Japan takes more aggressive stance towards Russia, China

Ben McGrath

Japan has backed the US-NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine and exploiting the conflict to justify its own military buildup and remilitarization. In particular, Tokyo is aggressively asserting its territorial claims to the Kuril Islands in its longstanding dispute with Moscow, while accusing China of preparing to invade Taiwan.

Fumio Kishida in October 2017. (Photo: Wikimedia commons)

The Japanese foreign ministry released its annual Diplomatic Bluebook for 2022 on April 22. The document refers to four islands in the Kuril Island chain just to the north of Japan, which it calls the Northern Territories, as being “illegally occupied” by Russia. It insists that “the Northern Territories are islands over which Japan has sovereignty, and are an inherent part of the territory of Japan.” Russia refers to the four islands as the Southern Kurils.

It is the first time since 2003 that the words “illegally occupied” have appeared in the bluebook while the phrase an “inherent” part of Japanese territory has not been used since 2011. The report also attacked Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine as “an outrage that undermines the foundation of the international order not only in Europe but also in Asia.”

Relations between Tokyo and Moscow have rapidly soured since the outbreak of the Ukraine war in February and the Japanese government’s decision to side with the US in denouncing Russia and imposing economic sanctions.

Tokyo is also increasing monetary aid to Ukraine to $US300 million and plans to supply Kiev with surveillance drones and hazmat suits—thereby supporting Washington’s unsubstantiated allegations that Russia could be preparing to use chemical weapons.

Tokyo’s decision to side with the US against Russia is a clear turning point in relations with both Moscow and Beijing. An official in the prime minister’s office cited in the Asahi Shimbun described the sanctions against Russia as “a landmark political decision in the history of Japanese foreign diplomacy.”

On March 21, Russia formally broke off negotiations with Japan over the Kirils, “due to the impossibility of discussing the core document on bilateral relations with a country that has taken an openly hostile position and is striving to cause harm to the interests of our country.”

On March 25, Russia’s Eastern Military District said it was conducting military drills on the Kuril islands with more than 3,000 troops and associate military hardware.

The Kuril Islands are located to the northeast of Hokkaido, stretching from there to Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula. Only four of the chain’s island groups are disputed—those closest to Hokkaido: Etorofu/Iturup, Kunashiri/Kunashir, Shikotan, and the Habomai Islands. The Soviet Union took control of the islands following Tokyo’s surrender on August 15, 1945.

Disputed Kuril Islands map [Wikipedia]

During World War II, the Allies—the Soviet Union, the US and Britain—agreed to strip Japan of all its colonies and islands, except its four main islands and other islands as they saw fit to return to Tokyo. The Yalta Agreement specifically stated that the Kurils would be handed to the Soviet Union.

In the immediate aftermath of World War II, the US relied on the betrayals of the Soviet Stalinist regime to restabilize capitalism, in Europe where the Communist Parties in France and Italy entered bourgeois governments, and in Japan, where the Japanese Communist Party suppressed the huge strike movement.

Having restabilized global capitalism, the US went on the offensive, leading to the start of the Cold War. Japan was transformed into a bastion of anti-communism and a base of military operations in the region in particular during the Korean War.

As a result, Japan and the Soviet Union never signed a treaty to formally end their conflict during World War II. During the 1950s, US intervention into negotiations prevented a resolution to the dispute and signing of a peace treaty, with the dispute over the Kurils serving as one excuse for Washington to maintain its military presence in Japan and the region.

The dispute has continued to fester after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. In 2018, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Russian President Vladimir Putin held talks with a view to concluding a peace treaty and resolving the dispute over the Kurils, but could come to no agreement.

Following Japan’s publication of the latest bluebook this month, Moscow insisted on its territorial rights over the Kurils. Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov stated the four islands were Russia’s “integral territory” and denounced Tokyo for its “hostile actions” towards Moscow, saying any peace treaty talks in the future had become unlikely.

Japan’s aggressive stance towards Russia is bound up with its own remilitarization that intensified under the previous prime minister, Shinzo Abe, who boosted military spending. He also set out to undermine and rewrite the country’s postwar constitution that formally bars Japan from maintaining a military or deploying it overseas. The current government of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has continued that policy.

While he stepped down in 2020, Abe remains highly influential within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party. In February, he called on the government to hold discussions on hosting US nuclear weapons in Japan, thus integrating it more directly in US war plans especially against China. While Kishida dismissed Abe’s remarks at the time, the LDP quietly began discussion his proposal in March, well aware that it would provoke widespread public opposition.

Abe has also been prominent in stoking tensions with China over Taiwan. He met online with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen in March discuss the war in Ukraine. In her remarks to Abe, Tsai stated, “This kind of unilateral use of military force to change the status quo and infringe on the sovereignty of a democratic nation absolutely cannot be permitted to occur in the Indo-Pacific region.”

While not explicitly mentioning Beijing or Taipei, Tsai’s comments come close to referring to Taiwan as a sovereign nation and openly challenging the “One China” policy. The policy states that Taiwan is a part of China, though both Beijing and Taipei agree to differing interpretations so long as the latter does not declare independence. Nations with diplomatic relations with Beijing, including the US and Japan, adhere to the One China policy and do not recognize Taiwan as an independent country. 

Abe declared that he was interested in visiting Taiwan. Such a visit would almost certainly be interpreted as a major provocation by Beijing. Though no longer prime minister, Abe’s influence and status as a major supporter of remilitarization would be interpreted as a serious challenge to the “One China” policy.

Beijing’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbi responded to the Abe/Tsai meeting by saying, “Taiwan is China’s business, not Japan’s.”

Tokyo is attempting to capitalize on the barrage of anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda to further push its goal of remilitarization. This has nothing to do with support for democratic or “human” rights in Russia or China, but is aimed at drowning out the widely held anti-war sentiment throughout the working class and among young people.

Fed monetary tightening hits Wall Street

Nick Beams

The move by the US Federal Reserve to lift interest rates and begin reducing its holdings of financial assets because of rising inflation is having a significant impact on Wall Street.

The Wall St. street sign is framed by the American flags flying outside the New York Stock exchange, Friday, Jan. 14, 2022, in the Financial District. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

Yesterday, what has been described as an “April rout” continued and the NASDAQ index dropped 4.2 percent, bringing its total loss for the month to 13 percent. It was the worst month since October 2008 amid the global financial crisis, and took its fall for the year to 21 percent.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the “broad selloff has erased trillions of dollars in market value from the tech-heavy gauge with investors souring on shares of everything from software and semiconductor companies to social-media giants.”

The Financial Times (FT) reported that the fall across the NASDAQ wiped off more than $5 trillion from its market value since the record high of last November.

The so-called FAANG stocks—comprising Meta (the Facebook parent), Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Alphabet (the Google parent)—have together lost $1 trillion in market value. Individual falls are significant. Amazon has recorded a loss of 26 percent for the year and Apple 11 percent. Netflix has dropped by 49 percent in April alone.

There have been sizeable falls in other areas of the market. The S&P 500 index has dropped four weeks in a row with a loss of 8.8 percent for April. Its loss for the year, which began with the index at a record high, is 13 percent.

The Dow fell 4.9 percent in April and has lost 9 percent this year. Both indexes have recorded their worst month since the March 2020 plunge at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The chief reason for the market decline is the inflation surge—the largest in four decades—which is pushing central banks to tighten monetary policy. When inflation was very low, they could pour money into the markets in response to a downturn without the fear this would spark a hike in prices.

These policies led to a 250 percent increase in the MSCI World Growth Index of stock markets over the past decade. But inflation means conditions have changed.

As Barry Norris, chief investment officer at Argonaut Capital told the FT: “Every time there’s been a selloff in markets there’s been a central bank put. Central banks are not going to come to the rescue this time.”

The shift by central banks is intersecting with the continuing problems in global supply chains. These have been caused by the refusal of capitalist governments to take co-ordinated international action to eliminate the pandemic, fearing necessary public health measures would adversely impact the stock markets and the financial system more broadly.

These decisions have now rebounded on the real economy with major effects. Apple alone forecast this week it could take a hit of as much as $8 billion in the current quarter because of supply chain problems.

“Supply constraints caused by COVID-related disruptions and industry-wide silicon shortages are impacting our ability to meet customer demand for our products,” the company’s finance chief, Luca Maestri, told analysts this week.

The type of constraints experienced by Apple stretch across the global economy as a whole—there is virtually no industry that has not been affected—meaning that losses will be of the order of hundreds of billions, if not trillions, of dollars.

Some indication of the continuing and worsening economic effects of COVID was the surprise news earlier this week that the US GDP had contracted at an annualised rate of 1.4 percent in the first quarter, due in part to the effects of the COVID surge at the start of the year.

The Biden administration has dismissed the figure as a “statistical quirk,” but the increasing view is that a significant shift is taking place. There are fears that inflation, already at more than 8 percent, is surging so rapidly that the Fed will need to lift rates to a level that will bring about a recession.

Recessionary trends are becoming ever more apparent in Europe as inflation continues to rise. The rate for the euro zone was 7.5 percent for the year to April and up 7.4 percent in March, led by the surge in energy prices, up 38 percent and unprocessed food prices which jumped 9.2 percent.

The price surge is taking place in conditions of weakening economic growth. GDP in the 19 euro zone countries grew by just 0.2 percent in the first quarter compared to 0.3 percent for the last three months of 2021.

The French economy showed no growth for the first quarter and the Spanish economy contracted as did the Italian. The German economy showed growth of only 0.2 percent over the previous three months.

The chief economics adviser at the Italian banking conglomerate UniCredit, Erik Nielsen, told the FT: “The world is in really bad shape. Particularly in Europe, where we have entered stagflation now.”

He said there was a “double whammy” looming in the euro zone where the European Central Bank was likely to start to lift rates because of inflation under conditions of an economic downturn.

China is also experiencing significant financial turbulence because of the latest outbreak of COVID, which the government is battling to bring under control. The renminbi fell by 4.2 percent against the dollar this month, a record decline, greater than the fall in 2015 which sent a tremor through global markets.

The fall in the currency constricts the ability of the government to take economic stimulus measures. The renminbi selloff accelerated after President Xi Jinping announced increased infrastructure spending to try to mitigate the economic effects of lockdowns in Shanghai and other major cities.

The tightening of monetary policy by the Fed is having major international ramifications because it effectively sets monetary policy for the rest of the world.

One of the effects of a rise in interest rates and a surge in the value of the dollar is to place increasing strains on poorer countries that have dollar-denominated debt.

A recent New York Times opinion piece by Georgetown University economic historian Jamie Martin noted: “Conditions are now ripe for the Fed to precipitate another global crisis. Of particular concern are extremely high levels of emerging market debt. The International Monetary Fund estimates that about 60 percent of low-income countries are experiencing debt distress or are close to it.”

Sri Lanka, he wrote, might be just the first domino to fall. But the conditions being experienced there, which have set off mass protests and demonstrations against the government, are only a very sharp expression of the struggles now developing in low-income and advanced economies alike amid a further deepening of the historic crisis of the global capitalist system.

US confirms threat to invade Solomon Islands over China security agreement

Patrick O’Connor

The United States government has confirmed its threat to invade the small South Pacific country of Solomon Islands in the event that China establishes a military base there.

An F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet is seen on the deck of the U.S. Navy USS Ronald Reagan in the South China Sea, 2018 (AP Photo/Kin Cheung)

The blatantly illegal ultimatum was personally issued to Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare by a US delegation led by National Security Council Coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, Kurt Campbell, on April 22.

Following the 90-minute meeting, the White House issued a menacing statement: “If steps are taken to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities, or a military installation, the delegation noted that the United States would then have significant concerns and respond accordingly.”

The State Department has since left no doubt as to what is meant by “respond accordingly.”

On April 26, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink, who was part of the delegation with Campbell, spoke with the media. He was asked directly whether the US “would take military action against Solomon Islands if China established a base there.” His refusal to rule out such an intervention means that is exactly what is under discussion in Washington.

Kurt Campbell in 2013 [Source: University of South Carolina US-China Institute]

“We’ve outlined the specific concerns that we have regarding the potential for a permanent military presence or power-projection capabilities or a military installation, and we’ve indicated that should those events come to pass, that the United States would respond accordingly. And I think it’s best if I leave it at that and not speculate on what that may or may not mean,” Kritenbrink replied.

The State Department official added that the recently signed Solomon Islands-China security agreement had implications for the “security interests of the United States and our partners,” and that in the meeting with Sogavare, “we wanted to be crystal-clear about what that may mean.”

These thuggish declarations have been echoed by the Australian government. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has stated he will not allow the establishment of a Chinese base on Australia’s so-called “door step,” adding that this would represent a “red line,” that is, a trigger for military action in Solomon Islands.

The Solomon Islands-China agreement has erupted as the most prominent issue in the federal election campaign, with the opposition Labor Party seeking to position itself as the most reliable and ruthless advocate of Australian and US imperialist interests.

What has emerged underscores the advanced nature of US plans for a military assault on China. Wracked by enormous social and political crises at home, and confronting a weakened position within the world economy, American imperialism is on a global rampage. The Biden administration previously pledged to end the “forever wars” in the Middle East only in order to better prepare for war against its great power rivals, Russia and China.

Washington has committed $33 billion to the US-NATO proxy war against Russia that has been provoked in Ukraine. US and Australian threats against Solomon Islands have further exposed the hypocrisy of imperialist geopolitics.

Ukraine’s moves to join the aggressive NATO alliance is defended as an absolute “right,” and Russian objections to additional US bases being established on its western land border dismissed out of hand. For Solomon Islands, on the other hand, despite being separated from the US landmass by 10,000 kilometres of ocean, the government’s decision to enter into a security agreement with Washington’s chief rival brings with it threats of retaliatory invasion. This demonstrates the reality behind US talk of a “rules-based order” and the sovereign rights of small nations under international law.

The Solomon Islands’ government has insisted it has no plans to house a Chinese military base.

Prime Minister Sogavare delivered a defiant speech to the parliament in Honiara yesterday. He raised rioting in 2006, which occurred during the neo-colonial, Australian-led Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI), and the three days of destruction that followed last November’s failed coup attempt by US-backed forces from the province of Malaita. “Obviously, the security agreement with Australia is inadequate to deal with our hard internal threats,” he stated, adding that for the wellbeing “of our people and the economy of our country we had look elsewhere.”

Sogavare insisted that Canberra had informed his government that Australian police and military would not protect Chinese assets and infrastructure during their deployment to the Solomons last year. This allegation has been met with angry denials by Australian officials.

Sogavare’s speech also exposed the hypocrisy of US-Australian complaints of a lack of “transparency” with the China security agreement, by pointing to their failure to consult regional countries before signing the AUKUS military pact with the United Kingdom directed against China.  

“I learnt of the AUKUS treaty in the media,” he told parliament. “One would expect that as a member of the Pacific family, the Solomon Islands and members of the Pacific should have been consulted to ensure this AUKUS treaty is transparent. But I realise that Australia is a sovereign country, and that it can enter into any treaty it wants to, transparently or not, which is exactly what they did with AUKUS treaty. […] When Australia signed up to AUKUS, we did not become theatrical or hysterical about the implications this would have for us.”

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison was yesterday asked if he thought Sogavare was “parroting China’s rhetoric.” Completely ignoring what Sogavare actually said, he replied, “Well, there’s a remarkable similarity between those statements and those of the Chinese government.”

There can be little doubt that Washington and Canberra intend to step up their destabilisation campaign against the Sogavare government.

Separately from their discussion with Sogavare last week, Kurt Campbell and the State Department team met with Matthew Wale, Solomon Islands’ opposition leader. Wale has long sought to curry favour with Washington and Canberra, and has pledged that if he is prime minister he will rescind not only the military agreement with China but also the 2019 diplomatic switch from Taiwan to China.

The US also continues its highly provocative financial and political support for violent separatist forces in the province of Malaita. The provincial leader Daniel Suidani has insisted he will not recognise Beijing and has barred Chinese personnel from entering Malaita. Suidani’s supporters in the proscribed Malaita For Democracy (M4D) group have previously issued pogromist threats against ethnic Chinese people on the island, and led the failed coup attempt last November that involved three days of looting and arson in Honiara.

The US and Australian media have maintained a blackout on Washington’s support for these forces, which threatens to reignite sectarian divisions that wracked the impoverished country between 1998 and 2003.

War in Ukraine is Pushing Global Acute Hunger to the Highest Level in This Century

Daniel Maxwell

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has produced a terrible humanitarian crisis in eastern Europe. It also is worsening conditions for other countries, many of them thousands of miles away.

Together, Russia and Ukraine account for almost 30% of total global exports of wheat, nearly 20% of global exports of corn (maize) and close to 80% of sunflower seed products, including oils. The war has largely shut off grain exports from Ukraine and is affecting Ukrainian farmers’ ability to plant the 2022 crop. Planting there in 2022 is expected to be reduced by nearly a quarter.

Sanctions and constraints on shipping in the Black Sea have largely shut down Russian exports, except by land to neighboring friendly countries. This is driving up world prices for grain and oilseeds, and increasing the overall cost of food.

Bans on Russian oil have also caused global spikes in energy costs. And both Russia and its ally Belarus, which is affected by some economic sanctions, are major producers and exporters of agricultural fertilizer. High fertilizer prices could have widespread impacts on food production.

I research famines and extreme food security crises and am part of a group of independent experts who review the data, analysis and conclusions whenever a national assessment indicates that a famine may be occurring or about to occur.

The people of Ukraine deserve all of the attention and help that they are receiving. But I believe the global community must not lose sight of humanitarian suffering occurring elsewhere now, including many countries far from the spotlight.

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification measures food insecurity objectively based on a wide range of evidence.IPC, CC BY-ND.

A perfect storm for food scarcity

Global food and fertilizer prices were near record highs even before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. Prices for grain and oilseed products had already reached or surpassed levels recorded in 2011, when a devastating famine in Somalia – triggered in part by extreme food prices – killed more than 250,000 people.

2011 was also the year of the Arab Spring uprisings in Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Bahrain and Syria. Many factors fueled those protests, including extraordinarily high bread prices in major Middle East and North African cities.

Now, the war in Ukraine has pushed prices to near all-time highs. As of April 8, the average cost of staple food grains had jumped by more than 17% from February levels. For food-importing countries everywhere, this increase will push the cost of food significantly higher. And with the war likely to continue, a global supply shortfall could lead nations to adopt measures such as export bans that further distort food markets.

The global grain market is very concentrated. More than 85% of global wheat exports come from just seven sources: the European Union, the U.S., Canada, Russia, Australia, Ukraine and Argentina. The same share of maize exports comes from just four countries: the U.S., Argentina, Brazil and Ukraine.

Many nations across the Middle East and North Africa are major wheat importers and buy much of their supply from Russia and Ukraine. For example, Russia and Ukraine provide 90% of Somalia’s wheat imports, 80% of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s, and about 40% each of Yemen’s and Ethiopia’s.

Losing Ukrainian and Russian exports means higher grain prices and much longer shipping distances from alternative suppliers such as Australia, the U.S., Canada and Argentina – at a time when high energy prices are raising shipping costs. And since global grain markets are denominated in U.S. dollars, the dollar’s current strength makes grain even more expensive for countries with weaker currencies.

Famine warning lights

For nations already at risk of famine, these effects could be disastrous. Prior to the war, the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization estimated that 161 million people in 42 countries were in extreme food insecurity, meaning they needed urgent food assistance. Over a half-million people faced famine levels of food deprivation – by far the most extreme levels of hunger since at least the early 2000s. The most badly affected countries include Yemen, Ethiopia, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, South Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia and Kenya.

The causes of these crises vary. Violent conflict is a common factor across most of them. Some countries are still struggling to recover from the economic and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. A devastating drought is also affecting the Horn of Africa, with rains from March through May now forecast to be well below average. This would constitute the fourth failed or below-average rainy season in a row for areas of Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya.

Even before the Ukraine invasion, this combination of factors had already led to the highest numbers on record of people needing food and other humanitarian assistance for their survival in the East African Region. Rural labor markets and the price of livestock – the two things that the poorest have to sell – have collapsed due to the drought, precisely as global food prices have spiked. A dramatic decline in purchasing power was a major driver of the 2011 famine in Somalia, and the same circumstances are rapidly taking shape now.

Not enough aid

For countries in crisis, the U.N. World Food Program is the primary global provider of food for at-risk populations. In 2021, the WFP procured nearly half of its grain from Ukraine.

Much of the WFP’s food aid is delivered as direct cash transfers rather than in-kind supplies. But whatever form it takes, the cost of that aid has increased substantially with rising food, fuel and shipping prices. WFP officials estimate that the cost of its operations has increased by 44% since the start of the war in Ukraine, and the agency now faces a 50% funding gap.

International prices for grains and oilseeds were already high when Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. Agricultural Market Information System.

The crisis in Ukraine has also spotlighted a growing gap between funding and needs, especially in some of the world’s poorest countries. For example, the U.N. issued a flash appeal for humanitarian assistance to Ukraine in early March 2022. By April 15 it was 65% funded. Countries at risk of famine, whose appeals have been out longer, have received much less funding. On April 15, Afghanistan’s appeal was 13.5% funded; South Sudan, 8.2%; and Somalia only 4.4%. Overall funding for global humanitarian needs stood at 6.5% of requested levels.

When I worked as the deputy regional director for CARE International in East Africa, I often worried about how a humanitarian crisis in one country might have spillover effects in others. There could be influxes of refugees who need assistance, or humanitarian staff might have to be shifted to support the response to the new crisis.

In those days, some crises triggered by drought could affect several countries in the region at once. But the ripple effects from the war in Ukraine could lead to the worsening of humanitarian crises around the world.

AIMS Master’s Scholarships in Mathematical Sciences for Teachers (MMST) 2022/2024

Application Deadline?

30th April 2022 18:00 GMT.

Tell Me About AIMS MMST:

The AIMS MMST is a professional program designed to provide current teachers of mathematics an opportunity to expand the knowledge of its participants in mathematical foundations relating to core secondary school curricula, and applications of modern mathematics. Coupled with significant mathematical concepts, the program is enriched with relevant pedagogy courses to challenge its students to investigate new, innovative and research-informed methods of knowledge transfer. The MMST program is offered on a part-time basis: 70% online and 30% residential for Ghanaian Nationals, while being entirely online for other African Nationals.

The AIMS teaching and learning model carefully set up by eminent abled faculty across the globe is uniquely designed to emphasize creativity, innovation, and flexibility. The program provides both a broad overview and in-depth study of cutting-edge topics in mathematical sciences with strong computing and research skills. This offers students exposure to a range of topics, allowing them to make informed choices as to their future specialization.

The two-year MMST program consists of three phases; the skills phase, the review phase, and the research phase. The AIMS MMST program is equivalent to a 4-semester hybrid course including project-based research. Typical courses offered in the phases include the following.

Which Fields are Eligible?

Skills Courses include:

• Mathematical Problem Solving 
• Physical Problem Solving
• History of Mathematics and Mathematical Discoveries
• Technology in Mathematics
• Introduction to Probability Theory 
• Communicating Mathematics 
• Calculus
• Introduction to Python and SciPy 
• Algebra for Teachers 
• Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations

Review Courses include:

• Geometry for Teachers 
• Real Analysis 
• Discrete mathematics 
• Statistics for Teachers 
• Mathematical Epidemiology 
• Number Theory for Teachers 
• Modeling 
• Numerical Methods and Scientific Computing with Python 
• Introduction to Financial Mathematics 
• Modeling of Computational Mathematics 
• Introduction to Classical Mechanics 
• Data Visualization

What Type of Scholarship is this?

Master

Who can apply for AIMS MMST?

• Must have a bachelor’s degree with sufficient mathematical background
• Must come from any African country
• Must currently be teaching in any African country

Which Countries are Eligible?

African countries

Where will Award be Taken?

Ghana

How Many Positions will be Given?

Not specified

What is the Benefit of AIMS MMST?

The full scholarship provided covers tuition, books, accommodation and meals at AIMS for the residential period, as well as a monthly stipend.

How to Apply for AIMS MMST?

A complete application should include the following documents:

• Curriculum vitae
• Post-secondary transcripts and certificates
• Details of two referees (one from the school you are currently teaching) to be submitted directly via the application portal.
• Valid passport / (ID for Ghanaians)

All inquiries should be sent via email to mmst-applications@aims.edu.gh. The subject of your email should have your full name and the name of the program. Example: John Owusu_ AIMSMMST

Application:

Kindly click HERE to apply!

NB: Only shortlisted applicants will be contacted

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship Programme 2023/2024

Application Deadline: 30th May 2022

To Be Taken At (Country): USA

About the Award: During their stay at a host American university, Humphrey Fellows are invited to take graduate courses relevant to their professional interests.  However, as the Humphrey Fellowship is not a degree program, participants spend a considerable portion of their time engaged in professional development activities including: consultations and affiliations with U.S. faculty and experts, field trips, workshops, research projects, and the development of practical useful strategies that could be applied in the Fellows’ home countries.

Field of Study: The Humphrey Fellowship offers opportunities in the following fields:

• Sustainable Development
• Economic Development
• Educational
• Public Health 

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: 

• Have a minimum of a four-year undergraduate degree from S.A. (BA + Honors)
• Have a minimum of five years of full-time professional experience beyond the attainment of a first university/undergraduate degree prior to July 2019
• University lecturers have to have management or policy responsibilities and experience. Exceptions apply to teachers of English as a foreign language and specialists in substance abuse preventions and treatment
• Demonstrated Leadership Ability: candidates should have achieved positions of significant responsibility at the national, regional or local level and show clear promise to assume greater future leadership roles
• A record of public service in the community: candidates careers must reflect a present and future commitment to public service, broadly defined in the public, NGO, or private sector

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The Fellowship provides for:

• Payment of tuition and fees at the assigned host university;
• Pre-academic English language training, if required;
• A living allowance, including a one-time settling-in allowance;
• Accident and sickness coverage;
• A book allowance; one-time computer subsidy;
• Air travel (international travel to and from the U.S. for the Program and domestic travel to required program events);
• A Professional Development allowance for professional activities, such as field trips, professional visits and conferences.

Duration of Programme: 10 months

How to Apply: The online application can be accessed HERE

Visit Programme Webpage for Details

French Institutes for Advanced Study (FIAS) Fellowship Programme 2023/2024

Application Deadline: 2nd June 2022 – 6:00 PM CET (Paris Time).

Eligible Field(s): The call is open to all disciplines in the SSH and all research fields. Research projects from other sciences that propose a transversal dialogue with SSH are also eligible.  Some of the IAS have scientific priorities they will focus on more specifically.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility:

• FIAS awards fellowships to outstanding researchers of all career levels, from postdoctoral researchers to senior scientists. The minimum requirement is a PhD + 2 years of research experience at the time of the application. Exception will be made for scholars with a Master + 6 years of full-time research experience after the degree (PhD training will not be considered in the calculation of experience).
• Researchers from all countries are eligible to the FIAS Fellowship Programme but they have to have spent no more than 12 months in France during the three years prior to the application deadline.

Eligible Countries: All

To be Taken at (Country): France

Number of Awards: For the 2023-2024 academic year, FIAS offers 37 fellowship positions: 4 in Aix-Marseille, 3 in Loire Valley (Orléans-Tours), 10 in Lyon, 3 in Montpellier, 4 in Nantes and 13 in Paris.

Value of Award: The FIAS fellows will benefit from the support and conducive scientific environment offered by the IAS, in an interdisciplinary cohort of fellows and in close relation to the local research potential. The fellows will be free to organize their work and conduct research as they wish.

CONDITIONS

All IAS have agreed on common standards, including the provision of a living allowance (2,700€ per month), social security coverage, accommodation, a research and training budget, plus coverage of travel expenses

Duration of Award: 10 months

How to Apply: Applications are submitted online via www.fias-fp.eu where you will find detailed information regarding the content of the application, eligibility criteria and selection procedure.

• It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details