UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson prorogues Parliament

Robert Stevens

Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament Monday evening after opposition MPs voted to oppose, for a second time, his attempt to force a general election before the current Brexit deadline of October 31.

Although Johnson won the vote by 293 to 46, a motion to hold a general election requires the support of two thirds of all the more than 600 MPs and the prime minister was far short of that as opposition MPs abstained.

Johnson’s anti-democratic suspension of Parliament was carried out to prevent opposition MPs from taking control of Parliament’s order paper over the next five weeks and derailing his plans to withdraw the UK from the European Union (EU), without a deal if necessary.

The vote to oppose an early election took place after a Bill, put forward by Labour Blairite MP Hilary Benn, and designed to prevent Johnson imposing a no-deal Brexit, received royal assent to become an act of law. It compels Johnson to request from the EU an extension to the Brexit deadline until January 2020 if there is no deal agreed by October 19. The bill was rushed through both Houses of Parliament last week after cross-party MPs deemed it the best way to stymie Johnson’s plans.

Despite being unable to prevent Benn’s Bill passing, the government insists that it will not request an extension from the EU beyond October 31. At a press conference last week at a police training college Johnson stated that he would rather “die in a ditch” than agree an extension. As this would mean the executive were refusing to accept an act of law, speculation mounted over the weekend that this could result in legal action taken against Johnson by MPs.

According to pro-Brexit Tory MP Nigel Evans the government is war-gaming “about 20” different ways it can get around having to seek an extension. One option being considered was for Johnson to write to the EU to formally seek a Brexit extension and then also send another letter stating that the UK does not want an extension. Another was to exploit the sentiments of one of the EU members not in favour of granting the UK an extension. France is reportedly poised to reject an extension with foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, stating at the weekend, “We are not going to do this [extend the Brexit deadline] every three months.”

Other plans being considered were Johnson calling a vote of confidence in his own government, a provision usually reserved for the leader of the main opposition party under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act (FTPA) or for Johnson to resign, with another figure making the request in his place as a temporary prime minister.

Johnson spent part of Monday in Dublin in talks with his Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar. The Irish government, with the backing of the EU, insists that a backstop—the mechanism to avoid a hard border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland post-Brexit—is needed in any withdrawal agreement the UK agrees with Brussels. “No backstop is No Deal,” Varadkar declared, as he stood beside Johnson, adding that the British government had come up with no “realistic” plans to replace the backstop. In response, Johnson was forced to say that a no-deal Brexit “would be a failure of statecraft for which we would all be responsible.”

Johnson, under orders from the Tories’ hard Brexit wing, opposes a backstop being part of a deal. A joint statement released after his meeting with Varadkar could only state diplomatically there was “common ground” but “significant gaps remain.”

Monday also saw the resignation of Parliament’s Speaker, the pro-Remain Tory John Bercow. The Financial Times noted, “During the past year, the Speaker has granted several emergency debates to pro-Remain MPs that have broken with convention to allow backbenchers to take control of the Commons and pass legislation to avoid a no-deal Brexit. This resulted in the Conservative party announcing they would stand a candidate against him [for Speaker] at the next election, which may have played a role in his decision to retire.” It emerged that his local Conservative association, dominated by Brexiteers, planned to deselect him as their MP.

Bercow stated that if MPs voted to oppose an early general election he would remain in place until October 31—the day that the UK is set to leave the EU. Giving a clear indication that he would oppose Johnson’s plans to the last, he said in his time as Speaker, “To deploy a perhaps dangerous phrase, I have also sought to be the backbencher’s backstop.” He would remain in place until the end of October as “that date will fall shortly after the votes on the Queen’s speech expected on 21 and 22 October. The week or so after that may be quite lively and it would be best to have an experienced figure in the chair for that short period.”

Bercow allowed two pro-Remain emergency “humble address” motions to be debated and voted on by MPs last night. The first was from Dominic Grieve, the former Tory attorney-general who was thrown out of the Conservative party last week by Johnson after he backed Benn’s Bill, along with another 20 Tory rebels. MPs voted by 311 to 302 in favour of Grieve’s request that the government publish all the documents related to “Operation Yellowhammer”—the planning documents for a no-deal outcome—and the private communications between Downing Street advisers on the decision to prorogue Parliament. The government said a revised version of Yellowhammer will be released, but is understood to be against publishing the proroguing information.

Strike by thousands of pilots shuts down British Airways

Richard Tyler

British Airways (BA) main base at London’s Heathrow, Terminal 5, was described as a “ghost town,” as some 4,000 BA pilots began a two-day strike on Monday. The strike is the first ever by BA pilots and is the biggest walkout in the company’s history.

Management were forced to cancel nearly all 800 flights on Monday, affecting up to 145,000 passengers. Globally, an estimated 1,700 BA flights will be axed over the two-day strike and around 300,000 passengers affected. Only five BA planes took off, two of which were leased to another operator, and three flown by pilots not belonging to the British Airline Pilots’ Association (BALPA). BALPA represents more than 10,000 pilots, over 85 percent of all commercial pilots flying in the UK.

The main airports hit were Heathrow, where 93 percent of BA’s pilots are based, and Gatwick. Sky News reported that, such was the disruption, “there may be knock-on disruption for people with journeys planned for Wednesday. This is because planes and pilots will likely need extra time to get back into the swing of normal operations.”

On a 90 percent turnout, 93 percent of pilots at BA belonging to BALPA had voted to support the industrial action. Their action is aimed at securing pay and benefits improvements following years in which air crews were forced to accept lower pay—as part of company/trade union deals—to bolster the profits of the national flag-carrier.

The airline is estimated to face a loss of £80 million as a result of the stoppage, far exceeding the cost of settling the dispute, put at £5 million by BALPA. The settlement figure is a drop in the ocean compared to the massive profits BA has generated for its parent company, International Consolidated Airlines Group (IAG), over recent years.

Financial news organisation Bloomberg called BA a good example of how the industry had “broken with its dismal profit trend.” BA’s income had risen steadily over the last five years, from around €1 billion in 2014 to nearly €3 billion in 2018, generating massive profits for its parent company of some £2.6 billion in 2018. With a 16.6 percent return on invested capital, IAG had “felt able to return 1.3 billion euros to shareholders in dividends over the past year,” according to Bloomberg.

BA CEO Alex Cruz, whose own yearly remuneration exceeds £1.3 million, called the pilots’ action “cynical,” claiming the 11.5 percent pay rise being offered, to be staged over three years, meant the “average captain” would be earning more than £200,000 a year.

The frothing right-wing media attacked the strike, with the Daily Mail denouncing the “Greed of holiday-wrecking BA pilots.”

A striking pilot, speaking to the media on condition of anonymity, said “It’s not really about money, it’s about respect. We’ve effectively been lied to. We’ve given up a serious pension scheme, pay and pay rises when the company was weak—all on the promise that when the company was strong and giving up proper returns to its investors, we would benefit.”

He contested the figure cited by Cruz, saying many pilots would struggle to ever reach that pay point. “Many pilots are working flat out, they are not likely to get a decent pension, it’s a much longer pay scale to progress to higher pay.” Pilots on short-haul flights earn considerably less. The starting salary for a cadet pilot is only about £27,000 a year, and that of a first officer £59,000, while pay for captains starts at £78,000, making £100,000 a more typical average wage, he said.

While the pilots are taking justified action in defence of their pay and conditions, their union is doing everything it can to bring the dispute to an end. BALPA General Secretary Brian Strutton has offered talks at the government-sponsored Arbitration and Conciliation Service (ACAS), and has implored management to “get back to the negotiating table.”

Leading up to the strike, Boris Johnson’s crisis-ridden government made attempts to end the dispute. A spokeswoman for the government said, “The unions and BA need to get round the table and sort this out. The public would expect nothing less.”

Trump blocks refugees from Bahamas as humanitarian catastrophe unfolds

Kate Randall

Hurricane Dorian unleashed its wrath on the Bahamas beginning on September 1. More than a week later, the picture emerging in its wake is one of unfathomable destruction. The official Bahamian death toll stood at 44 as of Monday, but government officials have warned that this number will rise dramatically. Eyewitnesses suspect the number will climb to the hundreds or even thousands.

As always with such disasters, the natural component—one of the largest hurricanes on record, fueled by global warming—intersected with social inequality and political indifference on the part of the ruling elites.

Speaking outside the White House Monday, President Trump bared his contempt for the Bahamian people seeking refuge in the US, which differs little from his attitude towards Central American refugees and immigrants from Mexico

“I don’t want to allow people that weren’t supposed to be in the Bahamas to go to the United States,” he said, “including some very bad people and some very bad gang members and some very, very bad drug dealers. So, we are going to be very, very strong on that.”

Such is the response of the American ruling class to the disaster only 50 miles off the coast of Florida.

Trump's rant follows an incident late Sunday involving a commercial ferry set to travel from hurricane-ravaged Freeport to Fort Lauderdale. A voice over the intercom announced, “All passengers who don’t have US visas please proceed to disembark.” More than a hundred passengers, including children, left the ferry confused and frustrated. In many cases, they had been waiting almost a week to evacuate and had been told they did not need a visa.

US Customs and Border Patrol insisted it was the ferry operator, and not some US government agency, that had ordered the passengers to disembark. Whatever the source of confusion, the incident is emblematic of the indifference which Dorian survivors face.

Seventy thousand people are homeless of the archipelago nation’s 390,000 residents. The Grand Bahama and Abaco islands were the worst hit by the Category 5 storm with 220 mile per hour winds and a 30-foot storm surge that wracked the islands for at least two days.

Search and rescue teams with cadaver dogs are attempting to rummage through rubble on the Abacos, putting whatever human remains they find into body bags and coolers. In Marsh Harbour, the Abacos’ biggest town and one of the hardest hit, morticians at a makeshift mortuary told CNN the difficulty reaching bodies was slowing their work.

The shantytowns of Marsh Harbour were some of the worst hit in the Abacos. Many Bahamians fear that the highest numbers of dead will be found there. The Bahamas boasts some of the most stringent building codes in the Caribbean. These communities, however, are mostly inhabited by Haitian immigrants, many of them undocumented, who have constructed their homes by hand with plywood and two-by-fours.

Doctors are warning that a health crisis could erupt, especially on Abaco, where toxic waters sit atop one of the Marsh Harbour neighborhoods. Poorly built homes used outhouses for toilets and have now been ravaged along with the rest of the community.

Reporters have been shown bodies pinned under debris, rotting in the open, or lying swollen in pools of water. But for many, their loved ones are still missing and unaccounted for. McAdrian Farrington of Murphy Town, west of Marsh Harbour, appeared on television broadcasts last week telling of how his five-year-old son was taken away by the floodwaters after he had placed him on the roof of his home in hopes of keeping him safe. His son still has not been found.

Thousands of people continue to pour into the capital, Nassau, where storm shelters are straining to house evacuees from the worst-hit areas. A woman who had evacuated to Nassau told CNN, “There are dead animals and gasoline in the water.” She said, “The clinic was so bad the toilet bowls were overflowing. The sewers are coming up … bodies are in the harbor.”

Over the weekend, nearly 1,500 evacuees arrived in Palm Beach, Florida, where they were vetted by immigration authorities. For those evacuated to Nassau who have no money and no passports or other documentation, there is no possibility at this point of evacuating to the US.

Bahamian Prime Minister Hubert Minnis told a press conference last week, “We are in the midst of one of the greatest national crises in our country’s history.” He said, “No effort or resources will be held back.” But the people are becoming increasingly frustrated at the slow pace of recovery and evacuation operations.

As in all such tragedies, it is the poorest and most vulnerable in society who stand to lose and suffer the most. As of 2017 in the Bahamas, nearly 15 percent of the population lived below the poverty line, growing by 2 percent since 2014. Haitian nationals have the highest poverty rate, at more than 37 percent.

Bahamian households living below the $5,000 poverty line increased by 83 percent between 2007 and 2011 due to the recession. Children under 14 suffer the highest poverty rates, as do households with seven or more members.

The Bahamas has no income tax, corporate tax, capital gains tax, or wealth tax, making the nation ideal for business and exploitation. A 1955 agreement established a duty-free zone in Freeport, with a nearby industrial park to encourage foreign industrial investment. Legislation in 1993 extended most Freeport tax and duty exemptions through 2054.

After tourism, financial services constitute the second most important sector of the Bahamian economy, due to the country’s status as an offshore financial haven. Hundreds of banks and trust companies have been licensed there.

While bankers and investors plunder the economy, a socially regressive Value Added Tax (VAT) of 7.5 percent was levied in 2015 and increased to 12 percent effective in July 2018, targeting workers and the poor, including those now most impacted by Dorian.

Natural disasters of the past decade point to a pattern of purposeful neglect of the US government in particular in response to such tragedies:

August 29, 2005: Hurricane Katrina made landfall in New Orleans, Louisiana, as a Category 3 hurricane, killing thousands and displacing many thousands more.

January 12, 2010: A magnitude 7 earthquake hit Haiti, affecting an estimated 3 million people and killing untold hundreds of thousands.

September 20, 2017: Hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico as a Category 4 hurricane. Although it claimed more than 3,000 lives, the Trump administration has continually refused to accept this death count.

To this day, countless thousands of people in Haiti and Puerto Rico are still living under tarps in squalid conditions, and there is no reason to believe this will not be the case in the Bahamas in 10 years’ time. While climate scientists concur that there is no question global warming has created the conditions for ever-more powerful weather events, nothing is done to prepare for them.

This is above all due to the subordination of all aspects of social life—from the well-being of the population, to the protection of the health of the planet, to the dispatch of humanitarian aid in the face of natural disasters—to the capitalist profit system.

“Horrendous” increase in New Zealand suicide rates

John Braddock

New Zealand suicide deaths have reached their highest level since official records began 12 years ago. The annual statistics, released on August 26, showed there were 685 suicides in the year to June 30.

It was the fourth year in a row the numbers have increased. Since 2014-15, when there were 564 suicides (then an all-time high) the total has risen by a staggering 21.45 percent. The suicide rate now stands at 13.93 per 100,000 people. Rates of suicide among youth, Maori and Pacific Island people have risen dramatically.

Among 15- to 19-year-olds, 73 died, up from 53 last year. The rate for this age group was 23.14 per 100,000, up from 16.88—a 37 percent increase. In the 20–24 age range, suicides increased from 76 to 91. That put the rate at 26.87 per 100,000, up from 21.21, a 27 percent increase and the highest rate of all age groups. The next highest was the 45–49 year-old group, with 67 deaths. Suicide rates for men are more than twice as high as for women.

“This is a really horrendous result,” Sean Robinson of the Mental Health Foundation said. Monique Faleafa, from the Pasifika support service Le Va, described the increase as “devastating.” Psychotherapist Kyle MacDonald said New Zealand was in the grip of a “mental health crisis.”

The ballooning suicide rate is an international phenomenon. Suicides had been declining in the UK, Europe, US and Canada before the 2008 financial crisis, then numbers rose dramatically. In a 2014 paper published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, Oxford University researchers compared data from before and after 2007 and found more than 10,000 “economic suicides” associated with the recession across those regions. US suicides are currently at their highest since World War II, with the opioid epidemic, social stress and lack of security among contributing factors.

In New Zealand, as elsewhere, the social layers worst affected are the most oppressed sections of the working class. Of the country’s 20 District Health Board catchment areas, Auckland, the city with the highest concentration of working class people, had the biggest increase of suicides with 73, a 70 percent rise from last year.

Maori suicides nationally—already disproportionately high—jumped further, with 169 Maori people dying in the year, up 27 from 142 last year. Pacific Islander suicides also rose, from 23 to 34 deaths. The rate among Pacific Islanders is lower than the national average but jumped markedly in the past year.

The Maori suicide rate now stands at 28.23 per 100,000 people, while the Pacific Island rate is at 11.49 per 100,000. Maori and Pacific peoples are over-represented in all the social statistics related to poverty, illness, homelessness, poor education and imprisonment rates.

According to figures cited by the Dominion Post, of the 6,889 people who committed suicide between 2007 and 2019, 1,884 were unemployed. That is more than a quarter of the total. Another 625 were students.

The suicide statistics are a damning indictment of the failure of the Labour-NZ First-Green Party government to address the spiraling social crisis. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said there was “no question” the suicide rate was too high. But she told a press conference the issue was “long-term,” and not just a “challenge” for the government. “We are moving quickly, but it is going to take time to create the kind of change we need as a nation,” she said.

In fact, Labour has done nothing to address the underlying causes of social distress—poverty, rampant inequality, lack of social services and the housing crisis. Last week Ardern announced that the government was abandoning its flagship KiwiBuild housing scheme, portending another hike in the price of rents and housing, a major factor in mental health and suicide rates.

Mental health groups called for urgent action over the suicide crisis. Kyle MacDonald said he was “frustrated” with the rate of progress. A program to allow people to see a doctor to get immediate support had been funded in this year’s government budget but was still in the planning phase.

US agency warns of lung illness epidemic among young people, attributed to e-cigarettes

Benjamin Mateus

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a public warning of a rapidly developing epidemic of severe lung illnesses associated with the smoking of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), also known as “vaping.” In just a few weeks, 450 cases have been confirmed spanning 33 states. As of this writing the death toll has increased to five.

The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) issued an urgent preliminary report on September 6, 2019, “Pulmonary Illness Related to E-cigarette Use in Illinois and Wisconsin,” describing their findings on a cluster of 53 cases recently afflicting the two states.

In July, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (WDHS) and the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) received multiple reports from physicians and hospitals of several severe cases of pulmonary sickness not associated with any infectious etiology. All have in common the recent use of e-cigarettes and its associated products. Concern over a growing epidemic prompted a coordinated effort by the two states along with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Many of those affected are otherwise young and healthy without any prior medical conditions. They present with severe “air hunger,” or shortness of breath. They also experience fevers, nausea and vomiting, as well as intense fatigue.

The median age of these patients was 19. They were predominately white males. Almost all required admission to the hospital, with many admitted to the intensive care units. Eighty-seven percent required supplemental oxygen, and one third were intubated and received mechanical ventilation. One patient in this cluster has died. Nearly all the patients received intravenous or oral steroids, with improvement once therapy was initiated. This would suggest an inflammatory mediated immune response has triggered the disease. Universally, chest x-rays or CT scans of these patients showed both lungs were affected.

All these patients had reported a history of having vaped within 90 days before their symptoms started, with most reporting heavy daily e-cigarette use. A significant number used both nicotine and THC or CBD products.

The CDC is warning consumers to stop buying bootleg products and mixing street cannabis with e-cigarette products. They also strongly urge them to stop modifying the devices to vape adulterated substances. Investigators and medical doctors have not elucidated the cause of this epidemic. The vaping process works by heating coils turning liquid containing oils and nicotine or THC, a psychoactive component of cannabis, into an aerosolized vapor. The vapor is inhaled, imitating the smoke from traditional tobacco products.

E-cigs were first introduced on the market in 2004 as a supposedly non-addictive nicotine replacement therapy to help tobacco users quit their habit. Since then, e-cigarettes have rapidly burgeoned in the tobacco markets and are expected to surpass traditional tobacco products in the next decade.

A report issued by the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) drug abuse section highlights the dramatic rise in vaping among teenagers, with 37.3 percent of 12th graders reporting they had vaped in the past 12 months. The prevalence of vaping among teenagers in 2011 was near zero. By 2017 it has become the most common use of any tobacco-like product in this age group.

The vaping of nicotine among seniors in high school has climbed from 11 percent to 21 percent in the years 2017 to 2018. Marijuana vaping has risen from 9.5 percent to 13.1 percent over the same time period. This translates to an estimated additional 1.3 million adolescents who have started vaping.

As Dr. Richard Miech, PhD, wrote in his letter to the NEJM, “Put in historical context, the absolute increases in the prevalence of nicotine vaping among 12th graders and 10th graders are the largest ever recorded by Monitoring the Future in the 44 years that it has continuously tracked dozens of substances.”

The attraction to the technology and flavoring of these electronic cigarettes among teenagers is quite alluring and one not missed on the markets. Teenagers surveyed say that access to these devices and their products is readily available. Interestingly, teenagers who vape are at increased risk of turning to conventional tobacco.

The issues raised by climate change in the wake of Hurricane Dorian

Bryan Dyne

The destruction caused by Hurricane Dorian lends weight to the prediction of climate scientists in the United States and internationally that as global warming continues unabated, hurricanes will increase in severity and intensity.

Hurricane Dorian made landfall in the Bahamas as one of the strongest storms on record, with a storm surge of up to 23 feet and sustained wind speeds of 185 miles per hour. At least $7 billion of damage was caused across the country, at least 43 people have died and potentially thousands more will be uncovered, buried alive in the rubble.

The scale of the disaster in the Bahamas is immense and among the events that have been predicted for several years as part of the broader research studying the impact of climate change. One such recent study is the Fourth National Climate Assessment published last October, which warns that key factors of hurricanes Harvey and Maria were “consistent with what might be expected as the planet warms.”

In particular, the report focused on the rapid increase of wind speeds and the intensity of heavy rain. Hurricane Irma in particular broke records for wind speed and duration for which such intensity was maintained. Harvey and Maria both were distinguished for record levels of rainfall, including single- and multi-day totals that exceeded any known storms across the United States. One study estimated that human-induced climate change caused a rainfall increase of between 19 and 28 percent.

These problems were exacerbated by the slow speeds at which these hurricanes moved over land, which increases the devastation inflicted on a specific area through wind and flooding. While a link between stalled hurricanes and global warming is still a very active area of scientific research, it is known that the speed and trajectory of hurricanes is governed by wind and ocean currents which have been shown to be directly influenced by rising ocean and atmospheric temperatures.

Similar assessments are already being made about Hurricane Dorian. One of its principal features was that it stalled over the Bahamas and moved barely more than one mile per hour for more than a day, essentially drowning parts of the islands in a continuous deluge. It has also set new records for size, rainfall and lifetime. It is only chance that Dorian did not do to a major city in the US or Canada—or to Nassau, a city of nearly 300,000 only 100 miles south—what it did in the northern Bahamas.

Dorian also made landfall as far north as Nova Scotia, an indication that global weather patterns are more broadly shifting warmer air and water toward the poles, another prediction made by those studying the impact of climate change.

Counterintuitively, global warming is not predicted to produce more hurricanes. Such events, even in the most radical climate models, are still governed by natural variability. What is expected, however, is that the hurricanes that are formed will become more intense. The 2017 Atlantic hurricane season witnessed four hurricanes in Category 5, the most powerful classification of storm, a record for the number of such storms in a year. This past February became the first month a super typhoon in the Pacific Ocean exceeded sustained winds of 160 miles per hour. These catastrophic weather events are shifting from anomalies to the new normal.

These storms also belie the claims, such as those recently put forward in Forbes (and other right-wing media outlets) that attempt to downplay the link between hurricanes and climate change by claiming that there is still not enough data to confidently say that every aspect of hurricanes and typhoons is being made worse by hurricanes. The argument is then made that policy decisions should not be made based on assuming that storms like Harvey, Maria and Dorian are more likely in the future.

FBI targets groups opposing Trump’s concentration camps as “Extremists”

Eric London

A leaked Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) intelligence report reveals that the US government is using informants and trawling social media to spy on domestic left-wing protest groups opposed to fascist border militias and the Trump administration’s attack on immigrants.

The document, titled “Anarchist Extremists Very Likely Increasing Targeting of US Government Entities in Arizona, Increasing Risk of Armed Conflict,” produced by the FBI’s Phoenix office, was published on September 4 by Yahoo News.

The report exposes unconstitutional activity that parallels the crimes of the FBI under former Director J. Edgar Hoover. It is a serious warning sign: the military-intelligence apparatus is covertly creating the legal and physical framework for the criminalization of free speech and the suppression of left-wing political activity. As the fascist in the White House establishes concentration camps for immigrants and political opponents, a bipartisan group of politicians and intelligence agents is working to crush dissent.

The report explains that the FBI is targeting “anarchist extremists” (which it refers to as “AEs”) because they “view US immigration policies and procedures for handling illegal immigrants—including arrests, removal, and border barriers—as violations of human rights and supporting government facilities and personnel as symbols of US tyranny.”

US immigration detention facility in Texas [credit: CBP, WikiMedia]

The FBI justifies labeling groups as “extremists” based on the fact that they are “monitoring various US Border Patrol activities, right-wing militia groups, and other groups favoring the border wall, mostly to expose human rights abuses and communicate threats to humanitarian groups operating in the area.”

The use of terminology is legally significant: groups opposing fascists are “extremists” while fascists are merely listed as “right-wing groups.” The FBI is effectively serving as the fascist militias’ protectors.

The report explains that the FBI has gathered information from “human and open source reporting with varying access and reliability, the majority having direct access.” Translated into plain English, the FBI is trawling websites and personal social media pages for “open source” information-gathering while working with “human” informants or infiltrating agents with “direct access” to the targeted groups and individuals.

The report exposes the antidemocratic nomenclature and legal categories employed by the intelligence agencies in their investigations of left-wing opposition.

The FBI reviewed “extremist websites,” including one “AE website” which advocates “disruptive actions” against Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The FBI referenced another “extremist website” on the grounds that it advocates “a trajectory of rebellion.” One individual was targeted for social media surveillance because he was “a self-identified antifascist” who had “expressed support” for “AEs.”

The FBI admits that “the majority of AEs do not further their goals with firearms” and that “AE groups have banned firearms or carrying loaded weapons.” In other words, the groups are targeted despite having explicitly renounced violent behavior.

The FBI report is one small but dangerous part of a broader effort to criminalize left-wing social opposition under the auspices of combating “domestic terrorism.”

In August, President Trump tweeted that “Major consideration is being given to naming ANTIFA an ‘organization of terror.’”

The intelligence agencies and a bipartisan network of politicians and officials have indeed been giving “major consideration” to labeling domestic groups as “terrorists.”

In its 2018 National Strategy for Counterterrorism document, the Trump administration added several sections addressing “domestic terrorism” for the first time.

The document pledged to “investigate and integrate threat information relating to domestic terrorists,” noting “the US has long faced a persistent security threat from domestic terrorists who are not motivated by a radical Islamist ideology.” Further, the administration pledged to “raise awareness of radicalization and recruitment dynamics” and to “promote grassroots efforts to identify and address radicalization to insulate civilian populations from terrorist influence.”

Modi's Outreach to Bhutan: Perception Management and the Neighbourhood First Policy

Ashutosh Nagda & Angshuman Choudhury

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Bhutan in August 2019 as part of the first phase of foreign state visits after assuming office for a second term. The visit came less than three months after Bhutanese Prime Minister Dr Lotay Tshering’s visit to India for Modi’s swearing-in.

The content and language used by the India during this visit reflects New Delhi’s intent to diversify its relationship with Bhutan, and undertake perception management to dismantle its 'big brother-hegemon' image. The visit served well to reinforce the Modi government’s ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy, and was particularly significant with regard to China’s clout in South Asia.

Agenda Diversification

The 2019 visit builds on the 2014 one, which had reinforced India’s hydropower and grant-based outreach to Bhutan. This time, both sides signed ten MoUs, of which seven focused on education, and one each on space cooperation, disaster management, and hydropower engagement.

Modi also formally launched the flagship Indian RuPay cards for use in Bhutan and agreed upon a feasibility study on the Bharat Interface for Money (BHIM) app. India offered, as a “gift”, increased bandwidth to Bhutan on the South Asian Satellite (SAS), which has already boosted the cost-effectiveness of Bhutan Broadcasting Service and enhanced the country's disaster management capability.

Evidently, the basket of issues on which New Delhi engages with Thimphu is being diversified, with greater focus by the former on soft power projection and technological linkages. Interestingly, this is in line with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) 2019 election manifesto, in which it promised to make “knowledge exchange and transfer of technology for the development of all countries” a prime focus of diplomatic relations.

The play on cultural symbolism by Modi, too, was not lost when he addressed Royal University of Bhutan students, and offered prayers at the historic Semtokha Dzong in Thimphu, which houses an India-loaned statue of the Bhutanese state’s founder, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal. India extended the loan period for this statue for another five years, and also added three more scholarship slots for Bhutanese students at Nalanda University.

This renewed diplomatic outreach by India builds on the good faith that both countries began forging after a few hiccups on issues such as India’s hydropower tariff and cross-border electricity transfer rules, which drew Thimphu’s concern. While India initially showed some inflexibility, relations later evened out. Tshering, who called the India-Bhutan relationship “non-negotiable,” being elected as Bhutanese PM in 2018 has further helped mend the rift.

India's Perception Management Policy

The India-Bhutan relationship, although healthy on most counts, is often weighed down by negative perceptions of India as a regional hegemon within Bhutanese media and civil society. This is even more so given the unique relationship that both share as close allies by virtue of a 'friendship treaty'.

The relationship came under serious test during the India-China military standoff at Doklam in 2017. It triggered discussions within Bhutan regarding its 'over-dependence' on India, and the need for Thimphu to balance its regional relationships by forging closer relations with Beijing, with whom it does not have formal diplomatic relations. China has since tried to reach out to Bhutan through increased trade, tourism, and a lucrative 'package deal', which Bhutan later rejected.

India's expansion of cooperation and the language of collaboration used by Modi during this visit must be seen in this context of regional dynamics. By framing India’s developmental aid and cooperation as a function of the “the priorities and wishes of the Government [of Bhutan] and the people of the Kingdom of Bhutan,” New Delhi is attempting to shed its image of a 'big brother', and posture itself as an equal developmental partner that believes in building horizontal, not vertical, partnerships.

This perception management exercise is well-timed to counter China’s charm offensives in Bhutan. It becomes more crucial in light of the growing assertiveness of pro-China lobbies within the Bhutanese elite and media. Notwithstanding Thimphu’s dismissal of Chinese aid after Doklam, negative domestic perceptions about India’s role remain, and may even take centre-stage in the future.

While India’s generous and consistent developmental aid still holds high value in Bhutan, China has much to offer in terms of investments, jobs, market access, and affordable public infrastructure. This, naturally, has not gone unnoticed. In the years to come, aspirational Bhutanese youth could amplify their demand for diversified geoeconomic regional linkages for high-voltage national development, particularly in light of soaring youth unemployment.

It is in this background of unpredictable regional equations that India is fine-tuning its bilateral outreach. With China using similar developmental semantics of “extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits” under its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), India can no longer afford to look like a dominant regional entity that relies on financial largesse without addressing the specific needs of smaller regional allies.

A Sharper ‘Neighbourhood Policy’?

Modi's language of cooperation in this visit mirrors the language used during his June 2019 Maldives visit, where he spoke about India's cooperation being “based on the requirements and priorities of Maldives.” A similar language of need-based development was deployed in Modi’s 2015 visit to Afghanistan.

These reflect an emerging pattern of diplomatic outreach that New Delhi is increasingly relying on to retain influence in the neighbourhood. In many ways, it is reactive to China’s ‘equal partnership’ posture towards small and middle South Asian powers as propagated under BRI. Ultimately, it reflects a timely endeavour that could set a new precedent for South-South cooperation in South Asia, and maintain a regional order as envisaged by India.

Stigler Center Journalists in Residence Program 2020 for Emerging Journalists in Business Reporting (Fully-funded to Chicago, USA)

Application Deadline: 20th October 2019 11:59pm Chicago time

Eligible Countries: International

To Be Taken At (Country): University of Chicago, USA

About the Award: The program will take place over approximately 12 weeks at Hyde Park campus, during which selected participants will audit classes, participate in events, collaborate with peers, and socialize with the university’s greatest scholars. Participants will choose their own classes at Chicago Booth. Examples of classes include The Firm and the Non-Market Environment with professor Marianne Bertrand and Crony Capitalism with professor Luigi Zingales.

Type: Training

Eligibility: Working journalists who have some years of media experience and are proficient in English are encouraged to apply.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• Reimbursement for economy-class airfare to/from Chicago and SEVIS and visa application fees
• A stipend* of $12,000 to cover living expenses over the twelve-week program
• World-class training in business fundamentals at Chicago Booth free of charge
• Participation in seminars and workshops at Chicago Booth and across the university
• An opportunity to write for the ProMarket blog
• Interaction with Booth faculty and students as well as other program participants
• Designated study space
• Certificate of participation upon successful completion of program

Program participants are expected to:

• Audit 3 classes
• Attend and actively participate in classes and complete all required readings and assignments
• Participate in Stigler lectures, lunches, and social events as well as other events recommended by the center
• Sign a letter of agreement with the center to indicate that the program guidelines and expectations are mutually agreed upon

Duration of Programme: 12 weeks

How to Apply: Interested applicants should review the required application materials and submit through our online system.
Applications must include:

• Resume/CV
• Two letters of recommendation
• A copy of three published news articles, preferably in English. If the articles are not in English, a translation should be submitted along with the original articles. Television and radio journalists should submit video/audio files along with a transcription in English.
• An essay of about 500 words describing your interest in the program and what goals you hope to achieve through the program
• Non-native English speakers must submit proof of English proficiency (waived if undergraduate or graduate degree was obtained in an English-speaking country). Examples of proof of English proficiency include:
  • Certificates or standardized test scores (TOEFL, IELTS, SAT, ACT, Cambridge, Duolingo, etc.)
  • English equivalency diploma or certificate awarded by accredited national education institution
  • Work experience in an English-speaking office with letter from manager affirming language skills

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Engineering for Development (E4D) Continuing Education Scholarship 2020/2021 for Students from Developing Countries

Application Deadline: 30th November 2019

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): Switzerland

About the Award: The goal of the programme is to enhance the knowledge and skills of future leaders with the perspective of contributing to capacity development and poverty reduction in their home countries.

Field of Study: All programmes of the ETH Zurich continuing education programme (MAS/CAS/DAS) are eligible for the scholarship. But only some programmes offer a fee reduction.
The following programmes offer a fee reducation:
MAS Nutrition and Health, D-HEST
Nutrition for Disease Prevention and Health (CAS ETH in Nutrition), D-HEST

Type: Short course

Eligibility:

• Candidate must hold a completed and recognised Master’s degree from a university 
• Proof of professional working experience of at least 2 years. 
• Minimal English standard is TOEFL level C1.Candidate must come from a country classified as Low Income or Lower Middle Income Country according to the DAC-list of the OECD.The candidate must have been admitted to an ETH MAS, DAS or CAS programme based on his/her academic and professional qualifications. Applications for the E4D scholarship scheme and the continuing education programme can be submitted in parallel.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The following expenses will be covered by the scholarship:

• Economy roundtrip ticket (max. 2’000 CHF) 
• Visa fees
• Living allowance for the duration of the programme (2’000 CHF per month if the programme is longer than 3 weeks. 800 CHF per week if the programme duration is up to 3 weeks)
• ETH general tuition fee waiver (660 CHF per semester)

The following expenses will NOT be covered by the scholarship:
The programme fees of the MAS/CAS/DAS are not covered by the E4D Continuing Education Scholarship.
The registration fee for applications of 150 CHF cannot be covered, but will be reimbursed to candidates from low income countries in case an application is unsuccessful.

Duration of Programme: Not known

How to Apply: 

• CV of the candidate 
• MSc or Masters Diploma and academic transcript(s)
• 1-2 page application letter, stating the motivation to attend the programme and the impact for the candidate’s career development and beyond.
• Two professional references
• Formal admission letter by the School for Continuing Education confirming that the candidate is admitted to the MAS, DAS or CAS programme.
• Certificate of employment. The certificate of employment letter must be sent to the E4D programme office directly through the employer (and not the candidate)

Detailed application criteria can be downloaded here (PDF, 193 KB).
Please submit your application documentation in one single pdf-file to e4d@sl.ethz.ch.

• Only candidates who are admitted to an ETH MAS, DAS or CAS programme based on his/her academic and professional qualifications are considered for a scholarship. Candidates must apply to both (I) a continuing education programme and (II) to the E4D scholarship. 

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme 2020/2021 for International Students

Application Deadline: 2nd December 2019 at Hong Kong Time 12:00:00

Offered Annually? Yes

About the Award: The Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme (HKPFS), established in 2009 by the Research Grants Council (RGC), aims at attracting the best and brightest students in the world to pursue their PhD programmes in Hong Kong’s institutions. About 250 PhD Fellowships will be awarded this academic year. For awardees who need more than three years to complete the PhD degree, additional support may be provided by the chosen institutions. The financial aid is available for any field of study.

Eligibility: Candidates who are seeking admission as new full time PhD students in the following eight institutions, irrespective of their country of origin, prior work experience, and ethnic background, should be eligible to apply.

• City University of Hong Kong
• Hong Kong Baptist University
• Lingnan University
• The Chinese University of Hong Kong
• The Education University of Hong Kong
• The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
• The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
• The University of Hong Kong

Applicants should demonstrate outstanding qualities of academic performance, research ability / potential, communication and interpersonal skills, and leadership abilities.

Selection Criteria: While candidates’ academic excellence is the primary consideration, the Selection Panels will take into account factors as follows:

• Academic excellence;
• Research ability and potential;
• Communication and interpersonal skills; and
• Leadership abilities.

Number of Awards: 250

Value of Award: The Fellowship provides an annual stipend of HK$309,600 (approximately US$39,700) and a conference and research-related travel allowance of HK$12,900 (approximately US$1,700) per year for each awardee for a period up to three years. 250 PhD Fellowships will be awarded in the 2020/21 academic year*. For awardees who need more than three years to complete the PhD degree, additional support may be provided by the chosen universities. For details, please contact the universities concerned directly.

Selection Panel: Shortlisted applications, subject to their areas of studies, will be reviewed by one of the following two Selection Panels comprising experts in the relevant board areas:

• sciences, medicine, engineering and technology

• humanities, social sciences and business studies

Application Process:

• Eligible candidates should first make an Initial Application online through the Hong Kong PhD Fellowship Scheme Electronic System (HKPFSES) to obtain an HKPFS Reference Number by 2 December 2019 at Hong Kong Time 12:00:00 before submitting applications for PhD admission to their desired universities.
• Applicants may choose up to two programmes / departments at one or two universities for PhD study under HKPFS 2019/20. They should comply with the admission requirements of their selected universities and programmes.
• As the deadlines for applications to some of the universities may immediately follow that of the Initial Application, candidates should submit initial applications as early as possible to ensure that they have sufficient time to submit applications to universities.

Visit Scholarship webpage for more details

Government of Ireland Research Masters and PhD Scholarships 2020 for International Students

Application Deadline: 31st October 2019 16:00 (Irish time)

Eligible Countries: National and International

To Be Taken At (Country): Ireland

About the Award: The aim of the Irish Research Council Government of Ireland Postgraduate Scholarship, hereinafter referred to as the Government of Ireland Postgraduate Scholarship, is to support suitably qualified research master’s and doctoral candidates pursuing, or intending to pursue, full-time research in any discipline.
A number of targeted scholarships are offered in collaboration with strategic funding partners.

Type: Masters, PhD

Eligibility:

• Applicants must fulfil the following criteria:
  
  
  • have a first class or upper second-class honours bachelor’s, or the equivalent, degree. If undergraduate examination results are not known at the time of application, the Council may make a provisional offer of a scholarship on condition that the scholar’s bachelor’s, or the equivalent degree result is a first class or upper second-class honours. If a scholar does not have a first class or upper second-class honours bachelor’s, or the equivalent, degree, they must possess a master’s degree. The Council’s determination of an applicant’s eligibility on these criteria is final;
  • must not have had two previous unsuccessful applications to the programme, including strategic partner themes. This includes applications since 2009 to the EMBARK Scheme previously run by the Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology, and the Government of Ireland Scholarship Scheme previously run by the Irish Council for Humanities and Social Sciences;
  • in the case of applications for a research master’s scholarship, applicants must not currently hold, or have previously held, a Council Postgraduate Scholarship;
  • in the case of applications for a doctoral degree scholarship, applicants must not currently hold, or have previously held, any Council Postgraduate Scholarship other than those which would enable them to obtain a research master’s degree
• Applicants will fall under one of two categories based on nationality and residency. For category one, applicants must meet BOTH of the following criteria:
• be a national of a European Union member state, Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein or Switzerland
  AND
• have been ordinarily resident in a European Union member state, Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein or Switzerland for a continuous period of three of the five years preceding 1 October 2019.

All other applicants will fall under category two.

While the majority of scholarships will be awarded to applicants who fall under category one, a proportion of awards will also be made to exceptional applicants who fall under category two. Please note that the Council may request documented evidence of an applicant’s nationality and residence.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• a stipend of €16,000 per annum
• a contribution to fees, including non-EU fees, up to a maximum of €5,750 per annum
• eligible direct research expenses of €2,250 per annum

Duration of Program:

• Research master’s degree: 12 months
• Structured research master’s degree: 24 months
• Traditional doctoral degree: 36 months
• Structured doctoral degree: 48 months

How to Apply: Potential applicants should read the 2020 Terms and Conditions carefully to ascertain whether or not they are eligible to apply. Indicative versions of the applicant, supervisor and referee forms are provided for information purposes only. All participants must create and submit their forms via the online system.

Visit Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Government of Ireland

Holland Government Scholarships 2020/2021 for International Students – Bachelors & Masters

Application Deadlines:

• 1st February 2020
• 1st May 2020.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: international students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA)

To be taken at (country): Netherlands research universities and universities of applied sciences

Fields of Study: courses offered at the Universities

About Scholarship: The Holland Scholarship is financed by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science as well as several Dutch research universities and universities of applied sciences. This scholarship is meant for international students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) who want to do their bachelor’s or master’s in the Netherlands.

Type: full-time Bachelors, Masters.

Eligibility Criteria: 

• Your nationality is non-EEA.
• You are applying for a full-time bachelor’s or master’s programme at one of the participating Dutch higher education institutions.
• You meet the specific requirements of the institution of your choice.
• You do not have a degree from an education facility in the Netherlands.

Number of Scholarships: not specified

Value of Scholarship: The scholarship amounts to €5,000.

Duration of Scholarship: You will receive this in the first year of your studies.

How to Apply: 

• The deadline for application is either 1 February 2019 or 1 May 2019. Please check your specific deadline on the website of the institution you want to apply to.
• Further information about the application procedure, the participating institutions and the specific deadlines is available on the website of the institution of your choice.

Check further instructions below.

1. Choose a course and/or institution with the Studyfinder tool.
2. Check whether the Dutch higher education institution is participating.
   a. Participating research universities
   b. Participating universities of applied sciences
3. Check the selected fields of studies on the website of the Dutch higher education institution.
4. Check whether you meet the application criteria above.
5. You need to apply for the Holland Scholarship directly at the institution of your choice and meet their selection criteria.
6. If you have any questions about the procedure, please contact the institution you are applying to directly.
7. After the application deadline, the institution you applied to will contact you to let you know if you have been awarded a scholarship.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details