All posts by CPNN Coordinator

About CPNN Coordinator

Dr David Adams is the coordinator of the Culture of Peace News Network. He retired in 2001 from UNESCO where he was the Director of the Unit for the International Year for the Culture of Peace, proclaimed for the Year 2000 by the United Nations General Assembly.

Austrian Censorship of Peace Conference Is An Outrage

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by By David Swanson, Kathy Kelly, John Reuwern and Brad Wolf from World Beyond War

Forty-eight hours before a global peace conference in Vienna, Austria, was to begin, the venue host abruptly cancelled. Peace, it seems, cannot be discussed, especially peace in Ukraine.

This news is a disturbing step in a growing trend.

Owners of the venue which was to host the Summit for Peace in Ukraine, announced on Wednesday, 7 June, 2023, their decision to cancel the agreement holding the summit on their premises. Fortunately, a new location was secured in Vienna (and anyone on Earth can sign up to take part online), but not before a smear campaign against the summit had been launched.

The venue owners reportedly explained: “We have decided to comply with the wishes of Ukraine and its embassy operating in Austria and have cancelled the rental of all rooms in the ÖGB catamaran for the event ‘International Summit for Peace in Ukraine’ next weekend.”

This was not just one venue taking this position. “On Wednesday, the Press Club Concordia also refused to make its premises in a central location in downtown Vienna available for a press conference of the ‘summit’.”

Supporters of the summit note the chilling innuendo caused by the abrupt cancellation of the summit. Speakers widely regarded for their moral and intellectual guidance have been undermined in statements intended to justify objections to the summit.

This is not an isolated incident. Western liberal ideals have long asserted that the best answer to mistaken speech was wiser speech and more of it. We now have a rapidly growing liberal consensus in favor, instead, of censoring media outlets, canceling speaking events, and forbidding people with unwanted points of view from even gathering together. Powers are being granted to governments, social media platforms, and other tech corporations that believers in democratic self-governance spent centuries claiming nobody should have.

Those who turn against free speech are often groups afraid they cannot win an honest debate. And so, they take up censorship. The movement for peace in Ukraine can take this as a compliment. Governments fear such a discussion of peace and instead smear this peace summit and the speakers.

An Austrian press report announced on Thursday that the venue (ÖGB Catamaran) had been withdrawn because the event was “under suspicion of propaganda.” What sort of propaganda? Well: “According to its own statements, the ‘International Summit for Peace in Ukraine’ wanted to show ways out of the war.” Under international law, propaganda for war is illegal and must be banned. Not a single nation on Earth complies with that requirement, raising up the value of free speech as trumping the rule of law. But speaking in favor of bringing a war to an end has now acquired the status of forbidden propaganda.

Moreover, the report explains, “some announced participants have no current fear of contact with the media of the aggressor.” In other words, if talk of negotiating peace is shut out of the media controlled by only one side of a war, speaking to media controlled by the other side — even to say exactly what one would have said to any other media outlet — is grounds for not only censorship but a ban on meeting and strategizing.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Question related to this article:
 
Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

How can we be sure to get news about peace demonstrations?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

The report gives some specifics: “The internationally prominent U.S. economist Jeffrey Sachs, for example, as well as Anuradha Chenoy, ex-dean of India’s Jawarharlal Nehru University and an important representative of global civil society networking, have given interviews to the TV station Russia Today (RT). The channel has been blocked across the Union for Russian war propaganda in the wake of EU sanctions. Sachs also answered questions from Russian TV host and war advocate Vladimir Solovyov in December 2022. Solovyov has often called for attacking Germany and Great Britain as well.”

The “Press Club Concordia” also explained that the problem was that Jeffrey Sachs might do an interview on Russian media.

Not only is diplomacy shunned, but speaking to members of the media with whom one disagrees is equated with advocating whatever those journalists have advocated. This can only contribute to distrust, enmity, and war without end.

Not only did the venue say it was doing the wishes of the Ukrainian embassy, but the Ukrainian ambassador to Austria tweeted that peace activists were the fifth column and henchmen of the Russian government.

And who created the idea that the whole world must obey the wishes of the government of Ukraine? The government of the United States — a country where little time passes these days without news of some event cancelled to fulfill the wishes of the government of Israel.

Further, “Noam Chomsky, who will speak at the summit via video, for example, believes that NATO has ‘marginalized’ Russia for too long.” Whether that fact is in dispute, or merely the acceptability of stating it out loud, was not explained.

“Also physically present in Vienna, according to the program, should be Clare Daly, an Irishwoman and member of the EU Parliament and the parliamentary group Die Linke. Daly also spoke repeatedly to RT about the West’s ‘complicity’ in the war in Ukraine. She believes the sanctions are wrong: they would not harm Russia and would not help Ukraine. In the EU Parliament in early 2023 voted against a resolution holding Russia legally responsible for the war. Daly said she does support those parts of the text that condemn Russia for the invasion and call on the government in Moscow to immediately cease all military action and withdraw from Ukraine. However, she said she opposes providing weapons to Ukraine and expanding NATO’s presence in the region.”

So, opposing both sides of a war is just as unacceptable as opposing one side, in the view of these censors.

This is where we have arrived. Proposing to negotiate peace — without even suggesting what those negotiations should arrive at — is so unacceptable to proponents of war, that it cannot be discussed — not in any large gathering. And yet, despite the wars being waged in the name of “democracy” it is not clear how such censorship is driven by democracy or in align with democratic values. Nor is it clear how many steps, if any, remain between the varieties of censorship we have now and hardcopy book burnings of the past.

(Editor’s note: We were informed on June 13 that “the websites for the International Peace Bureau and the Peace in Ukraine summit were hacked the day after the conference but should be up and running soon.”)

Europe, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Can Pope Francis bring peace to Ukraine?

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

An article by Thomas Reese in the National Catholic Reporter

Pope Francis has launched a peace mission aimed at finding a settlement of the Russia-Ukraine war, upsetting Ukraine’s allies with his refusal to insist that Russia leave Ukraine as a starting point for negotiations. For their part, the Russians simply ignore the pope.

Western supporters of Ukraine accuse the pope of moral equivalency, treating both sides as equal. This is nonsense.

Just four weeks into the war, the pope condemned  the “the violent aggression against Ukraine” and the “senseless massacre where every day there is a repetition of slaughter and atrocities,” in his Sunday Angelus in March 2022. “There is no justification for this!”


Photo of meeting between the Pope and Ukrainian President Zelensky on May 13 (EFE)

The Vatican has always said that it wants a “just peace.” When America Media’s Gerard O’Connell  asked Archbishop Paul Gallagher, the Vatican’s foreign minister, what a just peace meant for the Vatican, Gallagher said it meant a withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

This is not to say the pope holds the West blameless. In June of last year Francis told La Civilta Cattolica, a Jesuit publication, that a couple of months before the war an unnamed “wise” diplomat had expressed concern to him about NATO. “They are barking at the gates of Russia,” the diplomat said. “And they don’t understand that the Russians are imperial, and they will not allow any foreign power to approach them. The situation could lead to war,” concluded the diplomat.

While Francis made clear that this was the diplomat’s opinion, it is hard not to conclude that Francis agreed with him. He seems to believe, as many in the Global South do, that NATO somehow either provoked or failed to prevent the war.

Francis has also noted “the interest in testing and selling weapons” to combatants in the war. There is no question that the American military-industrial complex is profiting in Ukraine, financially as well as strategically: The Russian war machine is being severely degraded without the loss of a single American life.

(Continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Religion: a barrier or a way to peace?, What makes it one or the other?

Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

(Continued from left column).

But responding to those who accuse him of being pro-Putin, Francis told La Civilta Cattolica: “No, I am not. It would be simplistic and erroneous to say such a thing. I am simply against turning a complex situation into a distinction between good guys and bad guys, without considering the roots and self-interests, which are very complex.”

The pope acknowledged “the brutality and ferocity with which this war is being carried out” by the Russian side. “While we witness the ferocity and cruelty of Russian troops,” he said in the La Civilta Cattolica interview, “we should not forget the problems, and seek to solve them.”

The pope is not cheering on either side in this war, which is an essential quality needed in a mediator. The pope has appointed Cardinal Matteo Zuppi  as a special envoy for peace in Ukraine. Both sides have used the Vatican for facilitating exchanges of prisoners, which is a good sign.

With Ukraine unwilling to give up any of its territory — including Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014 — is there something else that would appease Russia and allow Putin to save face in defeat? I think there is: nuclear weapons.

The West has always feared the Red Army sweeping into Europe — indeed, it’s the reason NATO exists. Because the U.S. and Europe were unwilling to pay for enough conventional weapons to stop what they considered a formidable force, they relied on tactical nuclear weapons as a deterrent to the Red Army’s invasion.

We now see that the Russian army is a Potemkin army, more show than substance. If Ukraine all by itself can hold off the Russians and score victories, NATO would wipe the floor with them without using tactical nuclear weapons.

This military reality calls for a rethinking of NATO’s nuclear policy. As part of settling the Ukraine-Russia war, NATO and the U.S. should do two things: First, swear off the first use of nuclear weapons in Europe. Second, negotiate the elimination or at least reduction of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.

Ukraine will have to agree to not “officially” join NATO. The war has already made Ukraine part of NATO unofficially. Ukraine would continue to receive weapons, but no NATO troops can be deployed on Ukrainian soil.

Putin, as an authoritarian autocrat, can continue this war indefinitely. We must give him something to get him to stop. He could save face by telling his people that the war succeeded in forcing NATO into this deal.

There is a temptation to let the war go on as long as Russia is stymied and suffering huge military losses in the speculative hope that it will bring down Putin. But Ukraine is also suffering both military and civilian losses.

The pope reminds us to look at “the human side of the war,” the impact on people’s lives, the deaths, the refugees, the widows and orphans. The war cannot be examined only in terms of “geopolitical calculations.” Too many people are dying. The pope is right in calling for peace. Unnecessary tactical nuclear weapons in Europe would be a cheap price to pay for it.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

A global analysis of violence against women defenders in environmental conflicts

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

Excerpts from publication by Dalena Tran & Ksenija Hanaček in Nature

Abstract

Women environmental defenders face retaliation for mobilizing against extractive and polluting projects, which perpetrate violence against Indigenous, minority, poor and rural communities. The issue matters because it highlights the gendered nature of extractive violence and the urgent need to address the systemic patterns of violence that affect women defenders, who are often overlooked and underreported. Here we analyse violence against women defenders in environmental conflicts around the world. We use data from the Environmental Justice Atlas and employ log-linear and binomial regressions to find statistically significant patterns in displacement, repression, criminalization, violent targeting and assassinations committed against women defenders in extractive conflicts.


(Click on image to enlarge)

Statistical results indicate that violence against women defenders is concentrated among mining, agribusiness and industrial conflicts in the geographical South. Repression, criminalization and violent targeting are closely linked, while displacement and assassination appear as extreme outcomes when conflict violence worsens. Women defenders experience high rates of violence regardless of countries’ governance accountability and gender equality. This work contributes to the broader sustainability agenda by highlighting the need to address the impacts of extractive activities on women.

Main

Extractivism refers to projects extracting natural resources for exportation. It is an inherently unequal process often inciting extractivist violence, or the institutionalized use of brute force to displace and dominate communities for extractive and polluting projects such as mines or plantations. The extractive process frequently involves militarizing communities and assassinating environmental defenders, those advocating to protect environmental and human rights5. Such violence is typically justified by dehumanizing people and denying them agency through systematically excluding them from economic, social, political and cultural activities (for example, through classism, racialization and gendering). Extractive violence is also connected to ecocide, the notion that environmental destruction is criminal and has devastating genocidal impacts on affected communities dependent on the health of their environments for physical, spiritual, and cultural wellbeing. Genocidal outcomes are those exterminating and persecuting groups, assimilating survivors and erasing their culture.

Current literature describes a connection between colonial extractive attitudes, ecocide and genocide of Indigenous peoples, minorities, the poor and rural communities1. Ecocide typically begins with land grabbing, or forcefully dispossessing communities of their lands and natural resources. Such usurpation is secured through legal and institutional structures such as land ownership regimes disrupting common law tenure. This colonial control is also reinforced through covertly and overtly discriminatory ideological and discursive practices. Ensuing ecological destruction then becomes genocidal when causing conditions fundamentally threatening a group’s cultural and physical existence. More specifically, direct physical violence gives way to indirect forms of extermination through undermining place-based livelihoods, such as deforestation causing food instability, pollution causing health impacts, or structural inequalities increasing vulnerability to violence and ecological consequences.

There has been increasing attention to the ecocide–genocide nexus through environmental defender killings as well as slow violence wherein people suffer from long-term environmental harms. This study contributes an ecocide–genocide–gender connection to such literature. Violence against women environmental defenders (WEDs) is overlooked, and extractive violence is gendered. Corporations and states typically concentrate power among men during project negotiations, limiting women’s autonomy and normalizing their oppression. WEDs face retaliation because mobilizing defies gender expectations of docility (lack of retaliation) and sacrifice (absorption of extractive consequences).

(continued in right column)

Questions for this article

Protecting women and girls against violence, Is progress being made?

(continued from left column)

Assassinations are the most visible form of direct violence, but all threats to women defenders are difficult to document owing to censorship and a lack of dat. Lacking documentation of violence against women especially is also prevalent owing to discursive discrimination against women treating the loss of their lives as normal, deserved and ‘ungrievable. To address this gap, this article examines 523 cases from the Environmental Justice Atlas (EJAtlas) involving WEDs, 81 of which involve WEDs assassinated for their advocacy. Routine assassinations of WEDs are not isolated incidences, but rather political tactics forcefully making way for extractivism. Media reports often focus on gruesome details to sensationalize yet trivialize WEDs’ struggles, often not recording names, let alone their struggle. Patterns of extractive violence against women thus remain overlooked.

In this Article, we address the following questions: (1) Where and under which circumstances do WEDs experience different forms of violence leading up to their assassinations? (2) How do structural patterns of violence affect women defenders? Log-linear regression traced distributions of violence against WEDs across conflict types, commodities and impacts. Binomial regression then addressed structural patterns in countries where WEDs were assassinated. This article contributes global patterns of violence against WEDs. We broaden analyses to circumstances leading up to and including assassinations because ecocide is not limited to killings, but rather encompasses displacement, repression, criminalization and violent targeting. Given our statistical approach and the nature of the material, we are aware of the potential dehumanization of WEDs’ circumstances and denial of their agency. However, quantitative data analysis using a large, representative sample is necessary for strengthening arguments that patterns of violence against women defenders found in qualitative, locally focused case studies are not outliers, but rather are occurring worldwide.
Results

Regarding circumstances informing WED assassinations, extrajudicial killings predominantly occurred in Latin America, Asia and Africa. Many cases were in the Philippines, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico (Fig. 1). Even in Southern cases, some in Costa Rica, Kenya, Rwanda and Saint Lucia targeted Global North expatriates. The data are skewed towards the Philippines. There were 19 WED assassination cases, more than double compared with Colombia in second place. Some Philippines cases were massacres or serial killings, assassinating 26 WEDs across 19 cases, whereas cases elsewhere targeted one or two at a time.

Figure 2 shows that the types of conflict with high statistical significance (P ≤ 0.05) of violence against WEDs were biomass and land, mineral extraction and industrial and utilities conflicts. The distribution of violence throughout biomass and land conflicts (n = 146) was that nearly half of all corresponding cases involved repression (41%), criminalization (43%) and violent targeting (48%) of women defenders. . . .

Discussion (excerpts)

. . . . Overall, an ecocide–genocide–gender connection is thus apparent in how assassinations and extractive violence were situated within contexts producing gender-specific vulnerabilities for women defenders. Ecocidal dispossession of lands and resources, as many of the EJAtlas cases corroborate, often began upon intrusion of masculinized extractive industries into communities. Genocide caused cultural and physical erasure of peoples standing in the way of extractivism, and ecocide further accomplished such erasure through undermining women’s agency. As occurred in the deadliest countries towards WEDs, changing land ownership regimes8 used patriarchal ideologies to foster ecocidal conditions (extermination, persecution, survivor assimilation and cultural erasure) emboldening violence in subtly gendered manifestations of repression, criminalization, violent targeting and assassination.

The ecocide of Indigenous peoples across Southeast Asian EJAtlas cases, for example, has distinctly gendered aspects. Many Southeast Asian Indigenous peoples formerly had alternative gender cosmologies beyond man–woman binaries and with relatively more egalitarian power relations. Colonization goes beyond territorial invasion. Consequently, colonization and ensuing extractive land grabbing brought new legal, administrative and market structures concentrating (often militarized) power among men. We argue that, through discrimination and violence, these institutions committed ecocidal–genocidal–gendered violence by exterminating and persecuting Indigenous community leaders, erasing formerly egalitarian gender roles and relations, and assimilating survivors into marginalized, binary and unequal gendered labour and social divisions.

Ecocide rewrites WEDs’ histories and bodies as inferior and deserving of extermination. Ecocidal control of populations2 then occurs as fear of and actually experienced gendered (lethal) violence not only deters mobilizations but also creates impunity as women are less able to mobilize safely and openly. Moreover, while most cases do not explicitly report WED involvement or violence, this reflects representational and mobilization inequalities. For instance, there is a difference in how Indigenous and non-Indigenous women defenders negotiate and are impacted by extractive violence in different ways. Such intersectional differences exist and should be explored in future work.

global, WOMEN'S EQUALITY

China Culture: Xi calls for protection of Chinese civilization, culture and heritage

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

President Xi Jinping has called for the protection of the country’s rich cultural heritage. Cen Ziyuan spoke with experts from the Chinese Academy of History, where he made the call in a speech on Friday.



frame from news video

CEN ZIYUAN Beijing “President Xi said a deep and comprehensive understanding of the Chinese past will allow the nation to draw upon its traditional culture to meet current challenges. The Chinese leader described Chinese civilization as unique, cohesive, innovative, uniform and peaceful. He said the nation is not afraid of facing up to challenges and stressed the need for creativity and innovation.”

LI GUOQIANG Deputy Director-General, Chinese Academy of History “The pursuit of peace and harmony is the foundation of the Chinese spirit. It is in the gene of Chinese civilization. In the 5,000-year history, our ideal world is of great unity. We value a culture of peace and unity.”

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Questions related to this article:

Does China promote a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

Chinese President Xi Jinping made his remark after visits to the China National Archives of Publications and Culture and the Academy.

He reaffirmed that China does not aim to impose its own values and system on others, and that Beijing will continue to contribute to world peace and international order.

LI GUOQIANG Deputy Director-General, Chinese Academy of History “In such a cultural value, we do not support hegemony. We do not colonize others or occupy them. We continue to be open and embracive about foreign cultures.”

President Xi stressed the unity of the country is China’s core interest.

He said the country is at a historic turning point and he called on experts working in the field of culture to continue preserving and innovating the riches of Chinese civilization.

LIU JIAN Deputy Head, Institute of World History Chinese Academy of History “The continuity of Chinese civilization is developed under a uniform area of land and supported by pluralism. The condition to sustain the continuity is to uphold the traditions and innovate. We embrace culture from abroad.”

Experts say the continuity of Chinese civilization is a reference and promotes dialogues and exchanges of world cultures.

LIU JIAN Deputy Head, Institute of World History Chinese Academy of History “But now we also put emphasis on peace. This is the foundation of connectivity. This is also China’s contribution to world civilization.”

The Chinese civilization has always been ready to interact with different others. Engaging with the Chinese culture is key to understanding the nation better while its people are mutually willing to share their stories with the world.

East Asia, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Truth of US fault in Jeju massacre must be conveyed via evidence to the world, argues ex-foreign minister of Australia

… . HUMAN RIGHTS … .

An article by Heo Ho-Joon in Hankyoreh

To achieve true reconciliation regarding the Jeju April 3 Incident, the US government must take responsibility for its historical wrongdoing in the same way as the Korean government, argues Gareth Evans, the former foreign minister of Australia. The US’ key role will be acknowledging responsibility and apologizing, he says.

These remarks came on the first day of the 18th Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity held at the International Convention Center Jeju in Seogwipo during the “Making the Solution of Jeju 4.3 a Global Model: Truth, Reconciliation and Solidarity” session hosted by the Jeju 4.3 Research Institute.


Gareth Evans, the former foreign minister of Australia, speaks at the Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity. (courtesy of the Jeju 4.3 Peace Foundation)

The previous day, Evans received the fifth annual Jeju 4.3 Peace Prize presented by the Jeju 4.3 Peace Foundation. Evans was awarded the prize for his involvement in the conclusion of the Paris Peace Agreements that brought peace and an end to civil war in Cambodia, an opportunity which he seized to create the international “responsibility to protect” norm in 2005 that enables the UN to intervene in order to protect civilians in the event of state-sponsored genocide. Evans has also been involved in peace work such as nuclear nonproliferation and banning chemical weapons.

The 4.3 Peace Prize Special Award was awarded to painter Kang Yo-bae for his contribution to informing people about the Jeju April 3 Incident through his “History of People’s Uprising in Jeju” and “The Camellia Has Fallen” series of works in the 1990s.

Efforts to inform the international community of the tragic history that took place 70 years ago in Jeju must be taken, Evans argued.

“If mass atrocity crimes of the kind that occurred here on Jeju are not remembered and seared into the nation’s and the world’s consciousness, [. . .] then the prospect is all too real that these horrors will recur again, that people will fail to recognize the early warning signs of catastrophe before it is too late, and that we will fail as an international community to develop the kind of prevention and response strategies that minimize that risk,” he said.

Expressing concern about the movement to reveal the truth about crimes against humanity weakening in the international community, Evans said that the truth of and responsibility for the Jeju April 3 Incident must be conveyed to the international community so that it may serve as a basis for the creation of principles for solving these sorts of problems.

Evans argued that the level of responsibility the US should bear for the Jeju April 3 Incident must be explicitly stated based on historical evidence, and blame should be clearly assigned through fact-finding work.

The former foreign minister stressed that the US is “failing to properly acknowledge this responsibility.” Accordingly, he said, we must urge the US to acknowledge its responsibility in ethical and moral terms by thoroughly bringing the truth to light through evidence.

(Article continued in right column)

 

Question related to this article:

Truth Commissions, Do they improve human rights?

(Article continued from left column)

Evans recalled the moment when former German Chancellor Willy Brandt knelt down in front of the Monument to the Ghetto Heroes in Warsaw, Poland, in December 1971, and noted how the world remembers how Germany has continued to apologize for the Holocaust. He suggested that Japan should take a leaf out of Germany’s book and apologize for the horrific brutalities it committed in colonies in the past.

Furthermore, Evans suggested that, in the same way that President Barack Obama paid respects at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, Biden should express a similar sentiment with regard to the uprising and massacre in Jeju 70 years ago. Doing so will make the US a nation that “warrants respect,” he said, and will serve to bolster the alliance between Korea and the US.

During a press conference after the fact, Evans called for accountability from the US government with regard to the massacre of Jeju citizens during the Jeju April 3 Incident.

Saying that while it may appear impossible for the US government to share responsibility for the Jeju April 3 Incident in the same manner as the Korean government, Evans noted that what is clear is that the specific nature of US responsibility must be revealed. Real conciliation is about acknowledging and accepting one’s own mistakes, he stressed.

In his acceptance speech for the peace prize, Evans emphasized the “necessity to retain memory of the worst if we are to progress at all toward achieving the best.”

“If we fail to remember the indescribable horror and misery that is involved in any major war, we are at profound risk of sleepwalking into another,” he said of the need to improve global and regional performance when it comes to conflict prevention and response.

Evans also brought up the recent Korea-US summit.

“South Korea is closer to the eye of the storm than my own country, and most others,” he said. “Your preoccupation with North Korea’s ever-increasing nuclear weapon capability and endless rhetorical belligerence is perfectly understandable.”

But he cautioned against heeding the “many domestic voices” that are arguing for South Korea to arm itself with nuclear weapons. “For that to happen would be disastrous for the global non-proliferation regime, and with it your country’s international reputation, while doing little or nothing to actually enhance your security.”

Evans expressed concern about Presidents Joe Biden of the US and Yoon Suk-yeol of South Korea having “doubled down on their commitment to nuclear deterrence,” saying, “What South Korea, like Australia, should focus on ensuring in all our alliances with the US is not extended nuclear deterrence, with all [the] enormous risks that entails, but extended conventional deterrence.”

“If we want to build a worldwide culture of peace, there is a crucial need not only for us to remember what has gone so badly wrong in the past, but to stay optimistic about changing things for the better,” Evans stressed. “I’m sure that this is the spirit which sustained the people of Jeju during those long decades of government denial and suppression of the truth, before democracy and decency finally prevailed. I know it is the spirit which will sustain the effort to universalize the Jeju model of truth, reconciliation, and international solidarity.”

In the closing session of the Jeju Forum on the afternoon of June 2, Evans spoke with Governor Oh Young-hun of Jeju on the topic of “Promoting the Culture of Peace.”

East Asia, HUMAN RIGHTS

Spain: The Forum for a Culture of National Security approves the proposal to create a Culture of Peace Group led by Crue

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article from Crue Universidades Españolas  (translation by CPNN)

The Forum for a Culture of National Security approved on May 30 the five proposals of the working groups of the entities, institutions and organizations that are part of this body. Among the projects submitted to consensus was the creation of the “Culture of Peace” working group, which will be led by Crue Universidades Españolas, co-led by the Ministry of Social Rights and which will have the collaboration of the Coexistence Pact, an entity which is part of Crue.

(Editor’s Note: Crue Universidades Españolas, established in 1994, is a non-profit association of 76 Spanish universities: 50 public and 26 private.)

The Crue delegate for European Affairs, José María Sanz, was in charge of presenting the general lines of a working group that seeks to promote compliance with SDG 16 (promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies) and target 7 of SDG 4 (promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and the contribution of culture to sustainable development).

(Article continued in right column)

(Click here for the original Spanish version of this article.)

Question related to this article:

How can we develop the institutional framework for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

Crue’s proposal contemplates two main activities: carrying out a diagnosis in universities on social sustainability and prevention and response to violence –for which a panel of social sustainability indicators will be defined that will help to carry out a diagnostic report– and the promotion among universities of the International Day of Coexistence in Peace (May 16).

The other working groups approved were:

* Human Security through non-formal education, led by the Youth Council in Spain and co-led by the Youth Institute;

* The culture of local security: Self-protection, led by the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP) and co-led by the Association of Professional Specialists in Civil Protection and Emergencies (ANEPPE);

* Culture of belonging within a more egalitarian society, led by the Spanish Confederation of Student Parents’ Associations (CEAPA) and co-led by the Spanish Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia;

* The incidence of transversal professional criteria in the field of preventive action and as a means for resolving action, led by the Professional Union and co-led by the Ministry of Labor and Social Economy.

The Forum was established on 26 November and is made up of an equal number of people representing the General State Administration and the public sector, and designated people representing civil society organizations, academia, associations and non-profit entities. The main lines of action of the Forum are, first, to promote in the educational system and in training courses the values of education and a culture for peace, democratic values, non-violence, tolerance, solidarity, equality and justice. ; and second, to articulate and transfer a message of equal treatment and opportunities, of non-discrimination, of development of a democratic, participatory culture and of rejection of any type of violent radicalism.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, Europe

Mexico: UAEMéx and the Judiciary promote a culture of peace

… EDUCATION FOR PEACE …

An article from Capitale México (translation by CPNN)

Today, more than ever, it is vital to remember and value the importance of generating a culture of peace in our society, stated the rector of the Autonomous University of the State of Mexico (UAEMéx), Carlos Eduardo Barrera Díaz. Along with the president of the Superior Court of Justice of the State of Mexico, Ricardo Sodi Cuellar, he awarded of the First State Oratory Contest for the Culture of Peace, closing the “Week of Access to the Culture of Peace.”

In the Aula Magna “Licenciate Magistrate Gustavo A. Barrera Graf”, the rector emphasized that peace is the construction of a coexistence based on respect, understanding, tolerance and empathy. “Peace is achieved when we recognize our interdependence and commit to treating others with dignity and fairness,” he said.

(Article continued in right column)

(click here for the original version in Spanish).

Questions for this article:

Mediation as a tool for nonviolence and culture of peace

Is there progress towards a culture of peace in Mexico?

(Article continued from left column)

He highlighted that the collaboration between the Judiciary of the State of Mexico and the UAEMéx was essential to make this event possible and urged those present to continue building bridges and promoting peace in all areas of our lives.

In his turn, Ricardo Sodi Cuellar celebrated that the university offers a Bachelor’s Degree in Alternative Conflict Resolution, since building peace is the most important desire of any society.

“Mediation is a fine, elegant art, where people learn through the mediator, who is the one who facilitates this aspect, to build the foundations for peace, to resolve a conflict. This is important because society always has conflicts and the way in which we resolve them will bring us closer to or further away from peace,” said the magistrate.

In his turn, Judge Enrique Víctor Manuel Vega Gómez stressed that in order to talk about building a culture of peace, one depends on the involvement of society.
He asserted that holding this event, in which the Universidad Mexiquense de Seguridad also participated, is a way of leading youth towards the creation of a participatory democracy, that promotes peace.

The director of the Faculty of Law, María José Bernáldez Aguilar, pointed out that the combination of efforts between state institutions is essential for the construction of a solid and lasting culture of peace.

By joining forces, she said, we demonstrate that building a culture of peace is not an individual task but a joint effort that requires the active and committed participation of all institutions and social actors. “It is through this collaboration and teamwork that we can lay the foundation for a more peaceful and just future,” she said.

EDUCATION FOR PEACE, Latin America

Caravan of peace in Senegal: The kings of Oussouye and Sine spread the good word

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article by Alioune Badara in Le Quotidien

The Diola and Serer communities want to put culture and joking cousinhood at the service of peace. To implement this vision, Maa Sinig Niokhobaye Diouf Fatou Diène, the King of Sine, visited Maan Sibiloumbaye Diédhiou, the King of Oussouye. As part of the strengthening of ties of brotherhood and cohabitation, the kings of Oussouye and Sine initiated a caravan for peace. Diolas and Sérères took advantage of this visit to deepen the bonds of cousinhood, which constitute a social cement.


This is a trip for a good cause. The Serer and Diola communities want to support the State in promoting the culture of peace in Senegal. Following the establishment of a joint committee in November 2022 in Fimela, located in the Fatick region, to prepare for the visit of the King of Sine to the King of Oussouye, in order to strengthen the ties between the two, a cultural caravan for peace was organized. At the head of the caravan is Maa Sinig Niokhobaye Diouf Fatou Diène, the king of Sine, accompanied by Jaraaf and other members of the royal institution of Sine. They left Diakhao to visit Maan Sibiloumbaye Diedhiou, the King of Oussouye.

(article continued in right column)

(Click here for the French original of this article)

Question related to this article:

 

Can traditional leaders serve a culture of peace?

(article continued from left column)

The caravan was officially started in Fatick before the Governance by the authorities of the region. The royal institution of Sine specifieD that, “The Maa Sinig-Bu Badjum Ayi Cultural Peace Caravan provides an opportunity to harness the vast potential of Senegambia’s cultural and natural heritage, to strengthen social cohesion and the fight against poverty, and to promote sustainable development. at the base. This cultural caravan for peace, designed to benefit the entire Nation, aims to facilitate the synergy between state decisions, local initiatives and community actions, for the achievement of development objectives on a democratic and consensual basis.”

After a warm welcome in Oussouye, the kings of Sine and Oussouye invited the two communities to perpetuate these meetings, but also to look into the future of their communities, the role they can play in the development of the country. . Moreover, in his speech during the official ceremony held at the royal court of Oussouye, Maa Sinig Niokhobaye Diouf Fatou Diène, the king of Sine, returned to the very strong moments with their Diola cousins. “We communed together. It is an old tradition that we have perpetuated between the members of the two communities who are cousins. We found this relationship well maintained by our grandfathers, we have continued to maintain these links today.”

Echoing these words, the King of Oussouye confirmed the words of his peer. He also praised the centuries-old relationship that exists between the two communities. This caravan was also an opportunity for the two communities to show their multiple cultural facets. Through a cultural evening in the public square of Oussouye, Sérères and Diolas unveiled an artistic program that was also a traditional show.

In Diola and Serer mythology, Aguène and Diambogne were two sisters who once took a canoe to cross the Gambia River. But, their boat split in two, causing their separation. According to some historians, this legend begins in Ndakhonga, where the boat left for the high seas before it broke in two. One took the direction of the South, Aguène, the mother of the Diolas. And the other, that of the North, Diambogne, the mother of the Serers. This legend is today the foundation of the pleasant cousinage between Diolas and Sérères, cement of a peaceful cohabitation between the two communities.

Africa, DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION,

In memoriam: Walid Slaïby, co-founder Academic University College for Non-Violence & Human Rights (Lebanon)

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article from the Global Campaign for Peace Education (translated by The Global Campaign for Peace Education from the original French version by Anne-Marie El-HAGE in L’Orient Le Jour , May 8, 2023)

He was one of those followers of non-violence who made Lebanese society and the Arab world better. A thought that he developed during the civil war, in the same way as secularism, in reaction to the destructive consequences of the Lebanese intercommunity conflict on the social fabric. Walid Slaïby is no more. He died on Wednesday, May 3 at the age of 68, overcome by a cancer that had been eating away at him for more than 20 years. His name, inseparable from that of his companion in life and struggle, the sociologist Ogarit Younan, will forever be linked to activism for the right to life within the framework of the fight for the abolition of the death penalty. Civil rights will also be at the heart of his fight for a Lebanese personal status law. Along with workers’ rights and social justice, from the early 1980s.


Walid Slaïby, follower of non-violence and death penalty abolitionist, died on May 3 at the age of 68. (Photo courtesy of Aunohr Media Services)
(Click on photo to enlarge)


An immense legacy

From his commitment to the service of Lebanon, he will leave an immense legacy. A multitude of books, publications, translations, bills, associations, tangible progress on the ground, always with Ogarit Younan. With the crowning achievement in 2015 of the Academic University College for Non-Violence & Human Rights (Aunohr), an educational institution dedicated to non-violence that continues to train generations of students, activists, trade unionists ready to take over. This course will see the duo rewarded several times, in particular by the Human Rights Prize of the French Republic in 2005, the Fondation Chirac Prize in 2019 and the Gandhi Prize for Peace awarded in 2022 by the Indian foundation Jamnalal Bajaj, named after the disciple of Mahatma Gandhi.

It is in his fight against the death penalty that Walid Slaïby initiated the most tangible progress. “He was a silent soldier against capital punishment. But his work was very important,” says Wadih Asmar, president of the Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH). After federating several associations around the National Campaign for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, the activist rallied part of the political and judicial class to the cause, during shock events that were highly publicized. In 1998, when two burglars, one of whom had committed a double murder, were hanged in Tabarja in the public square, he openly proclaimed during a nocturnal sit-in “mourning for the victims of the crime and for those of capital punishment “. As a result, the last executions date back to 2004 in Lebanon, even if justice continues to pronounce the death sentence. “Lebanon is now classified as a de facto abolitionist country. In 2020, for the first time in its history, it spoke out for a moratorium at the UN General Assembly, alongside 122 other states. A position recently reiterated”, welcomes former minister Ibrahim Najjar, a committed abolitionist. The lawyer did not personally know the deceased, but he said he was “respectful and admiring of the courage of Walid Slaïby and his companion Ogarit Younan, who behaved as convinced abolitionists”. “Because the fight is not easy. It is so easy to confuse revenge with capital punishment,” he points out. for the first time in its history, it came out in favor of a moratorium at the UN General Assembly, alongside 122 other states. 

(Article continued in the column on the right)

(Click here for the original version in French)

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

How can we carry forward the work of the great peace and justice activists who went before us?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

A position recently reiterated”, welcomes former minister Ibrahim Najjar, a committed abolitionist. The lawyer did not personally know the deceased, but he said he was “respectful and admiring of the courage of Walid Slaïby and his companion Ogarit Younan, who behaved as convinced abolitionists”. “Because the fight is not easy. It is so easy to confuse revenge with capital punishment,” he points out. for the first time in its history, it came out in favor of a moratorium at the UN General Assembly, alongside 122 other states. A position recently reiterated”, welcomes former minister Ibrahim Najjar, a committed abolitionist. The lawyer did not personally know the deceased, but he said he was “respectful and admiring of the courage of Walid Slaïby and his companion Ogarit Younan, who behaved as convinced abolitionists”. “Because the fight is not easy. It is so easy to confuse revenge with capital punishment,” he points out. but he says he is “respectful and admiring of the courage of Walid Slaïby and his companion Ogarit Younan, who behaved as convinced abolitionists”. “Because the fight is not easy. It is so easy to confuse revenge with capital punishment,” he points out. but he says he is “respectful and admiring of the courage of Walid Slaïby and his companion Ogarit Younan, who behaved as convinced abolitionists”. “Because the fight is not easy. It is so easy to confuse revenge with capital punishment,” he points out.

For a Lebanese Personal Status Law

The personality of Walid Slaïby is no stranger to his great popularity. “Walid was a man of dialogue, attentive to his friends. It is through debate and acceptance of the other that he succeeded in laying the foundations of the culture of human rights in Lebanon, and in particular of non-violence”, affirms Ziad Abdel Samad, friend of the couple, engineer and teacher in political science. “Despite the divisions of Lebanese society, he managed to go beyond the militias and the borders to lead an avant-garde struggle and achieve remarkable progress”, he observes, referring to the efforts of the deceased to raise awareness among young people and bring closer Lebanese of different faiths and backgrounds. It is also in the institutionalization of the fight that Walid Slaïby drew his strength. “When I met him in the early nineties, he organized human rights training against religious discrimination, remembers activist Rima Ibrahim. Despite his illness, he never stopped dreaming of changing Lebanese society, to the point of institutionalizing the fight.

Several associations were then created, linked to the Lebanese Association for Civil Rights (LACR), notably Chamel and Bilad. In 2011, the militant couple launched their campaign to demand a Lebanese law on personal status which advocates, among other things, civil marriage. In Lebanon, family laws are governed by religious communities. They discourage inter-religious unions and discriminate against women. “For the occasion, we organized a sit-in and set up a tent for 10 months, place Riad el-Solh, in downtown Beirut. We have also prepared a bill,” recalls Rafic Zakharia, lawyer, teacher and member of the association. Signed by MP Marwan Farès, the text is presented to Parliament and transferred to the joint commissions. “The law has not been adopted. But our mobilization has never weakened”, assures the activist, whose “life has changed” since he met Walid Slaïby. “Non-violent thinking has become a way of life for me, not just a fight,” observes this death penalty specialist.

The happiness of having given hope to the Lebanese

The militant, the thinker, the humanist endowed with superior intelligence and a good dose of humor left with modesty and elegance, as he has always lived. “Walid Slaïby was both a great humanist and a man of science. Very solid in his convictions, he was flexible when it came to discussing. Never giving lessons, he was not a man to show off, but on the contrary was very discreet, ”describes the lawyer and former minister Ziyad Baroud, member of the board of directors of Aunhor, who knows him. for over 25 years. Multi-graduate, the disappeared was indeed a civil engineer (ESIB), a graduate in physics (UL) and in economics (AUB). Studies he completed with a DEA in social sciences (UL),

He will be missed by human rights defenders, starting with abolitionists around the world who pay tribute to him and his companion. “It was a star of light and reason in a world of shadow and madness”, sums up Raphaël Chenuil-Hazan, director general of the international association ECPM (Together against the death penalty). “With Ogarit, they formed this incredible duo who have devoted their lives for more than 40 years for a modern Lebanon”, he continues, congratulating himself on having had “the chance to send him love before his death of the abolitionist community around the world. Walid Slaïby will especially be missed by his alter ego, his soul mate, Ogarit Younan, with whom he was to celebrate 40 years of love and activism. “We were expecting the weather to improve a bit. We wanted a nice party. We didn’t think he was so close to death. He loved life so much. He had so much humor,” she regrets sadly. And if the disease occupied a good half of their life together, he will at least have had “the happiness of serving his country and giving hope to the Lebanese”. “Lebanon must be happy, we have served it, consoles Ogarit Younan. But if Walid had not fallen ill, without a doubt, Lebanon would have been different…”

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, Mideast

A united civil society push for Spain to join the TPNW

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Forty-five civil society organisations in Spain have come together to form a coalition with a single mission: to persuade the Spanish government to adhere to the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The Alianza por el Desarme Nuclear  (Alliance for Nuclear Disarmament), which has the backing of ICAN, was launched in Madrid on 23 May. It will work to raise public awareness of the treaty’s importance and lobby decision-makers to endorse it.

Speaking at the launch event, the alliance’s coordinator, Maribel Hernández, urged the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, to “take a courageous step forward” and sign the TPNW “as a symbol of our country’s commitment to peace”. She stressed the danger of “normalising the existence of nuclear weapons” and promoting a security model based on the possession of such weapons. As a NATO member, Spain has repeatedly endorsed the notion that US nuclear weapons offer it “protection” and could, in certain circumstances, be used on its behalf.

Carlos Umaña, a co-president of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War  and member of ICAN’s international steering group, recalled that Sánchez committed in 2018 to sign the TPNW, but this promise “remains unfulfilled”. It was part of a deal  struck with the leader of the Podemos political party, Pablo Iglesias. Umaña also noted that a majority of Spaniards – 89 per cent, according to a YouGov poll  in 2020 – want the government to sign the TPNW. “We are at the most worrying moment in history in terms of the risk of a possible large-scale nuclear war from which there would be no going back,” he warned.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Can we abolish all nuclear weapons?

(Continued from left column)

A broad coalition of organisations

The Alliance for Nuclear Disarmament comprises  a diverse range of organisations and other entities working in the fields of peace and disarmament, human rights, the environment, and social justice, including Centre Delás d’Estudis per la Pau, the Spanish section of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, AIPAZ (Spanish Association for Peace Research), FundiPau, Fundación Cultura de Paz, Greenpeace, Desarma Madrid, Ecologistas en Acción, General Commission for Justice and Peace, Mayors for Peace, Gernika Gogoratuz, Women in Black Madrid, Pressenza and MOC (Movement for Conscientious Objection). Since its launch, many more groups and individuals have expressed an interest in joining the alliance.

The groups are asking local municipalities  and regional parliaments to appeal to the Spanish government to join the TPNW. Barcelona and dozens of other cities and towns have already pledged their support, as has the autonomous community of Navarre. Pending Spain’s accession to the TPNW, the alliance believes that the government should observe the official meetings of states parties to the treaty, held roughly every two years. The NATO members Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway observed the first  such meeting, held in Vienna last June. The second meeting will take place in New York this November.

Spain and the TPNW

The TPNW was negotiated at the United Nations in New York in 2017 and adopted with the support of 122 states. Spain opted not to participate in the process and has not yet taken any steps towards becoming a state party. Ahead of the treaty’s adoption, the foreign affairs committee of the Spanish congress of deputies passed a resolution  calling on the government to support the approval of the new treaty – but it was not heeded. In 2020, the same committee welcomed  the TPNW “as an effort to move towards peace, security, and disarmament”.

Three former Spanish foreign ministers – Ana Palacio, Javier Solana, and Carlos Westendorp – signed an open letter  in 2020 with dignitaries from other NATO states and Japan calling on current leaders to “show courage and boldness – and join the [TPNW]”. Solana is also a former NATO secretary-general. They noted in their letter that the TPNW does not prevent its parties from remaining in alliances with nuclear-armed states, such as NATO, “but we would be legally bound never under any circumstances to assist or encourage our allies to use, threaten to use, or possess nuclear weapons”.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe