullying in Washington is the current trend.  On Monday, the British ambassador resigned his post after Trump refused to deal with him.  Well-liked in Washington and the halls of Congress, his downfall was an honest assessment of the Trump administration as ‘inept’ and ‘dysfunctional’.  The letters were leaked in the U.K.
Suppose the president tweets comments contrary to current established policy, does that mean a policy change?  Do departments adapt promptly.  Nobody knows.  That’s dysfunctional, and everyone knows it.  In the meantime, he has enjoyed 17 golf outings since February averaging three a month.  No wonder he is that rare president who does not seem to age in office from the stresses of the job.  Obama’s hair turned gray.
But then a lighter hand on the tiller has kept us out of war, whereas Obama, the Nobel Peace Laureate, destroyed Libya and escalated in Afghanistan.  The consequences are still being felt in Southern Europe particularly, through the hordes of refugees still continuing to arrive.  Also in the resurgence of anti-immigration political parties in northern Europe.
The supreme irony is the fact of refugees being rescued from ramshackle boats and dinghies or often dying in one part of the Mediterranean while the Obamas cruise on a billionaire’s luxury yacht in another.  Is that a metaphor for democracies in the modern world?  One is also reminded of Mr. Modi’s specially woven pinstripe cloth repeating his name endlessly on the stripes in the material.
Fortunately, the current president does not like the sea, or we would never see him in Washington.  As it is he has had 14 visits to golf clubs (not as much time on the course however) since the beginning of June.  He once had a small yacht that lay anchored in New York until he sold it.  His pleasures have generally centered on the more mundane:  cheeseburgers and women — the younger the better, although perhaps not as young as those that have gotten his friend Jeffrey Epstein in trouble again.  To be fair, Trump had a falling out with him ‘about 15 years ago’ he said recently.  ‘I was not a fan of his, I can tell you,’ he added although he called him a ‘terrific guy’ in 2002.
At least one party had 28 girls to a so-called calendar-girl party at Mar-a-Lago (Trump’s estate and club) in Florida, meaning selection of a calendar girl.  The male celebrities attending, according to the man assigned the task of finding the girls, happened to be Trump and Epstein, and no one else!  So surprised, the man still remembers the story.  The falling out between Trump and Epstein was rumored to have been a business deal.
It brings us to the second resignation, that of Alex Acosta the Labor Secretary.  A Harvard-educated lawyer, Mr. Acosta was the US attorney for the Southern District of Florida when he made a generous agreement with Epstein who had been charged with sex crimes.  For a 13-month sentence of mostly community work, usually from his mansion, Mr. Epstein was protected from further prosecution.  In a clear rebuke to Acosta, the case has been re-opened with a new charge of sex-trafficking minors.
As a result, Mr. Acosta has had to bow to the chorus of calls for his resignation.  The real question:  How ever did Trump get elected?  A mainstream press failure?

Euthanasia bill before New Zealand parliament

John Braddock 

A bill that would make assisted-suicide legal in New Zealand passed its second reading in parliament on June 26, and is one step closer to becoming law. The End of Life Choice Bill, sponsored by leader of the far-right ACT party David Seymour, is being treated as a “conscience” vote, with MPs not bound by party policy.
There were 70 votes for the bill, including 32 Labour MPs plus Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, and 50 against. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters’ right-wing NZ First Party backed the bill—but on condition it goes to a referendum. The Greens, part of the coalition government, also voted in favour. The bill, which had more than 39,000 public submissions, now goes to the house for further debate, where major amendments may be proposed, before its final reading.
Currently, euthanasia is illegal in New Zealand and it is also illegal to “aid and abet suicide” and to “incite, procure or counsel” someone else to commit suicide.
In the bill’s current form, people over 18 would be able to request a fatal dose of medication if they have less than six months to live or are suffering from a “grievous and irremediable medical condition.” Seymour has promised to amend the bill in the coming stage to limit euthanasia to people who have “a terminal illness that is likely to end the person's life within six months,” and to state that age, disability or mental illness cannot be reasons to grant consent.
As a basic democratic question, everyone should have the right to decide when to die, and the state should have no power to compel someone to continue in pointless suffering. However, against a background of widespread poverty among the elderly, the increasing erosion and privatisation of healthcare and deepening austerity measures, including talk of slashing aged pensions, there is no doubt many people feel under pressure to take their lives because they lack financial and psychological resources or social support.
In response to the widening social crisis, New Zealand’s overall suicide rate in 2018 was the highest since records began, with 668 deaths. Mainly working-class Maori men continued to be disproportionately represented: 97 died, up 12 percent on 2017. Female suicides increased by 44 compared to the year before. NZ has the highest death rate for young people among developed countries, with 35 deaths per 100,000 for those aged 10–24 years.
The ACT Party leader claims his bill will provide “choice” for people who are sufficiently ill to seek assisted suicide. Seymour declared “it is possible to design a law that gives choice for those who want it and protection for those who want nothing to do with it.” He said the fact that similar legislation was being adopted by many countries, including Canada and the Australian state of Victoria, showed it was becoming “normal.” He claimed most opponents had “religious convictions.”
In fact, the growing prevalence of legislation legalising suicide is testimony to the mounting social crisis in country after country, in which the lack of adequate social services, including health and aged care, for the aged and chronically ill, and their families contribute to feelings that it is pointless to continue living. ACT played no small part in creating this social disaster. Established in 1993 by former Labour Party finance minister Roger Douglas, it sought to extend the 1984–90 Lange government’s pro-business program of flat tax, privatisations, “small” government and sweeping attacks on the working class.
Opposing the legislation, some 1,000 doctors have signed an open letter saying they “want no part in assisted suicide.” The doctors declare that their focus is on saving lives and care for the dying, rather than taking lives, which they deem unethical. The letter states: “We are especially concerned with protecting vulnerable people who can feel they have become a burden to others, and we are committed to supporting those who find their own life situations a heavy burden.” It also upholds the right of patients to decline treatment.
Sinead Donnelly, a palliative medicine specialist, told Radio NZ that in Oregon USA, where assisted suicide is legal, statistics show the most common reasons people have for requesting such a procedure are “feeling a burden,” “fear of institutionalisation” and loneliness—that is, “societal issues,” not medical ones. The NZ legislation, she argued, will increase such pressures.
The public health system is in deep crisis. In 2018 New Zealand was among the worst of a dozen similar countries for waiting times for elective surgery, specialist appointments, and treatment after diagnosis. It ranked third-to-last on measures of health equity, and last for access to diagnostic tests. The Cancer Society has described access to treatment for cancer, one of the major killers, as a “postcode lottery” depending on which District Health Board (DHB) area patients live in.
Sections of the media, academics and political establishment are expressing concern about the proportion of the health budget spent on the elderly, particularly as the population ages. According to the Ministry of Health, people over 65 make up 15 percent of the population but use 42 percent of health services.
Over the last decade, DHB spending on older people increased twice as fast as their overall expenses and 5 times as fast as inflation. DHBs spend $NZ983 million on support services for older people, of which 60 percent goes to residential care.
The implicit solution is to slash or “rebalance” the health budget to save billions of dollars. It is no accident that the demand for access to euthanasia, previously politically unpalatable, is brought forward at a time of deepening austerity and attacks on the social rights of working people.
While organisations such as the Voluntary Euthanasia Society and Exit International have conducted high-profile campaigns for a law change, attempts to legislate for euthanasia in 1995 and 2003 failed to get through parliament. Following the 2014 election, Labour MP Maryan Street’s euthanasia bill was dropped and the party’s then-leader Andrew Little declared it was “not an issue Labour should be focused on.”
The treatment of the terminally ill is a serious and difficult social issue, not given to simple solutions. In 1998 the WSWS warned: “There are many reasons to be wary when euthanasia is offered as a solution to the problems of the sick and the elderly. The precedents of this century—the Nazis were the most enthusiastic proponents of this practice—are not hopeful. There is enormous potential for abuse and discrimination, for distortion of the decisions of the terminally ill by economic circumstances and social conditions.”
The warning remains extremely prescient.