Papua New Guinea government plans to block access to Facebook

John Braddock

The Papua New Guinea (PNG) government declared on May 29 it will ban Facebook use for a month to give authorities time to analyse the social network for “fake” profiles and “illegal” usage.

Communications Minister Sam Basil told the PNG Post-Courier: “The time will allow information to be collected to identify users that hide behind fake accounts, users that upload pornographic images, users that post false and misleading information on Facebook to be filtered and removed.”

A start date is yet to be announced. Basil later told parliament he disputed the newspaper’s report about an impending ban. He said the government’s official position would be made known after studies into “the advantages and disadvantages of Facebook.” Nevertheless, Basil declared he was “not afraid to put an indefinite ban” on the networking site.

The Post-Courier defended its report. Meanwhile, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) reported on May 29 that the PNG government intends to use its investigation to work out how to apply a restrictive “cyber-crime law” to social media more widely.

The move coincides with a decision to disconnect mobile phone sim cards that are not registered to users with formal identification. Basil told the ABC the disconnection would stop people using telecommunications and social media anonymously, claiming false accounts are used to “spread fake news and rumours.”

Basil previously said US Senate hearings on Facebook and a class action lawsuit against Cambridge Analytica and other companies over misuse of data raised concerns “for Papua New Guinea citizens.” Last month he commissioned a study of Facebook’s “impact” and the security of users’ personal information. He claimed “a lot of people” are receiving “threats,” “fake news” and “defamatory statements” from unknown accounts.

The purported concern for ordinary citizens is bogus. Over the past two years, the unpopular government led by Prime Minister Peter O’Neill has turned to increasingly authoritarian measures to suppress discontent among the working class and rural poor over austerity measures. Military-police operations have suppressed student protests and strikes. Soldiers have been deployed to break blockades of major gas projects in the Highlands by local landowners over a range of grievances.

Speaking to the ABC, Basil flatly denied that the Facebook ban was an attempt to restrict freedom of speech. However, he insisted that while politicians are legitimately open to criticism, “whenever there is criticism we must ensure that it is factual” and opponents “must have alternatives if they are criticising a government policy.”

Basil suggested the creation of a government-sponsored alternative to Facebook. “If there need be, then we can gather our local applications developers to create a site that is more conducive for Papua New Guineans to communicate within the country and abroad as well,” he told the Post-Courier.

Just under 10 percent of PNG’s eight million people have access to the Internet, one of the lowest rates in the world. Even so, Facebook has become a popular place to discuss politics, especially among young people. Many use the site to criticise the government and expose corruption. Tens of thousands have accessed World Socialist Web Site articles and hundreds follow the Socialist Equality Party (Australia) Facebook page.

Facebook, which has more than two billion users, is facing mounting pressure from governments globally. The Cambridge Analytica scandal has been used to intensify the push to censor the Internet and silence opposition to official politics.

In Indonesia, Communications and Information Minister Rudiantara last month issued Facebook with demands for information related to Cambridge Analytica and the security of users’ data. In Sri Lanka, authorities blocked access to 5.5 million Facebook accounts following incidents of communal violence in March, which the government claimed had been incited on social media. China and North Korea have enacted partial or total blocks of Facebook.

In response to Basil’s announcement, a Facebook spokesman said: “We have reached out to the Papua New Guinea government to understand their concerns.” This is a signal that the tech giant is ready to impose official demands and use the PNG ban to further its own program of Internet censorship.

The crackdown, which comes as PNG prepares to host the 2018 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders’ summit, has been met with a chorus of criticism. One person told the Post Courier it was “a total violation of civil rights” and an attempt to “gag people” during the APEC meetings. The PNG government intends to use the summit to promote more investment from multinational mining and other companies to exploit the country’s low-paid workforce.

Alarmed about the effects on business, Institute of National Affairs Director Paul Barker declared it a “travesty” to close down Facebook during APEC. He stated: “It would be both an attack on embracing technology, undermining the information era and mechanisms for accountability, but also damaging business and welfare.”

Activists and civil society groups spoke out. Transparency International chairman Lawrence Stephens said stopping Facebook for a month sounded “pretty authoritarian and pretty worrying.”

The most forceful criticism is coming from ordinary social media users. Jerry Kuri Mori wrote on May 29 in the “PNG Development Forum” Facebook group: “This government violates the very founding principles of our democracy which allows for the freedom of speech and expression … This is an illegitimate government who claims to represent the voices of our people and yet constantly violates the very democratic ideals of our national constitution.”

Abraham Ropa wrote on May 30 in the “PNG Anti-Corruption Movement” group: “Is [the ban] of fake accounts/user names and pornography or because people are revealing and publicising every truth about the corrupt deals about PNG government?”

In the group “PNG Happenings Today,” which has more than 136,000 members, Thomas Tom Kolye wrote on May 30: “1. What damage has Facebook made to PNG? 2. Is Facebook a threat to any human? PNG need improvement in Internet services and not [the] shutting down Facebook.”

Facebook expands censorship of news organizations with restrictions on political ads

Marcus Day

Facebook’s new measures restricting use of its advertising platform have begun to impact news and media organizations, according to a report published Friday by the Verge. The moves are the latest step in the company’s campaign to censor its platform under the bogus pretext of combating “Russian interference” and “fake news.”

Starting May 24, Facebook began requiring that anyone wishing to purchase a “political ad” must undergo an onerous authorization process, submitting images of a government-issued ID and verifying their address and Social Security number, among other requirements.

In addition to ads relating to elections, referenda, political parties or candidates for office, the social media company has designated 20 “issues of national importance” which fall under its new restrictions. The issues—abortion, budget, civil rights, crime, economy, education, energy, environment, foreign policy, government reform, guns, health, immigration, infrastructure, military, poverty, social security, taxes, terrorism, values—are so broadly defined as to include virtually all news or information of any significance.

In a May 24 blog post titled “Hard Questions: Why Doesn’t Facebook Just Ban Political Ads?”, Facebook Global Politics and Government Outreach Director Katie Harbath and Director of Public Policy Steve Satterfield wrote: “In the US, there aren’t laws or federal agencies that list specific issues that are subject to regulation. But to have a policy that our reviewers can enforce, they need a list explaining what’s OK and what’s not.”

CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in a post the same day, again sought to justify the anti-democratic measures with the absurd and bogus claim that they were intended to prevent “anyone to do what the Russians did during the 2016 election.” In reality, Facebook, in collaboration with the US state and intelligence agencies and other major technology companies such as Google, has utilized trumped-up accusations of “Russian meddling” and “fake news” in the 2016 elections in order to initiate a vast campaign of censorship of the internet and social media.

One of many Orwellian ads by Facebook promoting its censorship measures

Facebook’s newest measures have already begun to negatively impact their primary target, i.e., left-wing and socialist organizations and viewpoints. As David Moore, the Socialist Equality Party’s candidate for US Senate in California, wrote on the World Socialist Web Site Friday, Facebook’s requirements have effectively blocked advertisements by both his campaign and that of SEP congressional candidate Kevin Mitchell in the week running up to the June 5 midterm elections.

Facebook’s anti-democratic measures throw “a lengthy and arbitrary procedure in front of the numerous smaller candidates running across the country, to the benefit of incumbents and other well-heeled candidates,” Moore noted.

Along with the suppression of candidates’ and political parties’ ability to disseminate information and advocate their views, Facebook’s new restrictions have broad and ominous implications for the press.

Facebook already announced at the beginning of 2018 that it was “deprioritizing” news and political content on users’ News Feeds. Just last Friday, the company revealed that it would also be removing its Trending news section, which has frequently featured viral videos or posts revealing brutality or murder by police. These announcements followed several years of moves by the company to restrict the “organic” (i.e., unpaid) reach of pages and content on its platform, compelling many smaller publishers and organizations to pay to use its advertising tools. Now, that avenue is also being closed off.

Facebook has stated that it plans to use a combination of both artificial intelligence and thousands of “content reviewers,” i.e., human censors, to determine whether or not an ad is political, reviewing not just the text of the ad, but also its image, who it targets and any external websites to which the ad links.

According to the Verge, which reviewed Facebook’s new archive of ads with political content, the new restrictions have already resulted in dozens of media organizations’ ads being blocked, including those—such as a story about a graduation speech—seemingly without political content. Other blocked posts shown in the archive reveal the more sinister character of the new policies, such as one by the History Channel television station attempting to advertise an article about the covert transportation of nuclear weapons around the US during the Cold War.

However, the archive would seem to underestimate the real number of unauthorized political posts censored so far, as it fails to list at least one ad by the WSWS blocked in the last week. On Thursday May 31 the WSWS posted its Perspective column “Five thousand deaths in Puerto Rico from Hurricane Maria” to its Facebook page and purchased an ad to show the post to residents in Puerto Rico. Later that day, Facebook responded that it had disapproved the ad because the WSWS Facebook page was “not authorized to run ads with political content.”

Facebook’s notification that it was blocking the ad featuring the May 31 WSWS Perspective

The far-reaching character of Facebook’s restrictions to advertising platform has provoked limited criticisms among sections of the media. News Media Alliance, a trade group representing 2,000 news organizations, including the New York Times and Washington Post, published an open letter on May 18, which, while praising Facebook for its supposed commitment to “transparency,” stated that the new measures threaten “to undermine [journalism’s] ability to play its critical role in society as the fourth estate.” At least one company, Vox Media, has subsequently stated that it will refuse to undergo the authorization process.

While Bloomberg has reported unease at Facebook over the criticisms of the media industry, the company has thus far publicly indicated that it will continue its present course, with Director of Product Management Rob Leathern stating, “Enforcement is never perfect at launch, but that’s why we have processes in place for people and advertisers to help us improve.”

Meanwhile, Facebook has used News Feed communications to aggressively encourage users to report unidentified political ads, with Leathern continuing, “The community can find and report ads that don’t have the label but should, and advertisers can appeal ads that are in the archive but shouldn’t be there.”

While there may be concern among sections of the media establishment over the immediate impact of Facebook’s changes on their ability to conduct their business, publications such as the New York Times, Washington Post and others are at the forefront of the campaign to censor the internet and limit the free exchange of information outside officially sanctioned channels.

Lies and contradictions pile up on Ukraine’s faked murder of Babchenko

Clara Weiss

Six days after the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) revealed that it had staged the supposed murder of the anti-Kremlin journalist Arkady Babchenko, the Ukrainian government continues to seek to exploit the case for the anti-Russia campaign even as contradictions and lies concerning the state operation pile up.

Last Tuesday, the Ukrainian and Western press was filled with media reports about the killing of Babchenko in Kiev. The journalist, who supported the US-backed far-right coup in Kiev in early 2014 and the war of the Kiev regime in eastern Ukraine against pro-Russian separatists, had fled Russia in early 2017 after receiving death threats.

Ukrainian officials and Western media outlets, including the New York Times, immediately rushed to blame the killing of Babchenko on Russia. Yet in a stunning turn of events on Wednesday, Babchenko and the head of the Ukrainian Secret Service held a press conference to announce that the murder had been staged in a “special operation” allegedly designed to disclose a murderous plot against Babchenko by the Russian secret service, the FSB.

At the press conference, Babchenko described how he had faked his fall, put on a T-shirt that had been shot through to show bullet wounds, and was then covered in pig’s blood. His wife found him lying on the floor and called the ambulance. He was pronounced dead in the ambulance and brought to a morgue where he started to watch news coverage of his alleged murder.

The story since presented by the SBU to justify the faked murder and describe the alleged Russian plot to kill Babchenko resembles a poorly written spy novel, filled with glaring inconsistencies and blatant lies.

Only two suspects have been identified by the SBU. Boris German is allegedly the man tasked by the Russian FSB to kill Babchenko. He is the executive director of the Ukrainian-German weapon manufacturer Schmeisser. There have been reports, but no official confirmation, that he was in fact working for Ukrainian counterintelligence.

The hit man allegedly hired by German is Oleksiy Tsimbalyuk, who had previously fought in the civil war in eastern Ukraine for the fascist Right Sector on the side of the Kiev regime. No explanation has been offered for why Tsimbalyuk, by all appearance an ardent Ukrainian nationalist and opponent of Russia who has described the killing of Russian soldiers as “an act of mercy,” decided to change sides to kill Babchenko.

The Ukrainian general prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, said that that the staging of the murder led to the disclosure by the suspect of a list of 30 names of journalists whom Russia planned to kill in Ukraine. This number has since been revised upward, to 47. German was supposedly also tasked to stockpile secret weapons caches throughout Ukraine. How all of these plots were connected and how they were to be executed by a handful of people has not been explained.

The SBU also published as proof of Russian involvement the “dossier” the Russian FSB had allegedly compiled on Babchenko for his “killer.” Yet, as the journal meduza has pointed out, almost the entire biography of Babchenko in the dossier was copied from Babchenko’s Wikipedia article, while all other information had been published by Babchenko himself on various social media platforms.

The dossier included no information about Babchenko’s phone number or address in Kiev, both of which would have been important for the “killer” and easy for any secret service to obtain. The only private information in the dossier was Babchenko’s registered Moscow address and his Russian identification and passport numbers, all of which could have been (and in all likelihood were) revealed by Babchenko to the SBU, but appear to be of no immediate use to a hired killer in Ukraine.

These contradictions are in addition to more minor lies in the Ukrainian government’s account. For instance, Babchenko, in a very dramatic gesture, apologized to his wife at the press conference last Wednesday for having made her believe that he was dead. Yet on Thursday it was revealed that his wife had been in on the plot.

The Ukrainian government has not revealed whether it was aware that the killing had been faked when it declared that Russia was to blame for Babchenko’s “murder.”

Babchenko and the Ukrainian government have staunchly defended the media hoax and continue to seek to use it to whip up the campaign against Russia.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko hailed the staged murder as a “brilliant operation” and said on Ukraine television, “The whole world saw the real face of our enemy… It is not Ukraine you should condemn, but Russia.”

He promised that Babchenko and his family would receive around-the-clock protection, arguing that “Moscow would hardly calm down“ and that the Ukrainian secret services were growing stronger in “fighting Russian aggression.“

The advisor to the Interior Ministry Anton Gerashchenko wrote on Facebook: “Even Sherlock Holmes successfully used the method of faking his own death to effectively investigate difficult and complicated crimes, however painful that may have been for his relatives and for Dr. Watson.”

Babchenko, who worked for the Russian army in both Chechen wars in the 1990s, posted a series of vulgar and aggressive comments on Facebook to denounce his critics. In one post, he pledged “to die at 96 while dancing on Putin’s grave.”

Responding to criticism in the British press, he wrote: “Dear British press, will you please go fuck yourselves. If you want to do something useful, you can give me a British passport and British sanctuary. Then you will have earned the right to lecture me on how I should save myself and my family. Fucking smart arses!”

He also wrote: “I wish all these moralisers could be in the same situation—let them show their adherence to the principles of their high morals and die proudly holding their heads high without misleading the media.”

Babchenko’s boss at the Crimean Tatar television network ATR, Ayder Muzhdabayev, described the journalist’s critics to Al Jazeera as “vermin.” Muzhdabayev had been the first to report on Babchenko’s alleged death last Tuesday.

Several pro-Western Russian journalists who are close to the liberal opposition have published op-eds defending Babchenko. However, a few voices also raised concerns.

An editorial by Pavel Kanygin in the pro-liberal Novaya Gazeta argued that Babchenko had “died as a journalist by breaking professional ethics and engaging in an unprecedented collaboration with secret services.” Another op-ed in the same newspaper ridiculed the operation as a “parody” on Soviet spy novels and films.

The Russian business daily Vedomosti, which is associated with the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal, wrote in an editorial that the Babchenko operation had “blurred the border between truth and fiction” and would lead to more distrust in the media.

Similarly, numerous opinion pieces in Western outlets such as the Guardianand the German Spiegel, which have been heavily involved in the anti-Russia and anti-Putin campaign, raised concerns about the Babchenko operation and its consequences for the credibility of the media. The Guardian noted that “by faking Babchenko’s murder, Ukraine has smeared itself,” and that it had “handed Russia a massive propaganda victory.”

The New York Times ran an article on Sunday as an exercise in damage control that was headlined “Faked Killing of a Putin Critic Can’t Get Much Murkier. And Yet It Does.”

Numerous Western politicians, including German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, have also criticized how the Ukrainian government handled the case.

Their criticism of Babchenko and the Ukrainian government’s media hoax has nothing to do with concern for journalistic integrity or “truth.” Quite the contrary: it is motivated by a well justified fear that the crudity of this fraudulent propaganda operation will further discredit the anti-Russia campaign of the imperialist powers, in which the bulk of Western journalists and major bourgeois newspapers and media outlets are fully complicit.

Deep divisions over US trade policies at G7 finance ministers meeting

Nick Beams

In one of the most significant conflicts in the more than forty-year history of such multilateral meetings, finance ministers from six of the seven nations in the G7 joined together at the end of last week to issue a statement condemning the US for its trade policies.

The statement drawn up by Canada, which hosted and chaired the meeting, held in Whistler, British Colombia, sets the stage for an even bigger conflict when government leaders of the G7 meet in Charlevoix, Quebec on June 8–9.

Across the Pacific in Beijing, talks held over the weekend between US and Chinese officials over a program to increase US exports to China ended without any statement being issued by the two sides, as the deadline looms for the imposition of US tariffs on at least $50 billion worth of Chinese goods.

The Chinese state-run news agency Xinhua said there had been “positive, concrete” progress in some areas, but then made clear that the tariff threat was the key sticking point. “If the US rolls out trade measures including tariffs, all the agreements reached in the negotiations won’t take effect,” it said.

The statement from the G7, agreed to by Canada, the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Japan, pointed to the “negative impact of the unilateral trade actions of the United States.” This referred to Washington’s imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminium on “national security” grounds.

“Concerns were expressed that the tariffs imposed by the United States on its friends and allies, on the grounds of national security, undermine open trade and confidence in the global economy,” the statement said.

The aim had to be to restore “collaborative partnerships to promote, free, fair, predictable and mutually beneficial trade,” which had been put at risk by US actions against other G7 members.

In his remarks on the meeting, Canadian Finance Minister Bill Morneau said that “unfortunately the actions of the United States … risk undermining the very values that traditionally have bound us together.” Speaking to reporters, he added that there had been a consensus among the six that the Trump administration’s actions were “destructive to our ability to get things done,” and he asked US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to convey the “regret and disappointment” of the other six nations to President Trump.

Even before the message was delivered, Trump had given his reply via Twitter, saying the US “at long last must be treated fairly on trade.” He added, “If we charge a country zero to sell their goods, and they charge us 25, 50 or event 100 percent to sell ours, it is unfair and can no longer be tolerated. That is not free or fair trade, it is stupid trade.”

Speaking after the meeting, several finance ministers pointed to the unprecedented character of the division. Calling the US tariffs on steel and aluminium “deeply deplorable,” Japanese Finance Minister Taro Aso said, “I’ve been to these meetings for a long time. But this is a very rare case where opposition to the United States was unanimous.”

Aso said the G7 ought to be telling China to follow global rules, but “by taking measures that violate G7 and World Trade Organization rules, the United States is actually benefiting China. That’s wrong.”

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire referred to the “G6 plus one” and expressed “total incomprehension” over the US actions. He said the European Union was ready to proceed with retaliatory actions and Washington had only a few days to de-escalate the trade conflict.

According to one participant at the meeting, cited by Reuters, Le Maire directly asked Mnuchin, “How can you get China to respect international law if you don’t?”

German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz voiced the opposition of other members of the G7 to the decision of the US to pull out of the international nuclear agreement with Tehran and the threat by the US to impose sanctions on European countries that continue to trade with Iran. “There were several issues discussed at the G7 over which there was no agreement,” he told reporters. “That’s really quite unusual in the history of the G7.”

Mnuchin rejected claims that the US was circumventing international trade rules or abandoning the system of global economic relations it had built after World War II. In an expression of the “America First” agenda of the Trump administration, he directed attention to the handouts of hundreds of billions of dollars to US corporations and the ultra-wealthy.

“I don’t think in any way the US is abandoning its leadership in the global economy. Quite the contrary,” he declared. “I think that we’ve had a massive effort on tax reform in the United States which has had an incredible impact on the US economy.”

Seeking to push back against the isolation of the US within the G7, Mnuchin said there was support for Washington’s push against China over its alleged forced technology transfers and other policies. But in doing so, he made clear why there has been little or no progress on reaching an agreement with Beijing. Mnuchin said the talks, led Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, were not simply about the export of more US goods to the Chinese market.

“I want to be clear,” he said, “this isn’t just about buying more goods, this is about structural changes. But I also fundamentally believe that if there are structural changes that allow our companies to compete fairly, by definition that will deal with the trade deficit alone.”

But the “structural changes” the US is seeking to impose, with tariffs directed against goods manufactured under Beijing’s “Made in China 2025” program, amount to nothing less than the transformation of China into an economic semi-colony of the US.

Washington is demanding that China end state subsidies to key industries, which it says give them a major advantage in global markets, and that it cease efforts to develop high-tech industries, accusing China of stealing American intellectual property. The prevailing view in the military and intelligence establishment is that China’s efforts to outstrip the US in the high-tech sector constitutes a threat to the economic and military supremacy of the United States.

The intransigence of the US on this question was laid out in the broad demands presented to Beijing at the beginning of last month, which included the demand that China not “oppose, challenge, or otherwise retaliate against the United States’ imposition of sanctions on investments from China in sensitive US technology sectors or sectors critical to US national security.”

While there was no statement from either side on the weekend’s discussions in Beijing, it was widely reported that Chinese negotiators had stipulated that tariff threats had to be removed. According to one source cited by the Financial Times: “The Chinese are asking that the Trump administration publicly announce that they will not impose tariffs, and that’s a non-starter.”

Earlier comments by Mnuchin, following discussions in Washington, that tariffs had been put “on hold” were described by anti-China hawk Peter Navarro, the White House adviser on trade, as an “unfortunate sound bite” and were followed by the decision that the list of Chinese goods to be targeted would be finalised on June 15 and implemented “shortly” thereafter, and that there would be an announcement by June 30 on restrictions to be placed on Chinese investment.

Reflecting the increasingly besieged character of the Trump administration on trade, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow let fly with a disjointed and semi-coherent rant, blaming all and sundry for breaking trade rules “all over the place” and declaring that Trump was simply responding to decades of trade abuse.

“Don’t blame Trump,” he told “Fox News Sunday.” “Blame China, blame Europe, blame NAFTA, blame those who don’t want reciprocal trading, tariffs rates and protectionism.”

With Kudlow regarded as heading up a quasi-free trade faction within the Trump administration, it is clear that the divisions exposed at the G7 finance ministers meeting are set to widen at the summit to be held on the weekend.

Dozens drown in Mediterranean as Europe cracks down on immigrants

Eric London

Dozens of African refugees died in three separate boat disasters across the Mediterranean Sea yesterday. It was the deadliest day for immigrants since October. As the weather warms, hundreds of thousands are preparing to cross into a European continent dominated by right-wing governments intent on blocking their entry and deporting those refugees already present.

Off the coast of Tunisia, rescue divers recovered the drowned bodies of 46 African immigrants destined for the Italian island of Lampedusa.

“There were around 180 of us on board the boat,” which was 30 feet long, one survivor told a Tunisian radio station. The boat “sank because of a leak,” the immigrant said, describing a scene of panic and horror as the boat and its passengers were slowly lowered into the sea.

Another survivor told the press from a hospital bed, “I survived by clinging to wood for nine hours.” Tunisian government officials report that 70 immigrants have been rescued, meaning roughly 65 remain unaccounted for.

At the other end of the Mediterranean, another boat capsized yesterday morning off the coast of Demre, Turkey, leaving nine dead, including six children. Survivors said there were 14 or 15 people on board.

Spanish officials also announced they had rescued 240 immigrants Sunday from 11 boats. Forty-one of the immigrants were rescued at the last minute from a sinking boat. At least one was confirmed dead.

So far in 2018, 660 immigrants have died crossing the Mediterranean, or 2.8 percent of the total who have attempted to cross.

The death toll is the product of policies carried out by European governments to block rescue efforts and deter future crossings. Beginning in 2014, the European Union implemented a policy of keeping coast guard ships far from areas with frequent shipwrecks. Internal EU documents reveal policymakers arguing that more deaths would equate to lower refugee totals.

In 2017, Italian prosecutors ordered police to impound a rescue boat staffed by a German non-profit to prevent the boat from conducting missions to save drowning immigrants.

According to the Intercept, officials used undercover police and wiretaps in a fraudulent effort to “prove” that the volunteers were secretly conspiring with human smugglers. As a result of such persecution, the Intercept reported, “One year ago, there were close to a dozen humanitarian organizations operating rescue ships between Libya and Italy. Now there are just a few left.”

Those immigrants who survive the perilous journey face harassment, neglect and deportation by the most xenophobic governments Europe has seen since the Second World War.

In Italy, incoming Interior Minister and member of the far-right Lega party Matteo Salvini made a provocative visit to Sicily yesterday and told a crowd, “Enough of Sicily being the refugee camp of Europe. I will not stand by and do nothing while there are landings after landings. We need deportation centers.”

Salvini spoke at another demonstration on Saturday, threatening immigrants: “Get ready to pack your bags.” Lega and its governing coalition partner Five Star Movement (M5S) have pledged to deport 500,000 immigrants, a move which would require putting large sections of the country under martial law. Luigi Di Maio, the leader of M5S, has previously called rescue boat organizations “taxis of the sea.”

The fascistic threats against immigrants by Lega and M5S have provoked a growing atmosphere of violence against refugees. In Vibo Valentia in the southern province of Calabria, an Italian man murdered a 29-year-old Malian refugee within hours of Salvini’s speech yesterday. Police then reportedly issued a statement claiming the refugee was stealing material from a construction site.

In Germany, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Social Democratic Party (SPD) reached a grand coalition agreement that largely adopted the anti-immigrant platform of the neo-fascist Alternative for Germany (AfD). AfD parliamentarian Alice Weidel delivered a xenophobic rant in the Bundestag last month denouncing “Muslim migrants” as “burqas, knife-men and other good for nothings.”

In France, the government of Emanuel Macron used riot police to clear a migrant camp in Paris last week, forcibly moving over 1,000 people and crushing their tents. The French government recently passed an asylum law that criminalizes border crossings, limits the right to asylum, and speeds up the deportation process.

In Spain, El País recently reported that many immigrants are forced onto the streets upon arriving to the country and that some are forced to live on nothing but crackers for days on end. Hungary’s far-right Prime Minister Viktor Orban said in April that Europe is an “immigrant zone” and that mass migration means “our worst nightmares can come true. The west falls as it fails to see Europe being overrun.”

When European Union interior ministers gather Tuesday in Luxembourg to discuss immigration control, they will agree to even harsher crackdowns on immigrants that pave the way for mass deportations across the continent.

This comes in the face of widespread support for immigrants among the European working class. According to a Eurobarometer poll published in April, 57 percent of Europeans feel comfortable with the immigrant population and welcome them as neighbors, friends and co-workers. Just a third of the population says they are at least somewhat uncomfortable interacting with immigrants. In Spain, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, support for immigrants among the population was massive.

The anti-immigrant wave in Europe has drawn support from far-right elements around President Donald Trump, including his former fascist advisor Steven Bannon, who appeared on CNN Friday from Italy. Bannon praised the incoming Italian government’s anti-immigrant policies, falsely portraying it as pro-working class: “The working guy has been stiffed the entire time and that is the revolt that led to Donald Trump and that’s what’s we’ve really seen here in Italy.”

Workers have no interest in supporting the anti-immigrant policies of their ruling classes. The brutal policies targeting immigrants will be aimed at the working class as the class struggle intensifies. The ruling class’s efforts to whip-up anti-immigrant sentiment are aimed at dulling popular opposition to war and policies of social counterrevolution. In each country—and especially in France, Germany and Italy—the ruling class is using xenophobia as a mechanism to pit workers against each other and divert attention away from attacks on pensions and social programs.

Lift the ban on communications! Free Julian Assange!

James Cogan

June 6 will mark 10 weeks since the Ecuadorian government blocked all communication by WikiLeaks’ editor Julian Assange with the outside world, including personal visitors. Assange has been trapped inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London since 2012, when Quito granted him asylum in the face of a legal witch-hunt by the governments of the United States, Britain and Sweden.

Britain was moving to extradite Assange to Sweden on trumped-up allegations of sexual abuse as the first step in transferring him to the US to face charges of espionage, which carry a possible death sentence. Washington had vowed to punish Assange for having exposed before the world war crimes committed by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as US intrigues against other countries.

In remarks last Wednesday, Ecuadorian President Lenín Moreno attempted to defend the silencing of Assange. He sought to deny—unconvincingly—that this action was the outcome of his government’s capitulation to pressure and threats by the United States.

Moreno put forward an Orwellian conception of freedom of speech that lines up entirely with the standpoint of American imperialism and every enemy of democratic rights. Renouncing WikiLeaks’ right—and the right of all journalists and media—to publish information that reveals government and corporate criminality or challenges official propaganda, the Ecuadorian president asserted: “There are two types of liberty. The responsible liberty and the liberty in which everyone thinks they can do whatever they want, whenever they want and however they want. That is not liberty. Liberty must be used with a lot of responsibility.”

Moreno stated that the WikiLeaks editor had to accept that the “conditions of his asylum prevent him speaking out about politics or intervening in the politics of other countries.” He threatened that if Assange did not submit to such terms, Ecuador would “take a decision” to revoke its granting of asylum.

Assange’s entire mission in forming WikiLeaks in 2006 was to enable people to use the immense power of the Internet to break through the “responsible” disinformation and censorship that prevails in the corporate-controlled and state-owned media. All critical and independent journalism, by its very nature, involves “speaking out about politics.”

Assange is now in grave danger. It is more than two years since a United Nations working group condemned the British government for enforcing Assange’s “arbitrary detention,” calling it a “contravention of his fundamental human rights.”

His lawyer Jennifer Robinson and supporter Pamela Anderson have publicly warned in recent weeks about the seriousness of his medical condition. For six years, he has been confined in a small building with no access to sunlight or adequate medical treatment. For 10 weeks he has been subjected to the additional psychological pressure of what Moreno declares will be ongoing, indefinite isolation.

A calculated operation is underway to break the WikiLeaks editor. Moreno’s statements only underscore that the aim is to force him to “voluntarily” leave the Ecuadorian embassy, to be taken by waiting British police and placed in detention on bail-related charges without any means of contacting the outside world. That would be followed by further months or years of imprisonment while his legal defenders fight American extradition warrants.

The government of Australia, where Assange was born and holds citizenship, bears immense responsibility for the situation. In late 2010, instead of defending an Australian citizen whose rights were under attack, the Labor Party government of Prime Minister Julia Gillard sided with Washington. It labelled WikiLeaks’ actions “illegal” and declared it would support the prosecution of Assange for espionage. The current Liberal-National coalition government has not lifted a finger to oppose his ongoing persecution.

The American state and its allies are seeking to destroy WikiLeaks and Julian Assange in order to intimidate every critical and independent media organisation. The aim is to suppress the exposure of the crimes and lies of governments and to silence all those who seek to defend democratic rights and freedom of speech.

The attack on Assange is bound up with the aggressive moves by US and global intelligence agencies, working with social media and Internet companies, to suppress left-wing, anti-war and socialist views online. A pall of censorship is descending over the Internet, the most democratic form of communication in human history.

The International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) and its publication, the World Socialist Web Site, are urging resistance. We call for the greatest possible international mobilisation in defence of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. This is an essential part of a broader fight to defend Internet freedom, freedom of speech and all social and democratic rights of the working class.

A historical crossroads has been reached. Organisations and individuals will be judged by where they stand in this basic conflict over democratic rights.

The Socialist Equality Party, the Australian section of the ICFI, has called a demonstration in Sydney for 1:00 p.m. on Sunday, June 17 at the Sydney Town Hall Square. It is being held in conjunction with acclaimed journalist and filmmaker John Pilger, an unwavering defender of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, media freedom and democratic rights.

The demonstration has also been endorsed by prominent civil liberties attorney Julian Burnside and by Terry Hicks, who waged a five-year struggle against the imprisonment of his son, David Hicks, in the hell-hole US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.

Musician Roger Waters of Pink Floyd fame, who has for decades spoken out against war and injustice, has sent the WSWS a message of support endorsing action to defend WikiLeaks. On the stage of his concerts in Berlin over the weekend he posted the call: “Resist the Attempted Silencing of Julian Assange.”

The demonstration in Sydney will press the demand that the Australian government act immediately to secure Assange’s unconditional return to Australia, with a guarantee against any American attempt to extradite him to the US.

A vigil demanding freedom for Julian Assange will be taking place in London at the Ecuadorian embassy on Tuesday, June 19. The May government must end its persecution of Assange, drop the bail-related charges against him and allow him to leave the Ecuadorian embassy and the UK. Similar vigils on June 19 are being held in other cities around the world.

In contrast, a whole layer of trade union, Green Party and pseudo-left organisations that voiced support for WikiLeaks and Assange in 2010 and 2011 have repudiated any struggle against his persecution. They have shifted to supporting imperialism.

The working class and the youth, however, are entering into immense struggles, and there is enormous respect among them for Assange and WikiLeaks. The social force that will lead the fight to defend democratic rights is the international working class, as part of a broader struggle to secure its social rights and oppose war, inequality and the capitalist system.

Islamic Development Bank Science, Technology and Innovation Transform Fund (IsDB-STIF) 2018

Application Deadline: 31st July 2018

Eligible Countries: IsDB Member countries

About the Award: Transform is a multi-million-dollar fund that provides seed money for innovators, startups and SMEs to develop their ideas and compose a strong business proposal.

Categories:

• Category 1: New Ideas with Proof of Concept.
• Category 2: Scaling up of Innovative Projects.
• Category 3: Commercialization of Technology.
• Category 4: Capacity Building in Science, Technology and Innovation

Type: Grants

Eligibility: Scientists, Innovators, SMEs, Private Firms, Governments & Non-Governmental Organizations, and Academic or Research and Development Institutions in IsDB Member and non-member countries, which are in need of funding support under one of the following four categories of the IsDB-STIF can apply to the categories above.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: 

• Transform can also provide funding for the commercialization of technology developed through sustained partnerships among researchers and entrepreneurs as well as capacity building support.
• Through Transform, innovative ideas will be translated into real development solutions that will address development challenges and empower the communities and youth in particular to realize their full potential.
• Linked to the Engage hub, Transform will accelerate science, technology and innovation led solutions that drive economic and social progress in the developing world.

How to Apply: Apply Here

Visit the Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: IsDB

World Bank IFC Recruitment Drive for Sub-Saharan African Nationals 2018

Application Deadline: Varies according to position (12:00am UTC (8:00pm Washington, DC time)

Eligible Countries: Sub-Saharan African and Caribbean countries

To be Taken at: Positions may be based in Washington, D.C. or in a regional office.

About the Award: The IFC Recruitment Drive initiative is for nationals with a current passport from a Caribbean or Sub-Saharan African country.

The International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group, is the largest global development institution focused on the private sector in emerging markets. Working with more than 2,000 businesses worldwide, we use our capital, expertise, and influence to create markets and opportunities in developing economies around the world. In FY17, we delivered a record $19.3 billion in long-term financing for developing countries, leveraging the power of the private sector to help end poverty and boost shared prosperity.

Type: Job/Internship

Eligibility: 

• In addition to strong technical competencies, ideal candidates must have a demonstrated capacity for strategic thinking and be fluent in English with very good writing, presentation and communication skills.
• The WBG values diversity and invites all qualified individuals, with diverse professional, academic, and cultural backgrounds to apply. Specifically, women and persons with disabilities are strongly encouraged to apply.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The WBG IFC Recruitment Drive offers a total reward package that includes competitive salary, retirement plan, life insurance, medical benefits, paid leave, mobility support, and financial assistance.

How to Apply: Enter your search criteria or click the Search button to view and apply for any jobs. 

Visit Programme Webpage for Details


Award Providers: World Bank Group

MycoSafe-South European–African PhD Scholarships in Mycotoxicology for Young Researchers 2018

Application Deadline: 15th June 2018

Eligible Countries: European and African countries

To Be Taken At (Country): European and African countries

About the Award: The LEAP-Agri research project MycoSafe-South, the “European–African partnership for safe and efficient use of mycotoxin-mitigation strategies in sub-Saharan Africa”, intends to harness the expertise and infrastructure available in Europe by strengthening the capacity of the Southern partners to tackle the mycotoxin problem and the associated food safety issues.

Type: PhD, Research

Eligibility: The MycoSafe-South consortium creates opportunities for young researchers by assigning 4 PhDs students to conduct this research at both European and African institutes. The project is embedded in two of the most important global networks on mycotoxin management and research: Partnership for Aflatoxin Control of the African Union (PACA) and Partnership to improve food security & food safety in developing countries: mitigation of mycotoxins – MYTOX-SOUTH.

• You have recently (2014 or later) obtained a Master of Science (Msc) diploma in (veterinary) medicine, public health, pharmaceutical sciences, bio-engineering, bio-sciences, agricultural and nutrition sciences, or related disciplines.
• Final year students can also apply, on the condition that the candidate obtains the degree of master before September 1st, 2018 (project start date).
• The consortium encourages also young (< 35 years old) and female African scientists to apply.
• The candidate we are looking for has a strong motivation to conduct research, can work independent, but can also function as part of a team.
• The candidate should be willing to travel between different African and European research institutes.
• Affinity for animal experiments and laboratory work is essential.
• Good communication and writing skills in English is mandatory.

Number of Awards: 3

Value of Award: Successful candidates will be funded to and fro different African and European research institutes for the period of the research.

Duration of Programme: 3 years

How to Apply: Letters of application, including a motivation letter, extensive curriculum vitae, a copy of diplomas
and a grading list can be sent by email to Dr. Gunther Antonissen (Gunther.Antonissen@UGent.be) before June 15th, 2018. Provide also contact details of two persons who can be contacted for recommendation. Please clearly mention the reference (MycoSafe-South_dairy) of the PhD for which you apply. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED!

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: MycoSafe-South consortium

Joint NAM S&T Centre/ZMT Bremen Fellowship for Scientists and Researchers in Developing Countries 2018 – Germany

Application Deadline: 8th June 2018.

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To Be Taken At (Country): Germany

About the Award: In pursuance of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) concluded by the NAM S&T Centre [www.namstct.org] with the Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (Leibniz-Zentrum für Marine Tropenforschung – ZMT), Bremen, Germany [www.leibnizzmt.de], a Joint NAM S&T Centre – ZMT Bremen Fellowship scheme was initiated in 2008 for providing opportunities to the scientists from the developing countries to affiliate themselves with ZMT to upgrade their research skills and conduct joint research in Ecology, Biogeochemistry, Modelling and Tropical Coastal Marine Systems.

Type: Research, Fellowship

Eligibility: 

• The applicant must hold at least a Master of Science (M.Sc.) or an equivalent degree and should be actively engaged in research and development.
• There is no upper age limit, but younger scientists will be preferred.
• Selection is strictly on merit based on the scientific quality of the proposal submitted by the applicant.
• From a developing country only one scientist / researcher will be accepted in any given financial year.

Selection Criteria: They will be selected strictly on merit and competitive basis.

Number of Awards: Up to 5 scientists and researchers from the developing countries will be sponsored each year by the NAM S&T Centre to work at ZMT Bremen under the Joint Fellowship Programme.

Value of Award: 

• The fellowship covers airfare and provides a monthly subsistence allowance of €1250.
• ZMT Bremen will provide all possible facilities and access to various equipments in its constituent laboratories, which may be required by the Fellows for implementing their research activity under the supervision of a senior ZMT scientist.

Individual Fellows or their governments / institutions will be required to bear the following costs:

• All expenses in the home country incidental to travel abroad, including expenditure for passport and visa, required medical examinations and vaccinations and miscellaneous expenses such as internal travel to/from the airport of departure in the home country.
• Salary and other related allowancesfor the Fellows during the Fellowship period.
• Cost towards medical insurance to coverthe period of Fellowship in Germany.

The NAM S&T Centre and ZMT Bremen will not assume responsibility for the following expenditure in connection with the Fellowship of a particular scientist/researcher:

• Insurance, medical bills or hospitalisation fees.
• Compensation in the event of death, disability or loss of personal belongings or compensation for damage caused by climatic or other conditions

Duration of Programme: The maximum duration of Fellowship will be three months. All the selected scholars will have to obey the German VISA regulations according to which one can stay only for a maximum period of 90 days in Germany, beyond which the VISA regulations are more stringent.

How to Apply: 

• Applications for the fellowship may be submitted in the prescribed format (attached) directly to the NAM S&T Centre and not to ZMT Bremen. Incomplete applications will be rejected.
• A proposal on the scientific work to be carried out at ZMT Bremen must be attached with the application. To prepare the proposal the applicants may carefully study the material available on the website of ZMT Bremen [www.leibniz-zmt.de] and then, if necessary, get in touch with the ZMT at E-mail: agnes.richard@leibniz-zmt.de

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

Award Providers: NAM S&T Centre, Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research

Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) Training Programme for Developing Countries (fully-funded) 2018/2019

Application Deadline: Applications should be submitted preferably 3 months before the commencement of the course.

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): India

About the Award: The ITEC Programme, fully funded by the Government of India, has evolved and grown over the years. Under ITEC and its sister programme SCAAP (Special Commonwealth African Assistance Programme), 161 countries in Asia, Africa, East Europe, Latin America, the Caribbean as well as Pacific and Small Island countries are invited to share in the Indian developmental experience acquired over six decades of India’s existence as a free nation.
As a result of different activities under this programme, there is now a visible and growing awareness among other countries about the competence of India as a provider of technical know-how and expertise as well as training opportunities, consultancy services and feasibility studies. These programmes have generated immense goodwill and substantive cooperation among the developing countries.

Fields of Study: Topics for this period include courses in the themes of power, renewable & alternative energy; agriculture and rural development; environment & climate change; and others.

Type: Training

Eligibility: 

• Academic qualifications as laid down by the Institute for the Course concerned.
• Working knowledge of English required to follow the Course.
• Age between 25 to 45 years.
• Medically fit to undertake the training.

Selection Criteria: 

• Officials in Government, Public and Private Sectors, Universities, Chambers of Commerce and Industry, etc.
• Candidates should possess adequate work experience.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Program: The program covers transportation and visa costs, course fees, accommodation, and living and book allowances for course participants.

Duration of Program: October-December 2018

How to Apply: Find information on how to apply

Visit Programme Webpage for details

Award Provider: Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation

Short Story Day Africa Prize for African Writers 2018

Application Deadline: 31st August 2018.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: African countries

To be taken at (country): Online

Offered Since: 2013

About the Award: The Short Story Day Africa Prize is an African writing prize open to African citizens, permanent residents of African countries, or second generation Africans living in the diaspora only. Unpublished works between 3000-5000 words in response to the theme are eligible for the prize.
In 2018, Short Story Day Africa is seeking innovative short fiction set in the rooms, the passages, the bars and the lobbies of hotels across the continent, as well as metafiction exploring Africa as a hotel herself. If these walls could talk, what story would they tell?

Type: Essay writing contest

Eligibility: 

1. Any African citizen or African person living in the diaspora(Citizens of African countries or former citizens who have given up citizenship for whatever reason, and second generation Africans whose parents are/were African citizens), as well as persons residing permanently (granted permanent residence or similar) in any African country, may enter.
2. Writers may only submit one story for the competition. Repeat entries by the same writer will be disqualified.
3. Writers are welcome to submit stories in any fiction genre.
4. Stories must be between 3000 and 5000 words in length.
5. Stories must be submitted in English. While you are free to incorporate other languages into your story, the story must be able to be understood fully by its English content.
6. Stories must be submitted online via Submittable between 1 June 2018 – 3 1 August 2018. The link to the submission form will be made live on 1 June 2018.
7. To facilitate easy reading and judging, please format your stories according to the format stipulated below. Stories not formatted in this way are at the risk of being disqualified.
8. Stories must not have been previously published in any form or any format.
9. Simultaneous submissions are not welcome. Any story entered or published elsewhere during the course of judging or publication will be disqualified.
10. You are welcome to enter under a pseudonym or nom de plume, as long as you also include your real name along with your entry.
11. All entries will be judged anonymously. Please DO NOT put your name or any other identifying details anywhere on your manuscript.
12. The judges’ decision is final.
13. By submitting a story the author attests that it is their own original work and grants exclusive global print and digital rights to Short Story Day Africa for one year, and thereafter agrees to seek permission to republish and when published elsewhere attributes first publication to Short Story Day Africa; non-exclusive digital rights to Worldreader to publish individual stories on Worldreader Mobile; and non-exclusive digital rights to BooksLive for publicity purposes.
14. By entering, the author agrees to allowing Short Short Story Day Africa to include their entry in an anthology should it be selected by the judges; and to working with editors to get their story publication ready.
15. We will not share your personal information with anyone. We will, however, add you to Short Story Day Africa mailing list for the sole purpose of informing you of next year’s even, or of other Short Story Day Africa events that may be of interest to you.

Submission Criteria: Candidates should:

• Type their document, using a single, clear font, 12-point size, double-spaced. The easiest font to use is Times New Roman, or a similar serif font.
• Put the title of their story halfway down the cover page. Please DO NOT title your story Migrations. Start your story immediately below the title.
• Put an accurate word count at the top right.
• Please number the pages.
• Left-justify their paragraphs.
• Ensure there is at least a 1 inch or 2 centimetre margin all the way around your text. This is to allow annotation to be written onto a printed copy.
• Indent each new paragraph by about 1/2 inch or 1 centimetre, except for the first line of the story or the first line of a new scene.
• Don’t insert extra lines between your paragraphs. A blank line indicates a new scene.
• Put the word “End” after the end of their text, centred, on its own line.

Number of Awardees: Three

Value of Award: 

• 1st prize  US$800
• 2nd prize US$200
• 3rd prize  US$100

In addition three emerging writers will receive a 20 week online creative writing course. These will be selected from the long list or slush pile.

How to Apply: Candidates should go here to apply

Visit Award Webpage for details

Award Provider: Short Story Day Africa

Important Notes: Due to a lack of funding submissions will incur a small fee which pays for the Submittalbe platform. The fee is in dollars HOWEVER you do not need a dollar account to pay. All currencies are accepted and your bank will convert the amount taken off your account into local currency. Thank you for your understanding.

Facebook Grace Hopper Women in Computing Scholarship (Funded to Conference in Texas, USA) 2018

Application Deadline: 29th June, 2018 at 11:59pm PDT.

Eligible Countries: All

To be taken at (country): Houston, Texas, USA

About the Award:This fall we’ll join thousands of remarkable women in technology in Houston, Texas from September 26-28, 2018 for our eleventh year at the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing. This unique scholarship program will be awarded to 50 women excelling in Computer Science. Each recipient will have the opportunity not only to attend the Celebration, but to spend valuable days before the conference with Facebook engineers learning, collaborating, and preparing for the conference.

Type: Training, Events

Eligibility: 

• The scholarship is open to all women excelling in Computer Science globally.
• You have to currently be enrolled at an educational institution in order to qualify for the scholarship (high school through post-doc students are eligible).
• For international applicants: If you are selected, you would be responsible for your own travel visa. Facebook would cover travel expenses.

Number of Awards: 50

Value of Program: 

• Paid registration for the Grace Hopper Celebration
• Paid travel and lodging, including a pre-Grace Hopper Celebration program in Orlando that includes tech talks, mentoring sessions and networking events from September 26-28, 2018
• An invitation to a private reception with Facebook’s Engineering Team during the Grace Hopper Celebration
• Additional meal stipend

Duration of Program: September 26-28, 2018

How to Apply: Apply

Visit Programme Webpage for details

Award Provider: Facebook