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.

Havana Book Fair urges a culture of peace for the development of peoples

EDUCATION FOR PEACE .

An article from TV Santiago

A panel on the intellectual production of the South was held today (February 12) at the XXXI International Book Fair in Havana, Cuba. It stressed the need to build a culture of peace based on the progress of the nations of the world.

Taking place at the Nicolás Guillén Hall of the San Carlos de La Cabaña Fortress, the conversation included the interventions of Patricia Ariza Flórez, Minister of Culture, Arts and Knowledge of Colombia; Aliou Sow, Minister of Culture and Historical Heritage of Senegal, and Enrique Ubieta, director of Cuba Socialista magazine.

Ariza Flórez pointed out that there cannot be a social change without a cultural change and that the government of Gustavo Petro is in this endeavor because it pursues, in addition to improvements in people’s living conditions, the search for peace.

She commented that in the South American country the war sustained by the State and armed groups for 60 years caused a fragmentation of the social fabric of Colombia as a nation.

(continued in right column)

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

Question for this article:

Do the arts create a basis for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

The actress and theater director also stressed that the construction of a culture of peace is essential to repair the damage that violence and massacres left on her land and that, for this, the knowledge of indigenous and Afro-descendant populations must be taken into account. .

“We want peace to become a way of being, staying and reacting, and in this sense the Group of 77 plus China, with Cuba at the forefront, has to work to stop regional and world conflicts such as the one between Russia and Ukraine,” she insisted.

Colombia, assured Ariza Flórez, has sufficient authority to speak of peace because it is building it.

She said that through art, which she considers an exercise in freedom and also responsibility, one can contribute to eliminating stigmas, mitigating the complex climatic situation that the planet is experiencing, and recognizing the contribution of the plurality of cultures on the continent.

Aliou Sow, the head of Senegalese Culture and Historical Heritage, explained that the arts can generate solutions to the problems of humanity, beyond serving as a way of denouncing.

She stressed that nations must get to know each other without superficialities in order to work together, honestly and freely for the sake of sustainable development.

She asserted that each culture must be considered dignified, without one prevailing over another, and all people dedicated to this sector must be involved in the fight against the problems that affect humanity. Responses and alternatives should be based on the most positive values.

The XXXI International Book Fair of Havana will take place until February 19 and, later, it will be transferred to the rest of the national territory to culminate on March 19 in Santiago de Cuba.

Big Peace Rally in Germany: Despair and Joy

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Victor Grossman in World Beyond War

Despair and joy can be so close together!

In conflicts, I know, neither side can be trusted. Both sides twist and distort, magnify and minimize in support of their cause. But the daily, almost hourly pictures from Ukraine – of hardship, suffering, of death, destruction and flight, all too genuine, cause me the despair I have always felt on hearing – and worse seeing, if only on a screen – any pain inflicted on my fellow human beings, no matter what insignia they wear or flag they honor.

But I must also recoil at the hypocrisy and dishonesty which so often go unnoticed. The propaganda producers who feign despair but seek more conflict, more medals, more billions, always praise a noble cause: freedom, democracy, rule of order, and always warn of despicable enemies; Bolsheviks, anarchists, Stalinists, communist aggressors and, when these are eliminated, terrorism. When that, too, erodes, authoritarianism must serve, or “imperialism” turned upside down. A nasty “villain” is always effective, justly or not, an Iago: Lenin, Stalin, Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, Putin.

Is hypocrisy involved? Double standards? Chinese sources, like all others, must be met with caution. But can all the charges in their Foreign Affairs Department memorandum be completely denied?

“The history of the USA is characterized by violence and expansion… After World War II, the wars either provoked or launched by the United States included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Libyan War and the Syrian War… In recent years, the U.S. average annual military budget has exceeded 700 billion U.S. dollars, accounting for 40 percent of the world’s total, more than the 15 countries behind it combined. The United States has about 800 overseas military bases, with 173,000 troops deployed in 159 countries…The United States has also adopted appalling methods in war… massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons as well as cluster bombs, fuel-air bombs, graphite bombs and depleted uranium bombs, causing enormous damage on civilian facilities, countless civilian casualties and lasting environmental pollution… Since 2001, the wars and military operations launched by the USA in the name of fighting terrorism have claimed over 900,000 lives with some 335,000 of them civilians, injured millions and displaced tens of millions.”

Did none of this deserve the opprobrium now directed at Putin? Were any flags of sympathy displayed when the people of Serbia, Iraq or Afghanistan were bombed? When drones exploded on hospitals and wedding processions – were there also calls for tribunals against Bush – or Obama?

My despair grew far more intense when I felt the menace of escalating demands, after Leopard tanks, for powerful artillery, fighter planes and boats, and not just to win back Crimea; when I read the editorials insisting on “fighting on to victory,” no matter what it costs, above all to the people of Ukraine. Or when I read the following:

“This Ukraine crisis that we’re in right now, this is just the warmup,” said Navy Adm. Charles Richard, the commander of US Strategic Command. “The big one is coming. And it isn’t going to be very long before we’re going to get tested in ways that we haven’t been tested [in] a long time.”

Adm. Richard’s threat came after the US released its new Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which reaffirms the US doctrine on first use of nuclear weapons. The review says that the purpose of the US nuclear arsenal is to “deter strategic attacks, assure allies and partners, and achieve US objectives if deterrence fails.” What are then the US objectives in Europe, Asia – or Africa and Latin America?

Only a few lonely voices questioned them and their likely cost, but were quickly muzzled. Peace rallies, rarely attracting more than 2-3000 faithful leftists even in Berlin, were mentioned, if at all, superciliously and dismissed as ragged little remnants of the huge rallies of the 1980’s. The media kept up its routine of repeated scenes of death, flight and destruction in Ukraine (not in Yemen), combined with rousing calls for more and deadlier instruments of war – until Ukraine was fully restored and Putin defeated, humbled, possibly deposed and preferably tried and sentenced.

How then, could I find any cause for joy, any reason to smile?

Almost surprisingly, two of the best-known women in Germany overcame past differences and joined hands. Alice Schwarzer, now 80, had once, with her magazine “Emma,” been the main founder and expounder of the women’s rights movement in West Germany, including abortion rights, but had later drifted politically rightwards. Sahra Wagenknecht, 52, with an East German background, was alongside party founder Gregor Gysi the most prominent, media-wise and popular spokesperson of the LINKE, the Left, a truly brilliant orator, but who has been disavowed by most of the present reformist leaders of her party, with some of them even demanding her ouster.

This unusual duo joined to publish a manifesto calling for a cease-fire in Ukraine and urging – not tanks and armaments for the Zelenskiy government in Kyiv but pressure on both sides for peace negotiations. It warned of the consequences of more weapons – and more active participation by Germany, basically in the wake of Washington.

But what could these two women achieve against such high tidal waves? Their position, in today’s Germany, was considered purest heresy, which must quickly be exorcized.

Suddenly, the witch-doctors found this far tougher than expected – after 69 prominent Germans signed the manifesto, people originally from all the parties, popular, respected people: a former female church leader, singers, actors, the son of one-time Chancellor Willy Brandt. And then the numbers of signers grew, and grew, and grew! 50,000, 100,000 – by Saturday it had topped 650,000 and was aiming at a million!

The alarm bells rose to a deafening cacophony! The media, the politicians, sadly including many of the LINKE, they all joined in a wild attack against the manifesto and especially against Sahra.

Their attempts to disprove its arguments were less and less convincing. Could more weapons really bring Russia to its knees, forcing it to give up claims it deemed necessary to its independence – if not its survival, like keeping NATO missiles at least a minimal distance from Moscow’s doorsteps and preserving safe, unmonitored warm-water Black Sea routes to the world’s oceans? Or might bigger attacks by Ukraine-USA lead instead to desperation? All such questions are publicly taboo – like questions about who really blasted the German-Russian underwater gas pipelines, who was really throwing dangerous missiles at atomic energy plants controlled by Russian troops, or what the USA-Ukrainian biological laboratories were really researching. There were too many such questions to permit discussion; it was like opening Pandora’s box. The lid must be kept sealed!

Common lid sealers were the usual accusations of Putin-endearment, of blindness to death and destruction, denial of Kyiv’s right to territorial sovereignty and free choice of its alignments, awarding Putin territorial seizures without a fight. But none of this applied; the Manifesto made no demands on anyone – except to sit down and end the slaughter before it exploded further and irreparably.

When Sahra and Alice called for a big rally in Berlin on February 25th the fears multiplied. A counter-demonstration was organized for the 24th, the anniversary of open warfare, mostly with Ukrainians (66,000 now live in Berlin) but aimed at convincing Germans who sympathize with Ukraine and its suffering to reject any blame on the preceding NATO provocation and blame Putin alone. One effort was to transport a wrecked Russian tank to a spot next to the Russian embassy, with its big gun aimed directly at its entrance.

(Continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

(Continued from left column)

But the main argument against Sahra and Alice stressed the support by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), whose anti-European Union, pro-Russian positioning led its leaders to add their names to the manifesto and announce their intention to join the peace rally. Sahra answered: “We can have nothing to do with fascists or racists, we must not permit them to raise their banners or posters. But we simply do not wish, nor or we able to exclude anyone from singly signing or attending whose heart is honestly devoted toward ending further bloodshed – or worse.”

Many in eastern Germany vote for the AfD because of anger and disappointment at hardships caused by unification and their treatment as second-class citizens. Too many are fooled into blaming “privileged foreigners.” Many are just against “those on top,” somewhat like many simpler Trump voters, they want (affordable) butter not guns, therefore distrust further involvement in the Ukraine war. Since some LINKE leaders gratefully joined in state governments they were seen, not always falsely, as “part of the Establishment,” so many LINKE voters switched to the AfD or didn’t vote at all. Such support is certainly embarrassing to Sahra and Alice, but they hope a Manifesto for Peace movement can become a healthy antidote to fascists and their deceitful initiatives.

Yet it was this issue which was played upon by both media and politicians – trying to depict the Manifesto movement as a unity: right-wing nationalists with leftist “Putin-lovers”. This method of attack has been utilized in the past to split and wreck attempts at building a broad peace movement. One might suspect that powerful groups grasp this function of the far right all too well and apply it whenever required.

Would such constant media hammering succeed? Would this peace rally end up as a pathetic flop, with a meager crowd like the Zelenskiy-friendly Ukrainian rally the evening before? Waiting for the subway, I feared to find, once again, that same small bunch of the faithful, many of them old friends.

And what did I find? On this icy-cold Saturday afternoon, with snowflakes beginning to flutter down, the subway was jammed! There was hardly room to even stand properly! And at the next station more tried to push into the car! Where were they all going?

There was no doubt about it! When I arrived at the station near the Brandenburg Gate, the site of the rally, thousands and thousands climbed out of the jammed cars, ascended and merged into the crowded streets, all headed in one direction! I too moved through the famous arch towards the big speakers’ stage – but never got to a place where I could see them. I had just barely enough room to squeeze in to a free spot. And only later did I learn from my sons that the crowd had been huge on all sides, jammed, chilly, but friendly, polite, in wonderfully high spirits at the giant turn-out, and determined in their applause, cheers, occasional boos (when war-hungry politicians were named), with occasional shouts like “No Weapons! Negotiations!”- “Make Peace not War”.

Many, perhaps most of those present, on or below the speakers’ stage, deplored and condemned the Russian invasion. But many also insisted that Kyiv’s big planned attack on the Donbas, the numerous maneuvers all around Russian ports and borders, a secret CIA intensive training program in 2015 for elite Ukrainian special operations forces, had made it unavoidable, that these were part of a trap – which Russia either fell into or was forced to fall into, as in Afghanistan in 1979.

I, too, knew of an MSNBC report on March 4, saying: “Russia’s Ukraine invasion may have been preventable: The U.S. refused to reconsider Ukraine’s NATO status as Putin threatened war. Experts say that was a huge mistake…The abundance of evidence that NATO was a sustained source of anxiety for Moscow raises the question of whether the United States’ strategic posture was not just imprudent but negligent…Senator Joe Biden knew as far back as 1997 that NATO expansion, which he supported, could eventually lead to a hostile Russian reaction.” Views on the war were far distant from those in the media!

People discussed and debated, but all I spoke to agreed that further conflict would only continue the terrible afflictions for the Ukrainians, could achieve no victories but only create giant dangers – also atomic dangers threatening the entire world.

And the neo-fascists? In media reports afterwards they were very much present, with an interview with one of their leaders somewhere on the periphery. We heard later that a few known far-rightists had indeed shown up with a banner, but a “left-wing Linke” group, at the ready, had quickly covered it over with a bigger anti-war banner and pushed the rightists – non-violently – away from the rally. I saw a few Russian and pro-Russian flags, carried, I think, by Russian-speakers, perhaps adult children of the many Russians who have moved here in recent decades. One of my sons did see a small group with nationalist flags, which could not easily be banned in that giant but always peaceful crowd, but can hardly have reached anywhere near 1%. And as for me, in all the time I spent there, or getting there and back, I saw not one rightist sign, but rather many hundreds carrying peace dove depictions or self-made anti-war slogans, happily ignoring the organizers’ request to carry no signs at all.

As Sahra and Alice commented: the Manifesto, now being signed by additional tens of thousands, and especially the rally, have frightened all those who want to continue the war, who want no negotiations, who are determined, as some say openly, “to ruin Russia” and unseat anyone like Putin who, love him or hate him, refuses, unlike Yeltsin, to take orders from abroad. Policy-makers in the American seats of power clearly want to prevent even the weak but potentially growing cooperation between Germany with its European allies and Russia or China, which had been supported by some sectors in Germany – but had now been suffocated, with the current near-total domination by those German Herren, now in modern dress, but who recall all too frighteningly the stiffly monocled, heel-clicking warriors of past generations.

Of course, détente between Western Europe, Russia and China could mean fewer billions for US frackers and fuel providers, could cut profits for weapon-makers and other hungry expanders, from Amazon, Coca-Cola and Disney to Facebook, Unilever and the other queen bees in the honeyed hives of the pharmaceutical, movie, herbicide, food and other empires. Above all, the CEOs at Lockheed, Northrup, Raytheon, at Rheinmetall, Exxon Mobil and Chevron could then no longer rub their hands quite so gleefully or buy quite so many yachts, jets or mansions.

In her speech, Sahra reiterated: “We want no German tanks firing at those Russian women and men whose great-grandparents, in millions, were inhumanly slaughtered by the German Wehrmacht.” She condemned as cynical the signing of agreements to provide armaments for years in advance and said that true solidarity meant getting engaged for peace, not war.

Of course Vladimir Putin must also be willing to make compromises, she said, Ukraine must not be turned into a Russian protectorate. But as we have since learned, negotiations were not stymied by the Russian side. Several speakers recalled that Blinken, like his predecessors, had continued to push eastward, rejecting Russian appeals and offers and a final red-line warning in December 2021 to agree on security guarantees for all sides. New revelations by Naftali Bennett, the former prime minister of Israel, indicate that negotiations between Russia and Ukraine were moving ahead in March until Boris Johnson from London and his prompters in Washington made clear that an agreement was not desired. Turkey’s Recep Erdogan, though he succeeded in achieving grain shipments, prisoner exchanges and even a safe travel guarantee for Biden’s trip to Kyiv, felt the same outside pressure against further agreement.

Sahra and Alice got cheers when they stressed that agreements are not impossible, but must be fought for – and must be wanted! There is no need for tanks but rather for diplomacy, for a readiness to find compromises. A broad new peace movement is urgently necessary – and this rally must provide an impetus.

The media and the politicians, now more frightened than ever, were unsurprisingly quick, later, to dig up a solitary rightist they could use as Exhibit A, and then to lie about the figures. After the pro-Zelenskiy rally the night before, with about 7,000, they estimated 10,000; in our peace rally they could only count up to the same 10,000 figure, when everyone else saw 30,000, 50,000, perhaps even more. Since too many had taken part who would not swallow such a nonsense figure, TV reporters shame-facedly revised it to 13,000 or, vaguely, “thousands.” These were the least nasty, distorting even insulting examples of the immense efforts – even within a fracturing LINKE – to strangle this baby in its cradle before it emulates Hercules’ swift growth in muscle!

It was in fact the biggest peace rally in many, many years, good cause for them to fear – and for me and so many I have spoken to a source of great, unaccustomed joy! So close can despair and joy occupy one’s heart!

Yurii Sheliazhenko: Peace in Ukraine: Humanity Is at Stake

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A speech by Yurii Sheliazhenko published by World Beyond War

Yurii Sheliazhenko, a Board Member of World BEYOND War, gave this speech at the webinar of the International Peace Bureau “365 Days of War in Ukraine: Prospects Towards Peace in 2023” (24 February 2023)

Dear friends, greetings from Kyiv, capital of Ukraine.

We meet today on the disgusting anniversary of the beginning of a full scale Russian invasion, which brought to my country enormous killing, suffering and destruction.

All these 365 days I lived in Kyiv, under Russian bombing, sometimes without electricity, sometimes without water, as many other Ukrainians who were lucky to survive.

I heard explosions behind my windows, my home shaked from pounding of artillery in distant combat.

I was disappointed by the failures of Minsk agreements, of peace talks in Belarus and Türkiye.

I saw how Ukrainian media and public spaces became more obsessed with hatred and militarism. Even more obsessed, than previous 9 years of armed conflict, when Donetsk and Luhansk were bombed by the Ukrainian army, like Kyiv was bombed by the Russian army during last year.

I called for peace openly despite threats and insults.

I demanded ceasefire and serious peace talks, and especially insisted on the right to refuse to kill, in online spaces, in letters to Ukrainian and Russian officials, calls to civil societies, in nonviolent actions.

My friends and colleagues from the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement did the same.

Because of closed borders and cruel hunting for draftees at the streets, in transport, in hotels and even in churches — we, Ukrainian pacifists, had no choice but to call for peace directly from the battlefield! And it is not an exaggeration.

One of our members, Andrii Vyshnevetsky, was conscripted against his will and sent to the frontline. He asks for discharge on the grounds of conscience in vain because the Armed Forces of Ukraine refused to respect human right to conscientious objection to military service. It is penalized, and we already have prisoners of conscience such as Vitalii Alexeienko who said, before the police took him to prison for his refusal to kill: “I will read New Testament in Ukrainian and I will pray for God’s mercy, peace and justice for my country.”

Vitaliy is a very brave man, he so courageously went to suffer for his faith without any attempts to escape or evade prison, because clear conscience gives him a feeling of security. But such sort of believers are rare, most people think about security in pragmatic terms, and they are right.`

To feel secure, your life, health and wealth must not be in danger, and there must be no worries for family, friends and your whole habitat.

People used to think that national sovereignty with all might of armed forces protects their safety from violent intruders.

Today we hear a lot of loud words about sovereignty and territorial integrity. They are key words in the rhetoric of Kyiv and Moscow, Washington and Beijing, other capitals of Europe, Asia, Africa, America and Oceania.

President Putin wages his war of aggression to protect the sovereignty of Russia from NATO on the doorstep, the tool of U.S. hegemony.

President Zelensky asks and receives from NATO countries all sorts of deadly weapons to defeat Russia which, if not defeated, is perceived as a threat for Ukrainian sovereignty.

Mainstream media wing of military industrial complexes convince people that the enemy is non-negotiable if not crushed before negotiations.

(Continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

How can just one or a few persons contribute to peace and justice?

(Continued from left column)

And people believe that sovereignty protects them from war of all against all, in the words of Thomas Hobbes.

But the world of today is different from the world of Westphalian peace, and the feudal notion of sovereignty and territorial integrity don’t address brazen human rights violations committed by all sorts of sovereigns by war, by fake democratic warmongering, and by open tyranny.

How many times have you heard about sovereignty and how many times you heard about human rights?

Where we lost human rights, repeating the mantra about sovereignty and territorial integrity?

And where did we lost common sense? Because the more powerful army you have, the more fear and resentment it causes, turning friends and neutrals into enemies. And no army can avoid battle for a long time, it is eager to shed blood.

People must understand that they need nonviolent public governance, not belligerent sovereignty.

People need social and environmental harmony, not autarchic territorial integrity with militarized borders, barbed wire and gunned men waging war on migrants.

Today the blood is shedding in Ukraine. But current plans to wage the war for years and years, for decades, may turn the whole planet into a battlefield.

If Putin or Biden feel secure sitting on their nuclear stockpiles, I am scared of their security and millions of sane people are scared too.

In a rapidly polarizing world, the West decided to see security in war profiteering and fueling the war machine by arms deliveries, and the East chose to take by force what he sees as its historical territories.

Both sides have so-called peace plans to secure all they want in an extremely violent manner and then make the other side accept new power balance.

But it is not a peace plan to defeat the enemy.

It is not a peace plan to take contested land, or remove representatives of other cultures from your political life, and negotiate on conditions of acceptance of this.

Both sides apologize their warmongering behavior claiming that sovereignty is at stake.

But what I must say today: a more important thing than sovereignty is at stake today.

Our humanity is at stake.

Ability of humankind to live in peace and resolve conflicts without violence is at stake.

Peace is not eradication of the enemy, it is making friends from enemies, it is remembering of universal human brotherhood and sisterhood and universal human rights.

And we must admit that governments and rulers of the East and West are corrupted by military industrial complexes and by great power ambitions.

When governments are unable to build peace, it is on us. It is our duty, as civil societies, as peace movements.

We must advocate ceasefire and peace talks. Not only in Ukraine, but everywhere, in all endless wars.

We must uphold our right to refuse to kill, because if all people refuse to kill there will be no wars.

We must learn and teach practical methods of peaceful life, nonviolent governance and conflict management.

On examples of restorative justice and widespread replacement of litigation with mediation we see progress of nonviolent approaches to justice.

We can achieve justice without violence, as Martin Luther King said.

We must build an ecosystem of peacebuilding in all spheres of life, alternative to toxic militarized economy and politics.

This world is sick with endless wars; let’s say this truth.

This world must be healed with love, knowledge and wisdom, by rigorous planning and peace action.

Let’s heal the world together.

English bulletin March 1, 2023

WORLD DIVIDES OVER THE UKRAINE WAR

In our special bulletin of February 17, we published some of the important voices from North America and Europe who oppose the American/NATO escalation of the war in the Ukraine. Unlike most of the major media in those countries, these voices are not “obedient” to their governments’ policies.

At the end of the special bulletin, we quote Lula, the new President of Brazil, who said his country is willing to contribute, together with countries such as China, India and Indonesia, to create a “club of countries that want to build peace on the planet.” And we asked if the rest of the world stop the US, Europe and Russia from sleepwalking all of us to Armageddon?

In order to answer this question, we translated the phrase “Ukraine War opinion” into Arab, Spanish, Bangla, Hindi, Korean, Indonesian and Turkish, and searched via Google for articles published locally during the past month in those languages (but not the international services of BBC, VOA, etc.) For Africa, we searched in French and English. The quotations below have been translated into English from the various languages as you can see by using the translation service of a Chrome browser.

Beginning with Brazil and the other countries listed by Lula, what is the opinion of the major media outside of the NATO countries and their allies? Do they support or oppose the escalation of the war?

As for Brazil, the meeting of Lula with US President Biden is described as follows by Emir Sader in the Argentinian media Pagina12: “Lula reiterated that he does not want to send weapons to the war in Ukraine, because he is for peace, he wants to find a way to end the war and not prolong it. But Biden ignored Lula’s words. . . . (Lula’s) . . . words in the US still sound like those of a true statesman, next to the small size of the head of the world’s greatest war power.”

As for China, the Indian expert Antara Ghosal Singh from the Observer Research Foundation, writes that China’s strategy regarding the current crisis in Europe is to sit away and watch the war of two forces. . . . Chinese experts who talk about peace and agreement often say that they are waiting for the monkey to get an advantage in the fight of two cats. China will be the only big power to escape from this war without any damage.

As for India, an opinion piece by a professor at Mahindra University published by the Navbharat Times, the largest Hindi daily in terms of circulation, concludes that America and Europe are “caught in the web of war.” The sanctions imposed by West because of the Russia-Ukraine war are only benefiting India and China. The writer cites the following estimates by the International Monetary Fund for economic growth : the Russian economy could grow at 2.1% in 2024, compared to 1% for the US, 1.6% for the 27 countries in Europe, and 0.9% for Japan. The countries that do not ban oil imports from Russia, India and China are going to achieve a growth rate of 6.8% and 4.5% respectively.

In Indonesia, El Shinta news quotes the suggestion that neutral countries such as Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and South Africa could act as intermediaries for a peace accord in the Ukraine because their attitudes are not anti-Russia, but also not anti-Ukrainian. But the article complains that it has become more and more difficult to mediate an end to the war, largely because of the neoconservative group in the United States who want a complete defeat of Russia and who, therefore, often intercept and kill peace initiatives, including those initiated by Israel and Turkey.

Elsewhere in Asia, in Bangladesh, Monayem Sarkar, Director General, Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research, writes in abnews24: “Ukraine has truly become a battleground for the US-led NATO alliance versus Russia. The Ukrainian army led by Vladimir Zelensky is actually waging a ‘proxy war’ on behalf of the NATO alliance. . . . This totalitarian war needs to be stopped as soon as possible. Whether it is to strengthen America’s hegemony or to boost its armaments industry, peacemakers around the world must come forward to end this war. If the Ukraine war is prolonged without immediate resolution, the possibility of a nuclear attack cannot be ruled out. At one point, many are expressing fear that the West will be directly involved in this battlefield, which will practically lead to the Third World War.”

And in Korea, the new book by Professor Lee Hae-young of Hanshin University, entitled “Ukrainian War and New World Order” is reviewed in Hani.com. The book claims that what is leading this war is the ‘neocon’ seeking ‘expansion of liberal hegemony’. Rather than a war between Ukraine and Russia, it is a ‘proxy war’ between the United States and the West, with Ukraine at the forefront, against Russia. The eastward march of NATO, which began in earnest in the 2000s and even reached Ukraine, is one of the proximate causes of the war. Another review of the book, published in pression.com, concludes “After the Russo-USA War, the world order will be shaken. These changes will further destabilize the Korean Peninsula. The present Ukraine may be the Korea of the near future. I sincerely recommend reading this book to many people who are concerned about the future of the Korean Peninsula.”

Although the Arab countries have long been allied with the United States, their attitudes towards escalation of the Ukraine War are not favorable. Here is a list:

Pan-arabist satellite news television channel Al Mayadeen, based in Beirut: “the reconstruction of Ukraine needs at least 20 years, meaning that the defeat of Ukraine has become a fait accompli that cannot be changed. As for the Western camp, especially the United States of America, its goal may be to weaken Russia as much as possible by engaging it in the war in Ukraine to deplete its strength, without this reaching the point of cornering it, because that would make Moscow resort without thinking to using its nuclear weapons, which is what the Russian leaders recently threatened. But the problem lies in whether the West did not take these threats seriously, then the whole world would have slipped into what is unimaginable.”

Lebanon: an article in the Beirut daily newspaper Al Akhbar. “Ukraine War: Subjugation of Europe and then Russia.” The Ukraine War is “an American war against Russia, with Ukrainian hands and European tools, while Europe itself is the implicit target for its subjugation.” “This war, its repercussions, and the rejection of this policy of American hegemony that we are witnessing, as if the world has had enough of imposing will at all levels, indicate that the world is heading towards a new multipolar system, and the decline of American hegemony in its unilateralism.”

Kuwait: an article in Alrai Media. “European countries cannot maintain their support for the war for a long time, and therefore the currency will lose its purchasing value and inflation will push to record levels, causing economic disasters and recession. Despite the economic damage to partners in Western Europe, President Joe Biden’s administration cannot stop the war at its peak because losing would be a disaster. If the war ends anytime soon without weakening Russia, Washington will lose control of Europe. In this case, Western European doubts regarding the continuity and viability of NATO will return. Therefore, it is expected that the ferocity of the battle – and with it the rise in commodity prices – will rise in the coming months to break or weaken Russia before the end of the US president’s term, if possible.”

Saudi Arabia: an article by Major General Samir Farag published by the MBC Media Group. “It is now required to quickly reach peace talks between the conflicting parties, otherwise, with the onset of spring, Russia will launch comprehensive offensive operations to seize more Ukrainian lands. It is expected that Russia’s first goal in the upcoming spring offensive will be to seize the port of Odessa on the Black Sea to prevent Ukraine from having ports on the seas, especially the Black Sea, after it lost control of the Sea of Azov. In these battles, Russia will use the scorched-earth method, using the new Russian types of missiles, King, Alexander, and Doomsday. Russia may also consider seizing Kiev, the capital, to overthrow the Ukrainian regime. All these assessments will lead the world to the necessity of resorting to peace, because peace is needed not only to Russia and Ukraine, but also to all countries of the world.”

Egypt: An opinion piece by Hicham Mourad of Cairo University published by the weekly Ahram. “Egypt’s position is similar to that of the majority of the Gulf monarchies and it has remained largely neutral since the start of the war. It has been quiet in its criticism of Russia and unwilling to join in the imposition of Western sanctions. Cairo’s burgeoning political, economic and military ties with Moscow explain its position. They include in particular a $25 billion contract for the construction of the Al-Dabaa nuclear power plant on the North Coast, the construction of a Russian industrial zone in the Suez Canal economic region, major reports trade and tourism, as well as arms contracts.”

United Arab Emirates: An editorial in Al Khaleej, the leading newspaper published in the country. “The declaration of the Atlantic countries to send weapons and ammunition of an offensive nature does not mean that the battle will be resolved easily. Rather, the opposite is true, because Kiev’s confessions confirm that its situation is critical. . . the fear remains because the defeat of any party will be a major problem and a horrific collapse of the European security system and the entire world, and there will be no room for remedy unless all parties are convinced of deliberation and avoid confronting that moment.

Jordan: An article published in Al Ghad, Jordan’s first independent Arabic daily national newspaper. “A recent op-ed in The Washington Post offers an insight into the mindset of US foreign policy makers. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. . . . call for “dramatically” more arms shipments to Ukraine. . . . Their solution is clearly unreasonable: let the people of Ukraine suffer more so that the country can defeat Russia and regain all Ukrainian lands. This is not, neither moral nor logical, a solution at all.”

In Sub-Saharan Africa, we found articles from Mali, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and the African Union published in French or English.

Mali: a long opinion piece by Rene Naba published in Maliactu. “The tragic truth is that if the West had not sought to expand NATO into Ukraine, it is unlikely that a war would have raged in Ukraine today. . . History will severely condemn the United States and its allies for their astonishingly stupid policy towards Ukraine”, argues John Mearsheimer, professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago. . . . Ukraine would be expendable for the United States. But Mearsheimer fails to see that the war is existential for the United States too: if Russia holds out, their imperial system crumbles.”

Kenya: a weekly column by Gitau Warigi for the Sunday Nation. “Something, whatever, should be done to end the ruinous Russia-Ukraine war. . . . The high fuel and food prices and general disorganisation across the world that it has brought has made everybody suffer. Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelenksy needs to take the lead in this initiative. He should open negotiations with Russia. His country’s cities are being destroyed by fusillades of missiles and drones fired from Russia. Infrastructure is being systematically destroyed.

Nigeria: an article by Tarkaa David in the online journal “leadership.” “Africa, Victim Of Ukraine-Russia Crisis”. “The huge financial assistance to Ukraine, primarily for the supply of weapons and military equipment by Western countries has significantly reduced the volume of aid to African countries. . . . NATO weapons will again arrive in Ukraine, most of which will flood the “black markets” and get to the countries of the African continent, where they are highly likely to be used in the commission of terrorist act.s . . . According to the report, apart from providing huge assistance to Kiev, Washington is deliberately provoking a food crisis in African countries by disrupting the supply of agricultural products from Ukraine.”

South Africa; an opinion piece in The Mail and Guardian. Most South Africans get their information about the war in Ukraine from Western media, and our own media, a good deal of which reports the Western line verbatim and uncritically. While the media often presents itself as impartial, this is never the case. . . . All powerful states deploy considerable resources and expertise towards shaping media narratives in their own interests. And during times of war, the media, including social media, is explicitly considered to be part of the battlespace. This is not a new development. As the old saying goes, “the first casualty when war comes is truth”.

African Union: The African News Agency reports that the Executive Secretary Ambassador, Zainab Ali Kotoko, of the Committee of Intelligence and Security Services in Africa (CISSA) has lambasted warring parties in Ukraine saying those who started the war are now trying to manipulate Africans to take their side. She refused to criticize the fact that South Africa is engaged in military training activities with Russia, saying that it must not be viewed as something wrong as long as it related to their bilateral relations and did not by any chance fuel the ongoing conflict.

In Latin America, in addition to the assessment of Lula’s encounter with Biden as described above, we found articles from Costa Rica and Argentina.

Costa Rica: opinion piece in El Mundo. “Ukraine: the war of the end of the world.” “Not to be apocalyptic, but the cards are on the table for a devastating global conflict.. . . Barack Obama decided to support a coup in kyiv (the Maidan), he created an absolutely unnecessary and unacceptably dangerous situation.  . . . And finally, his vice president (Biden) had the Russian invasion of Ukraine explode in his face. He hasn’t done a better job than his predecessor. Instead of forcing an immediate peace, he has pushed Ukraine into a war that is sustained solely by the barrage of weapons provided by the West. . . . Everything indicates that Russia, which began its invasion as a “special military operation”, is going to stop using rhetorical titles and launch its conventional power over poor Ukraine. . . . But the bigger problem is that if things don’t work out for Russia, it always has its nuclear arsenal. And there, we are going to be affected all over the planet. These political leaders are playing a game that can put the existence of humanity at risk.

Argentina: An editorial by Hernando Kleimans in Telam, the website of the official news agency of the Argentine Republic. “The absurd theory of Washington’s exclusivity over the rest of the countries, about its privilege in establishing a “rules-based order” that only it knows about, comes face to face with the absolute majority of humanity. Heart-breaking testimonies of hunger, misery, climatic disasters, plagues or infant mortality are worthless. The imposition of the great military-industrial complexes and the monopolistic centers of financial speculation, such as the new “merchants of the temple”, over the pusillanimous vassal governments, prioritizes their particular interests and is indifferent to the catastrophe, towards which it marches happily and without scruples.

Finally, we turn to Turkey, caught between Europe and the rest of the world. Selahaddin E. Çakirgil, columnist for the Star, a high-circulation Turkish newspaper. “Is the ‘Russia-Ukraine War’ heading towards a ‘nuclear catastrophe’?” The Chairman of the Russian Duma has written “If Washington and NATO countries provide Ukraine with weapons that it can use to attack Russian cities and try to seize our lands, we will retaliate with more powerful weapons.” “Given the technological superiority of Russian weapons, foreign politicians making such decisions need to understand that their aid could result in a global tragedy that will destroy their country. It is untenable for them to argue that “nuclear forces have not used weapons of mass destruction in local conflicts before. . . It is also obvious that the Western Front is actually dragging Ukraine into a ‘Proxy War’ in order to secure its own future against Russia. . . . In short, the Ukrainian War is increasingly heading towards a more complicated situation.”

Most of the countries named above (Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and United Arab Emirates) were among the 101 countries that did not vote with the US, Europe and Ukraine on one or more of the UN General Assembly resolutions last week that condemned Russia and refused to criticise arm shipments to the Ukraine.

Opinion polls conducted recently in China, India and Turkey by the European Council on Foreign Relations confirm that ordinary citizens share the perspectives described above.

Finally, here is a curious fact that exposes the failure of Western media. The most recent opinion polls in the United States show that a majority of Americans no longer support the American arms shipments to Ukraine. But this information is not reported in the European or North American media. Instead, we learn this from Navbharat Times of India, Kabar24 of Indonesia and Elaosboa  of Egypt.

It is very dangerous that the “obedient” mass media of Europe and the United States continue to support the escalation of the war. Are they leading us sleepwalking into Armageddon? We return to the article by Hernando Kleimans in Argentina. He entitles his article, “Son malditos porque viendo no quieren ver…” – ” “They are cursed by seeing what they do not want to see…”, a phrase that comes from Jesus, according to the Gospel of Saint Matthew. Kleimans argues that “more than two thousand years later, that phrase echoes with more force than ever in the great corridors of international politics. It is that the blindness of those who continue to ignite the demons of war that can lead our green planet to its total destruction, a deserted wasteland that will continue to rotate in infinite space as proof of our inconsistency as a species.”

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

United Nation General Assembly divides over Ukraine resolution and Belarus amendment

TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY

Let’s “work together for peace”, Nuns, Clergy Appeal after South Sudan Peace Pilgrimage

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT



Tourism as a force for Global Peace

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY



France: Mouvement de la Paix for peace in Ukraine 24-25 February

  

WOMEN’S EQUALITY



Vatican: Women raise their voices for peace

EDUCATION FOR PEACE



Education in Burkina: More than 94,000 to learn in the 2023 literacy campaign

HUMAN RIGHTS



Nobel Peace Prize 2023: PRIO Director’s Shortlist Announced

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION



Mexico: Initiative for a Law on Peace in Durango

National March on Washington March 18 : Peace in Ukraine

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

From the website of United National Antiwar Coalition

​Coinciding with the 20th anniversary weekend of the criminal U.S.-invasion of Iraq a major set of actions including a demonstration at the White House in Washington, D.C. on Saturday March 18 demanding “Peace in Ukraine – Say NO to Endless U.S. Wars” and “Fund People’s Needs, Not the War Machine.”

Demands

Peace in Ukraine – No weapons, no money for the Ukraine War
Abolish NATO – End U.S. militarism & sanctions!
Fund people’s needs, not the war machine!
No war with China!
End U.S. aid to racist apartheid Israel!
Fight racism & bigotry at home, not other peoples!
U.S. hands off Haiti
End AFRICOM

Click here to help build this action

Click here to endorse the action

This action is being called by UNAC, the ANSWER Coalition, Code Pink, Black Alliance for peace and many others listed below. This is the first time in many years that then entire U.S, antiwar movement has been able to get together and build a national action. This is a very important step forward for our movement.

(Continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Can the peace movement help stop the war in the Ukraine?

The peace movement in the United States, What are its strengths and weaknesses?

(Continued from left column)

Endorsers:

United National Anti-War Coalition,
ANSWER Coalition,
Black Alliance for Peace,
The People’s Forum,
CodePink,
World BEYOND War,
Popular Resistance,
Veterans for Peace,
International Action Center,
Party for Socialism and Liberation,
Al-Awda,
The Palestine Right to Return Coalition,
Labor Against Racism and War,
Leonard Peltier Defense Committee,
Universal African Peoples Organization,
East Bay Democratic Socialists of America,
Socialist Action,
Nevada Green Party,
Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network,
Ohio Peace Council,
Green Party of Connecticut,
Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists Social Justice Committee, Environmentalists Against War,
Pacific Green Party (OR),
Linn-Benton Chapter,
Lauren Faith Smith Ministry for Nonviolence,
Maine Cumberland County Greens,
Genesee Valley Citizens for Peace,
San Jose Peace and Justice Center,
Servicio Particular Alacran,
Minnesota Peace Action Coalition,
PeaceWorks of Greater Brunswick,
UPWARD (Uniting Peace With Actions Respect and Dignity),
Socialist Party of America,
North Country Peace Group,
Workers World Party,
Roger Waters,
PeaceWorks,
Bronx Antiwar Coalition,
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space,
Chicago Anti-War Coalition,
National Immigrant Solidarity Network,
China-US Solidarity Network,
North American Climate Conservation and Environmental group,
Stop the War Machine – New Mexico,
Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace,
Odessa Solidarity Campaign,
DC Young Communist League,
Uhuru Solidarity Movement,
North American Climate Conservation and Environmental group,
Virginia Defenders for Freedom Justice & Equality…

(Note added on March 25. An email received at CPNN from the UNAC today says “More than 2,500 people participated in the rally, march and teach-in on March 18.” This figure is confirmed in an article from the website Toward Freedom.)

Nobel Peace Prize 2023: PRIO Director’s Shortlist Announced

…. HUMAN RIGHTS ….

An article from the Peace Research Institute Oslo

The director of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), Henrik Urdal, announced his shortlist today for the 2023 Nobel Peace Prize, with human rights activists topping the list. 
The 2023 shortlist comprises of:

1. Narges Mohammadi and Mahbouba Seraj
2. Kyaw Moe Tun and Myanmar’s National Unity Consultative Council
3. The International Court of Justice
4. Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Juan Carlos Jintiach
5. Human Rights Data Analysis Group


Left to right: Mahbouba Seraj and Narges Mohammadi

“History has shown us that respect for human rights is intrinsically linked to peaceful societies. The non-violent struggle for human rights is therefore a valuable contribution to peace and stability, and an advancement of the ‘fellowship among nations’ as stipulated by Alfred Nobel in his will. As this year marks the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, my Nobel shortlist reflects a timely and worthy focus on human rights defenders and activists,” said Henrik Urdal.

Each year, PRIO’s director presents his own shortlist for the Nobel Peace Prize. He offers his opinion on the most worthy potential laureates, based on his independent assessment. The PRIO director’s view on potential and worthy Nobel Peace Prize laureates is widely recognized and has been offered since 2002. Henrik Urdal presents here his sixth list since taking up the position of director in 2017.

Narges Mohammadi and Mahbouba Seraj

Oppressive regimes in Iran and Afghanistan have drastically reversed women’s rights in the past year, from executing Iranian youths for protesting gender inequality, to banning Afghan women attending university. Research shows that more gender-equal societies are more peaceful. If the Nobel Committee would like to shine a spotlight on the non-violent struggle for human rights as a contribution to peace, Narges Mohammadi and Mahbouba Seraj are highly deserving nominees to share the prize, based on their tireless efforts to improve women’s rights in Iran and Afghanistan.

Narges Mohammadi is a leading Iranian human rights activist and journalist who has campaigned for women’s rights and the abolition of the death penalty. She has spent multiple periods in prison in Iran and is currently serving a long prison sentence for charges including spreading ‘propaganda against the state’. Her imprisonment has been internationally denounced. Mohammadi is deputy head of the Defenders of Human Rights Center, which is led by the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Shirin Ebadi. She was also elected President of the Executive Committee of the National Council of Peace in Iran.

Mahbouba Seraj is a prominent Afghan journalist and women’s rights activist. After 26 years in exile, she returned to Afghanistan in 2003, and is now based in Kabul. She is a champion of children’s health, education, fighting corruption and empowering survivors of domestic abuse. She is also the founder of the nonprofit Afghan Women’s Network and the Organization for Research in Peace and Solidarity, and has pushed for women’s participation in the Peace Jirga and the High Peace Council.

Kyaw Moe Tun and Myanmar’s National Unity Consultative Council

Since the coup d’état on 1 February 2021, Myanmar’s military has reportedly killed over 2,800 people and detained more than 17,400. The UN has stated that the military brutality against the population amounts to crimes against humanity and possible war crimes. For their efforts to inclusively work for peace and democracy, and to end the violence by the security forces, Myanmar’s representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun, and the National Unity Consultative Council (NUCC) would be worthy recipients of the 2023 Nobel Peace Prize.

Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun denounced the military coup soon after it occurred, calling on states not to recognize or legitimize the junta. Since then, he has represented the people of Myanmar in the UN on behalf of the National Unity Government that was formed by elected members of parliament, representatives of various ethnic groups and civil society leaders. Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun has used his position to convey the voices of the Myanmar people to the international community.

The NUCC aims to end all forms of dictatorship and to build a federal democratic union in Myanmar that fully guarantees democracy, national equality and self-determination. It is an inclusive body with representatives from elected members of parliament, political parties, civil society organizations, officials from the civil disobedience movement and strike organizations, and ethnic resistance organizations.

(Article continued in the right column)

Question related to this article:

What is the state of human rights in the world today?

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

How can just one or a few persons contribute to peace and justice?

(Article continued from the left column)

International Court of Justice

Mechanisms for peaceful resolution of conflicts between states are particularly important to maintain and support peace in an increasingly polarized world. The International Court of Justice (ICJ)  promotes peace through international law, akin to promoting peace congresses, another achievement highlighted in Alfred Nobel’s will. The ICJ would be a worthy recipient of the 2023 Peace Prize should the Nobel Committee wish to recognize the importance of multilateral collaboration for peaceful relations.

The ICJ was established in 1945 by the Charter of the UN to settle legal disputes between states and advise on legal questions within the UN. With all 193 UN member states party to the ICJ Statute, the Court has become a globally accepted multilateral mechanism for dispute resolution. While a Nobel Peace Prize to the ICJ would largely be seen as uncontroversial, the Court acted boldly and early on 16 March 2022 by ordering Russia to ‘immediately suspend the military operations’ in Ukraine. The Nobel Committee could emphasize this ruling as an attempt to stop an illegal war of aggression.

Other potential candidates for a prize focused on peace through international law are the International Criminal Court (ICC), or regional bodies such as the European Court for Human Rights or the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Juan Carlos Jintiach

Discrimination and injustice against indigenous peoples stokes tensions between communities that can lead to violence and armed conflict. The non-violent struggle to protect and strengthen the rights of indigenous peoples is a laudable rationale for being awarded the Peace Prize. Two worthy campaigners for the rights of indigenous peoples are Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Juan Carlos Jintiach. This would also be an environmental prize for conservation action and the fight against climate change.

Philippine-born indigenous rights activist Victoria Tauli-Corpuz has worked for many years to advance the rights of indigenous peoples across the world. She served as the Chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and as the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Tauli-Corpuz founded and heads Tebtebba, the Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre for Policy Research and Education. She has also worked extensively with tropical forest conservation and against destructive development projects, climate change, social justice issues and the advancement of indigenous peoples’ and women’s rights.

Similarly, the Ecuadorian indigenous leader Juan Carlos Jintiach has played a key role in elevating the voices of indigenous peoples. He is a democratically elected leader of COICA (the federation representing Indigenous organizations in the Amazon Basin) and an active member of multiple indigenous rights groups. He served as the co-chair of the global indigenous caucus in the international indigenous forum on climate change within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Jintiach has worked to connect the concerns of communities on the ground with global policy arenas, and has served as a consensus-building voice among these actors.

Human Rights Data Analysis Group

Research and knowledge can play an important role in promoting peace. A Nobel Peace Prize for organizations working to mobilize research and education in the service of preventing conflict would highlight the importance of truth-seeking and facts in the face of the propagation of divisive disinformation.

One such organization that would be a worthy recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize is the Human Rights Data Analysis Group (HRDAG). Based in the United States, HRDAG systematically documents and analyses data on human rights abuses. Founded by Patrick Ball, the organization aims to promote accountability for human rights violations through rigorous, non-partisan science.

Other worthy candidates for a prize focused on documenting human rights violations include the research agency Forensic Architecture, and the investigative journalism groups Bellingcat and Lighthouse Reports.


Background on the Nobel Peace Prize

The Nobel Peace Prize is arguably the most prestigious prize in the world. It is awarded annually by the Norwegian Nobel Committee to persons or organizations for their efforts to promote peace. The Norwegian Nobel Committee  bases its decision on valid nominations received by the 31 January deadline. Anyone can be nominated. Indeed, history has presented us with a few rather dubious nominees, including Hitler. The right to nominate  is reserved for members of national assemblies and governments, current and former members of the Committee, Peace Prize laureates, professors of certain disciplines, directors of peace research and foreign policy institutes, and members of international courts.

The five committee members have until their first meeting after the deadline to add nominations of their own. Urdal abstains from using his right to nominate, given his active role in commenting on the prize. He has no association with the Nobel Institute or the Norwegian Nobel Committee. The laureate will be announced in October.

Mexico: Initiative for a Law on Peace in Durango

.. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION ..

An article by Juan Cardénas in El Siglo de Durango (translation by CPNN)

In order to strengthen respect for human rights, security and justice for all the people of Durango and to ensure that no place is left for violence, the State Congress will analyze an initiative to create the State Law for the Culture of Peace, as well as the creation of two Councils on the matter.


The peace agenda is part of the issues that are being considered by local deputies for the current regular session.

“It is not enough to increase the sanctions or aggravate punishments, but we must attack the origin of the criminal acts and provide the State and society with useful tools that guide us effectively to live in peace,” said local deputy Verónica Pérez Herrera .
(continued in right column)

(Click here for the Spanish original of this article)

Questions for this article:

How can culture of peace be developed at the municipal level?

Is there progress towards a culture of peace in Mexico?

(continued from left column)

Expanding the reasons for her initiative, the legislator referred to the culture of peace fostering values, attitudes and behaviors of respect, tolerance, equality, solidarity, dialogue and negotiation, strengthening harmonious coexistence and ties between individuals of the community and promoting a perspective that contributes to the construction of a just society.

“Peace not only consists in the absence of conflict but also its prevention, so it is up to all members of a society without distinction to seek and preserve respect and justice to achieve peace,” Pérez Herrera said before the meeting of the Congress.

The initiative seeks to establish a State Council that would be headed by the Secretary General of the Government and that groups together the public entities that have a direct impact on the formation of a culture of peace in society. These include the State Attorney General’s Office, the State Commission for Human Rights, the State Institute for Women, the Secretary of Public Security and the DIF System; as well as representatives of the private sector and civil society.

Also proposed is a Citizen Advisory Council for the Observance of the Culture of Peace, made up of citizens with experience in the matter, which will provide the organization with moral quality to issue opinions and recommendations regarding the actions to be carried out.

These will lead to the creation of the State Commission for the Promotion and Diffusion of the Culture of Peace, which will exercise the actions, plans, programs, projects and measures approved by the State Council and the Consultative Council, made up of representatives of both Councils.

Tourism as a force for Global Peace

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Ajay Prakash from Peace Tourism

Tourism is a large industry but it is also a complex one since, unlike most other industries, there is not one clear product. It incorporates many aspects, including accommodation, transport, attractions, travel companies, and more. It comprises a broad group of businesses focused on the satisfaction of customers and providing specific experiences for them. It is unique because it’s an industry that is based completely on connecting people across all boundaries of race, religion or nationality and bringing joy to their lives.


 Ajay Prakash, President – Travel Agents Federation of India

India has assumed the Chair of the prestigious G20 and this is the perfect opportunity to emphatically present before the world all that India has to offer. Our traditional values, our Sanskar of universal love and brotherhood, of tolerance and acceptance, of embracing unity in diversity and of welcoming the guest with the expression Atihi Devo Bhava are India’s gift to the world. This is the opportunity to step up what I would term our “Cultural Diplomacy” – to present afresh Indian values, knowledge and leadership to the world through both, government to government and people to people initiatives.

Tourism offers great opportunities for emerging economies and developing countries. It creates jobs, strengthens the local economy and contributes to infrastructure development; it can help to conserve the natural environment, cultural assets and traditions, to reduce poverty and inequality and to heal the wounds of conflict. It is an industry that has a cascading and multiplier effect on many other industries, thereby providing a major boost to the economy.

The economic aspect and effect of tourism has been well documented – It accounts for almost 10% of global GDP and employs 1 in 10 persons (of course these are pre-Covid numbers because the industry took a huge hit in 2020 and 2021) and traditionally the tourism growth curve has always been ahead of the GDP growth curve by a couple of percentage points.

But its impact goes far beyond the economic benefits and it is worthwhile to look at Tourism as a social force as opposed to an industry and how we can use it to establish a Culture of Peace.

Tourism is about connecting people with each other and with the Planet. When you travel with a gentle heart and an open mind, you discover that the differences that seemingly divide us pale into insignificance before all the common needs, aspirations and desires that are universal across nations, races or religions. We all want good homes, a bright future for our children, a healthy environment free from disease, clean water, the support of our communities … and Peace. We all share the same ideals, hopes and aspirations and travel teaches us that diversity is no need for antagonism.

Mark Twain said it very well “Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one’s lifetime.”

It’s obvious to everyone that Peace is a prerequisite for the success of tourism, but the converse is equally true and Tourism can also be a powerful force to foster Peace. But first, let us redefine Peace. Peace has to be marked by a presence, not an absence – it is not simply the absence of war or conflict; it is the presence of tolerance, of acceptance of love and understanding.

The Dalai Lama said “Peace does not mean an absence of conflicts; differences will always be there. Peace means solving these differences through peaceful means; through dialogue, education, knowledge and through humane ways.”
37 years ago, in 1986, a visionary man called Louis D’Amore established the International Institute for Peace through Tourism or IIPT. It was established with a vision that tourism, one of the largest industries, could become the first global Peace industry and the firm belief that every traveller is potentially an Ambassador of Peace.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can tourism promote a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

IIPT has only one purpose – to spread greater awareness of the power of Tourism as a vehicle for Peace. The aim of “Peace through Tourism” is to eliminate, or at least reduce, the conditions which lead us to a perception that violence is necessary.

So how do we do this?

The first step is to understand that we can make a difference, that we matter! Tourism is a huge industry; if we account for 10% of global GDP surely we are an industry that can make its voice heard and we are an industry that can influence global events. But for that we have to come together and we have to realize that we have the power. Like other industries, we too need to lobby the government so as to make an impact at the policy level.

The effects of climate change are all around us. What we term natural disasters are often the result of unchecked human activity – glaciers melting, sea levels rising, unseasonal floods and uncontrollable fires, toxic air and contaminated water. Is this the world we wish to leave for our children?

Along with 190 countries India has signed the COP 15 pledge of 30 by 30 – a pledge to preserve at least 30% of global biodiversity by 2030. That is a step in the right direction. Many such steps are needed for the sustainability of the Earth – still the only home for human beings in this vast universe.

We have to prepare our travellers and ourselves to make the change. As stakeholders in the industry we have to build sustainability and responsibility into our core business practices. It can be as small as keeping the air conditioning at 25 degrees, switching off lights when they’re not needed, avoiding single use plastics or the compulsive printing of every document. It could be as large as converting your entire fleet to electric vehicles. Once you start on the path of conservation, the opportunities will keep coming. The magic mantra is “Refuse, Reduce, Recycle.”

Never underestimate the power of one. A river starts as a drop, a few more drops join and it becomes a trickle, the trickle becomes a stream and finally it’s a mighty river that sustains life until it goes and meets the sea. That is how movements are born, too. Let us today resolve to work for a more responsible, peace-sensitive tourism.

Another area where the tourism industry can make a big difference is in promoting gender equality. Almost 65 – 70% of the workforce in tourism is female, but only 12 – 13% of them are in responsible or managerial positions. Women comprise almost half the world’s population, but they have never got an equal chance. The “Beti padhao, beti bachao” is a great initiative but then they also need to be given the opportunity to put that education to use. Numerous studies have proved that empowering women is not only socially or politically correct, but that it actually leads to a healthier bottom line.

The next step is to educate our travellers, to awaken them to the higher paradigm of tourism. If they are travelling to a new place, we need to sensitise them to the social and cultural differences, we need to create experiences and situations where they can interact positively with the local host community, we need to encourage them to buy local products, try local food. Many times this push will come from the travellers themselves.

Today’s travellers are much more tech savvy, they’re more aware, they’re more discerning and the younger generation is much more conscious of the ecological footprint of any activity. So if that’s the segment you want to connect with, now is the time to rework your business strategy.

The IIPT has a global Peace Parks program and has dedicated over 450 Peace Parks across the world. We need to create such symbols to reassert that Peace is a fundamental global right and that India is willing and able to lead the way.

In conclusion, I present the IIPT Credo of the Peaceful Traveller as a first step on the path to use tourism to foster a Culture of Peace.

IIPT Credo of the Peaceful Traveller©

Grateful for the opportunity to travel and experience the world and because peace begins with the individual, I affirm my personal responsibility and commitment to:
* Journey with an open mind and gentle heart
* Accept with grace and gratitude the diversity I encounter
* Revere and protect the natural environment which sustains all life
* Appreciate all cultures I discover
* Respect and thank my hosts for their welcome
* Offer my hand in friendship to everyone I meet
* Support travel services that share these views and act upon them and,
* By my spirit, words and actions, encourage others to travel the world in peace.
 

Vatican: Women raise their voices for peace

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article by Linda Bordoni from Vatican News

Pope’s powerful appeal for peace in Ukraine resounded at the weekly General Audience on the eve of the one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion. Participating in the audience were three young women who felt particularly encouraged and comforted by his continuing closeness and prayers. The women from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus told Vatican Radio about their own dreams for peace and of their continuing pacifist commitment.


From left to right: Olga Karach, Linda Bordoni, Kateryna Lanko and Darya Berg

Darya from Russia, Olga from Belarus and Katya from Ukraine are in Italy bringing the voices of millions of their countrymen who oppose the ongoing war in Ukraine and the increasing militarization of the world.

They have been invited by the Italian Non-Violent Movement (Movimento Nonviolento) which promotes demilitarization and peace-making activities.

Speaking to Vatican Radio after having participated in Pope Francis’ General Audience on Wednesday morning, the three women reiterated their commitment to work for peace. They expressed gratitude and admiration for the Pope’s tireless condemnation of the absurdity of war, for his appeals to world leaders to pursue negotiations and peace-making, and for his spiritual and concrete closeness to those who are suffering.

“It is my aim,” Darya Berg explained, “to find a way for Russian people to live without blood on their hands.”

‘Go by the forest’

Representing the “Go by the forest” project, she explained it is a nonviolent civil resistance project working “to help Russian people avoid this awful war that Russia started in Ukraine.”

Darya, who has had to flee her country in order to be able to pursue her pacifist ideals and commitment, said she would be in jail today in Russia for her words and actions.

She is here, she added, to represent them and to tell Europe and the whole world that there are “a lot of Russian people who are against the war, who don’t want to kill anybody who wants peace.”

It is important to hear the voices, she said, even if they are silent.

Darya explained that “Go by the Forest” has a double meaning in Russia: it means “We don’t care about what you think,” and that, she explained, “is what we say to the government in our country.” It is also an invitation to “go by the forest” to find ways to cross the border and escape military conscription.

That’s what we do, she said, to help “people who don’t want to kill anybody in this bloody war,” helping them understand their rights, helping them by providing legal information, psychological support and hiding places in Russian territory as well as crossing the borders.

(Article continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:

Do women have a special role to play in the peace movement?

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

(Article continued from left column)

It is still legal, Darya explained, to exit the country; however, it is very difficult for people, especially from villages and small towns who do not have passports and who have never been out of Russia.

They are threatened, she said, “by the government, by the military, by the army. They don’t know what they can do, what they cannot do.”

‘Our House’

Belorussian Olga Karach heads an organisation called “Our House”. She said it is currently running a campaign to help Belarussian men avoid enrolment in the Belarussian army and the war in Ukraine.

She noted that just this week the Belorussian president passed a law approving the death penalty for army deserters.

Like Darya she is campaigning to raise the voice of those men “who don’t want to go to the army, who don’t want to take up weapons and who are now in a very marginalised space.”

Olga said that although media attention shifted following the peaceful revolution in 2020 in which thousands of anti-Lukashenko citizens were jailed or exiled, “still, we have a lot of terror and operations in our country.”

Today, she said the people of Belarus “need much more solidarity and much more support because now Lukashenko is under unbelievable pressure by Vladimir Putin to send the Belarussian army to Ukraine.”
She is in Italy now, Olga added, because she wants “block and prevent a second front in Ukraine from the Belarussian side.”

“We need the attention of Europe for the Belarussian situation,” she said, “, especially for Belarussian men who are trying to avoid participation in the army.”

The closeness of Pope Francis

Completing the trio is Kateryna Lanko from Kyiv in Ukraine, whose aim, she said, is “to make peace in Ukraine, to stop the war, to make a stronger peaceful movement in Ukraine and help our conscientious objectors.”

Commenting on Pope Francis’ powerful appeal for peace during the General Audience and on his words regarding the fact that “Whatever is built on rubble can never be a true victory,” she said she felt encouraged and warmed by them.

The strength of unity

The three women reaffirmed their common commitment stemming, they said, from common problems and the belief that together there is much they can do.

Their Italian tour aims to raise funds for their work, but more than that, to be heard. Olga recalled with gratitude the solidarity shown by so many Italians for Belarussian children in Chernobyl who were orphaned or affected by the nuclear disaster in 1986.

She hopes Europe will take notice of the fact that Lukashenko is currently organizing military training camps for children as young as six “to teach them to shoot, to use military equipment” and to be prepared as child soldiers.

“All three of us really need your help, Darya concluded, “and we really need to be heard. I believe that together we can end the war and that it’s very important for our countries to save as many people as possible.”

“We are here to say that there are people who don’t want to fight, who don’t want weapons in their hands who don’t want to kill and to die.”

United Nation General Assembly divides over Ukraine resolution and Belarus amendment

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Analysis by CPNN

The United States and its allies claimed victory at the United Nations with the vote on a resolution condemning the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. The final vote was 141 for, 7 against and 32 abstentions.

But a thorough analysis suggests that the victory was not so one-sided. If one considers the votes on the Belarus amendment to condemn arms shipments to the Ukraine, the General Assembly was divided with more than half (101 countries) failing to follow the American line regarding the vote on this amendment.

Of the 91 votes that defeated the Belarus amendment, 45 were cast by Europe and the US/Canada while 46 by all the rest of the world.


Voting on Belarus resolution condemning arms shipments to Ukraine

Here are the operative paragraphs of the two resolutions and the voting details.

Principles of the Charter of the United Nations underlying a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine Draft resolution A/ES-11/L.7

1. Underscores the need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine in line with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

2. Welcomes and expresses strong support for the efforts of the SecretaryGeneral and Member States to promote a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine, consistent with the Charter, including the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity of States;

3. Calls upon Member States and international organizations to redouble support for diplomatic efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine, consistent with the Charter;

4. Reaffirms its commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, extending to its territorial waters;

5. Reiterates its demand that the Russian Federation immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, and calls for a cessation of hostilities;

6. Demands that the treatment by the parties to the armed conflict of all prisoners of war be in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949 2 and Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, 3 and calls for the complete exchange of prisoners of war, the release of all unlawfully detained persons and the return of all internees and of civilians forcibly transferred and deported, including children;

7. Calls for full adherence by the parties to the armed conflict to their obligations under international humanitarian law to take constant care to spare the civilian population and civilian objects, to ensure safe and unhindered humanitarian access to those in need, and to refrain from attacking, destroying, removing or rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population;

8. Also calls for an immediate cessation of the attacks on the critical infrastructure of Ukraine and any deliberate attacks on civilian objects, including those that are residences, schools and hospitals;

9. Emphasizes the need to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law committed on the territory of Ukraine through appropriate, fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at the national or international level, and ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes;

10. Urges all Member States to cooperate in the spirit of solidarity to address the global impacts of the war on food security, energy, finance, the environment and nuclear security and safety, underscores that arrangements for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine should take into account these factors, and calls upon Member States to support the Secretary-General in his efforts to address these impacts;

11. Decides to adjourn the eleventh emergency special session of the General Assembly temporarily and to authorize the President of the General Assembly to resume its meetings upon request from Member States.

Belarus: A/ES-11/L.9 – amendment to draft resolution A/ES-11/L.7

1 ; After the eighth preambular paragraph, insert a new preambular paragraph reading: Noting with concern the continuing supply of weapons by third parties to the zone of conflict that obstructs the prospects for sustainable peace,

2. After operative paragraph 5, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Calls for the start of peace negotiations;

3. After existing operative paragraph 10, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Calls upon Member States to address the root causes of the conflict in and around Ukraine, including legitimate security concerns of Member States;

4. After existing operative paragraph 10, insert a new operative paragraph reading: Also calls upon Member States to refrain from sending weapons to the zone of conflict.

(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?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

Here are the voting details of the 101 countries that did not follow the American line regarding the vote on the Belarus amendment.

15 countries voted for the Belarus amendment

Angola
Belarus
China
Cuba
North Korea
Egypt
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Honduras
Iran
Mali
Nicaragua
Russia
Syria
Zimbabwe

52 countries abstained on the Belarus amendment

Afghanistan
Algeria
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Bhutan
Bolivia
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei Daresalam
Burundi
Colombia
Congo
Djibouti
El Salvador
Gabon
Ghana
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Jordan
Kenya
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lesotho
Libya
Malaysia
Mexico
Mongolia
Mozambique
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Philippines
Saint Vincent
Saudi Arabia
South Africa
South Sudan
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Tajikistan
Thailand
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Uwbekistan
Yemen

17 countries did not vote on the Belarus amendment although they voted for the final resolution

Cambodia
Chad
Comoros
DR Congo
Kiribati
Madagascar
Mauritania
Mauritius
Morocco
Niger
Rwanda
Saint Lucia
Serbia
Seychelles
Solomon Islands
Somalia
Timor Leste

4 countries did not vote on the Belarus resolution while they abstained on the final resolution

Armenia
Central African Republic
Kazakhstan
Vietnam

13 countries did not vote on the Belarus or the final resolution

Azerbaijan
Burkina Faso
Cameroun
Dominica
Equatorial Africa
Eswatini
Grenada
Guinea Bissau
Lebanon
Senegal
Turkmenistan
UR Tanzania
Venezuela

Note 1: The fact that a country does not vote on a resolution is not always a political statement. However, in this case, 21 countries did not vote on the Belarus amendment but voted or abstained on the final resolution while no country did the opposite, voting or abstaining only on the Belarus amendment. The other 13 that failed to vote on either the amendment or the resolution tend to be aligned with other countries that abstained rather than being aligned with the US, NATO and their allies. Thus it seems likely that in most cases the absence of a vote was a political statement, and it has been counted as such here.

Note 2: The representative of Mexico voiced his regret that the last-minute amendments by Belarus had not been tabled in sufficient time for their full consideration.