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.

Last Days of Hearings at the International Court of Justice on the Israeli Occupation of Palestine

. . HUMAN RIGHTS . .

An article from the United Nations Regional Information Centre for Western Europe

The advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2022 led to hearings that began on 19 February (read more about the first few days of the hearing in our first article and continued until 26 February, with 52 states and three international organisations  presenting their opinions.


Photo copyright ICJ

Iran Criticises “Inaction” of the Security Council

The Islamic Republic of Iran highlighted the “seriousness” of the situation in Gaza on 22 February, pointing to “the inaction or insufficient action of the Security Council, if not the main, is one of the main causes of the prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territories. All the atrocities and crimes committed by the Israeli régime in the past almost 80 years are a consequence of such inaction. Even today, the Security Council is paralysed due to the stalemate caused by a certain permanent Member.”

Iran called for an end to cooperation in all its forms, whether “political, military, economic, or other”, with Israel to prevent it from “continuing its prolonged occupation,” as well as for the “complete termination of all its military operations in the Gaza Strip.”

Iraq and Jordan Demand End of Occupation

Iraq argued for the ICJ’s jurisdiction in the ongoing procedure, noting that the Court had already issued an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Territories  in 2004.
In this opinion, the Court had determined that “the construction of the wall and the regime associated with it created on the ground a ‘fait accompli’ that could become permanent and, as such, amount to a de facto annexation,” in violation of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

Baghdad also called for “the respect (…) under any circumstance or in any place” for the opinion rendered by the ICJ on 26 January in the context of South Africa’s complaint against Israel for “genocide” in Gaza, “in order to stop the systematic killing machine against the Palestinian people.”

Speaking for Jordan, Ayman Safadi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, spoke of the horrors of war in Gaza, where “children are operated on without anaesthesia.” He stated that “in Gaza, Palestinians are dying by Israel’s war. They are also dying from hunger and lack of medication, as Israel prevents the delivery of food and medicine in violation of international humanitarian law and in defiance of the provisional measures you have ordered. This aggression has to end and end immediately. Israel is acting and has been allowed to act in complete disregard of international law. That cannot continue.”

Asserting that “the occupation is illegal and inhumane,” he urged the Court to “rule that the Israeli occupation, the source of all evil, must end.”

13 Additional Countries Discuss Reparations

Visibly moved, Ali Ahmad Ebraheem S. Al-Dafiri, Ambassador of Kuwait to the Netherlands, stated that “the unprecedented violence in Gaza is a result of 57 years of illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories, and it must stop.” Kuwait also demanded an end to the occupation and a negotiated two-state solution along the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital. It added that “the occupying Power is under the obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by its occupation and discriminatory policies and practices.”

Lebanon highlighted that the ICJ had already affirmed in 2004 in its opinion on the construction of the wall that Israel was “obliged to return the lands, orchards, olive groves, and other real property seized to any natural or legal person.” Lebanon added that Israel “is also obliged to cease its violation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, to end its occupation of the Palestinian territories, and to recognise the State of Palestine. And to provide reparations.”

Similarly, Libya, Syria, Malaysia, Ireland, Namibia, Oman, Indonesia, Slovenia, Tunisia, Spain, and the Maldives advocated for reparations through restitution or compensation. In total, 19 countries advocated for reparations during the six days of hearings.

The United Kingdom urges the ICJ not to respond to the request for an advisory opinion.

On 23 February, the United Kingdom reiterated many of the arguments previously made in writing by the United States, Canada, Fiji, Hungary, and Zambia, arguing for respect for the existing framework within the Security Council to allow for a negotiated solution to progress.
London went further, asking the Court not to issue a ruling due to the way the questions posed by the General Assembly were formulated. These two questions amount to “taking the entire Palestine question to be looked at by the highest court in the globe,” as stated by the United States.

According to the United Kingdom, the Court cannot interfere in a dispute between two parties, as mentioned in its 1975 advisory opinion on Western Sahara, without the consent of both parties.

Furthermore, the Court could “draw legal conclusions on an incorrect factual basis” due to not only the ongoing conflict but also the extent of the documentation required: “the entire factual record stretching back some 57 years and a United Nations dossier spanning nearly 30,000 pages.”

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

Finally, the United Kingdom believes that the framework established by the Security Council, with resolutions 242 and 338, envisions Israel’s withdrawal from the Occupied Territories through negotiation, not a judicial decision.

… while many countries defended the Court’s jurisdiction

Ireland condemns the 7 October attacks but believes that “these limits have been exceeded by Israel in its military response to the Hamas attack.”

Rossa Fanning, Attorney General of Ireland, stated that his country “believes that clarification now, by this Court, of the international law issues raised by the prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territory will assist in providing a stable foundation upon which to build a just resolution” of the conflict.

“Several States have suggested that this request for an advisory opinion is an attempt to resolve a bilateral dispute without the consent of one of the parties to that dispute. We very much regret that Israel has chosen not to engage with the subject matter of the request. (…) However, in our view, the issue of the Occupied Palestinian Territory is directly of concern to the United Nations itself, and it goes much further than a mere bilateral dispute.”

The ICJ’s jurisdiction was defended by many States, including Norway, which emphasised a situation of “de facto annexation” in the Palestinian Territories, Pakistan,  Spain,  Japan, and China, which expressed its support “for the just cause of the Palestinian people.”  Switzerland stated that “Israel has legitimate security concerns, but also the obligation to respect international law.”

Abdel Sattar Issa, Ambassador of Lebanon to the Netherlands, argued that “asking the Court not to intervene, not to give its advisory opinion in the name of a bilateral negotiation process to be protected, a political solution to be preserved, is a perverse argument that creates antagonism between the political and the legal when they are, in any society, including the international society, two complementary elements in dialectical relation. Law frames the political, prevents its drift, whether at the public or private level. Law guarantees a minimum of justice in relations.”

Similarly, Syria defended the Court’s jurisdiction at a time when “the Palestinian people find themselves with no real protection.” Ammar Al Arsan, Head of the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the European Union in Brussels, stated, “We are here today to make sure that they – the occupiers – do not get away with impunity.”

“There is no peace process,” according to Indonesia.

Indonesia went further in opposing the argument made by the United States that the Court’s advisory opinion could impact a negotiated peace process: “First, there is no viable peace process to be undermined. Israel has been consistently obstructing a negotiated two-state solution that is in line with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions. (…)

After all, negotiation with someone holding a gun against your head is not a negotiation at all (…). Just last November, Prime Minister Netanyahu even boasted, “I’m proud that I prevented the establishment of a Palestinian State”.

This argument was echoed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which includes 57 States: “Are there ongoing negotiations between Israel and Palestine? The truth about this matter is that there are none. It is a myth that has been artificially maintained for a long time, but which, in light of events, has collapsed by the admission of the parties involved.”

Qatar advocates for labelling of Israel’s practices as “apartheid.”

Qatar’s position, outlined by Mutlaq Bin Majed Al-Qahtani, ambassador to the Netherlands, highlighted a “growing perception in some quarters that international law applies to some, but not to others. That some peoples are seen as deserving of security, freedom and self-determination, but others are not. Some children are deemed worthy of the law’s protection, but others are killed in their thousands. Qatar rejects such double standards.”

Qatar denounced violence that has become “part of the fabric of life for Palestinians even before the beginning of the occupation in 1967. And Gaza has always paid the highest price. In the 15 years before 7 October, Israeli military campaigns killed 5,365 Palestinians in Gaza, the majority of whom were undisputedly civilians.”

The ambassador mentioned the increase in violence in the West Bank and “the systematic persecution of human rights organisations and journalists,” referring to the death of Shireen Abu Akleh from the Qatari channel Al Jazeera, “murdered by Israeli forces on 11 May 2022.”

Qatar urged the ICJ to label the occupation of the Palestinian Territories as an apartheid regime, an argument advanced by 25 participants in the hearings, so that the “the international community, including the General Assembly, can activate similar mechanisms for bringing about an end of the occupation as it did with the apartheid régime in South Africa. This is the surest path to truth, justice, and, yes, reconciliation.”

Three international organisations speak out.

On 26 February, the last day of hearings, the Arab League called for an end to the occupation and the “immediate” withdrawal of all Israeli settlers from the Occupied Territories.

The OIC concluded its presentation with these words: “The unfounded and unpunished violence that Israel exercises over the Palestinians leads to more violence in response. It is a vicious cycle, that of vengeance, which is always to the advantage of the strongest. This is the deadly cycle of violence that tragically unfolds before our eyes. To break it, an impartial third party, affirming the common standard with authority, is needed.”

Finally, the African Union (AU) declared that “Israel’s aggression against Gaza is nothing but a shameful attempt to create a new Nakba ⎯ , a new catastrophe aimed at erasing the Palestinian presence in Palestine.”

The Court has entered into deliberation before issuing an advisory opinion that will be given at a later date.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

English bulletin March 1, 2024

CULTURE OF PEACE AS A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

The United Nations Summit for the Future, planned for September 2024, calls for a vision for the future. In their proposals submitted to the Summit some have proposed that it should re-commit the UN to the culture of peace.

In her proposal, Anne Creter says that “Culture of Peace is a comprehensive, UN established “blueprint” or “roadmap” of actions necessary at all levels of existence to manifest sustainable peace.” She sites in particular the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace A/RES/53/243 adopted by the General Assembly (GA) in 1999, saying that it “must be integrated into A Pact for the Future.”

In her proposal, Myrian Castello calls for “future characterized by sustainability, inclusivity, and a culture of peace.” She promotes specifically the Declaration for the transition to a culture of peace in the XXI Century.

In their proposal, the International Alliance of Women “recalls the banner in front of the NGO peace tent in Huairou during the 4th UN World Conference on Women 1995 reading “Change the Culture of War to a Culture of Peace”.

And in his proposal, Paul Malliet asks for a UN Council of Peace that could eventually make up for the impotence of the Security Council. He calls attention to the UN A/RES/52 -243. “Declaration and Programme for a culture of peace”; as an existing initiative that requires structure to be effective.

A vision of a transition to a global culture of peace through radical reform of the United Nations is provided in the utopian novella, I have seen the promised land.

The countries of the Global South plan to play a major role in the UN Summit. Concluding from their Summit that took place in January in Kampala they says that the more than 100 countries involved “hope to play an influential role in shifting the balance of the geopolitical landscape from conflict, confrontation and mistrust to diplomacy, dialogue, peace and understanding.”

Although the outcome document of the Summit of the Global South is devoted primarily to economic reform, it does make explicit reference to the culture of peace: “We reaffirm that there can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development. We stress the importance of building a culture of peace by strengthening multilateralism based on international law. . . ”

News of the Summit of the Global South was reported in English in at least 33 countries of the Global South, and probably many others in local languages. However, despite the participation of high-level representatives of more than 100 countries, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the President of the UN General Assembly, the Summit received ABSOLUTELY NO mention by the major English-language news agencies of Europe and North America! As published in French in the journal L’Humanité , it was “un événement totalement passé sous silence dans les pays occidentaux.”

Among other visions, youth participants in the Luanda Biennale Pan-African Forum for the Culture of Peace say that “The spirit of the Biennale of Luanda inspires a new generation of young Africans that paved the way towards a peaceful and prosperous Africa.”

The culture of peace as a vision for the future is promoted in the recent book published in Norwegian by Ingeborg Breines: The Culture of Peace – Utopia or Alternative Security Policy? The author brings to the forefront a series of guiding documents, inspiring projects and publications such as the International Year for a Culture of Peace, the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the Children of the World, the Manifesto 2000 on a Culture of Peace, the Seville Declaration on Violence, the Statement on Women’s Contribution to a Culture of peace, the Declaration on the Right to Peace and not least the Constitution of UNESCO.

Vince Two Eagles writes from the Sioux Indian Reservation of South Dakota that “In 1999, the General-Assembly adopted, by resolution 53/243, the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, which serves as the universal mandate for the international community, particularly the United Nations system, to promote a culture of peace and non-violence that benefits all of humanity, including future generations.”

Readers are invited to sign declarations and manifestos for peace.

The most recent is the Manifesto for Peace Media in the XXI Century which includes among its demands to “Carry out a preventive, slow and contextualized journalistic work that contributes to the de-escalation of conflicts and prioritizes the prospects for peace, before, during, and after the outbreak of violence.” The Manifesto is open for signatures here.

A Declaration of Peace, conceived and promoted by the organization World Beyond War, has now been signed by people in 196 countries. It says “I understand that wars and militarism make us less safe rather than protect us, that they kill, injure and traumatize adults, children and infants, severely damage the natural environment, erode civil liberties, and drain our economies, siphoning resources from life-affirming activities. I commit to engage in and support nonviolent efforts to end all war and preparations for war and to create a sustainable and just peace.” The Declaration is open for signatures here.

And specific for a culture of peace, the Declaration for the Transition to a Culture Of Peace in the XXII Century describes strategies in two simultaneous routes: local and global. The local route is fundamentally pedagogical and is carried out mainly by organized civil society with the support of local governments. The global route involves the expansion of the UN General Assembly, along with the formation of an international security council of mayors that would issue regular press releases demonstrating that the culture of peace could be achieved if the United Nations were governed by “we the peoples.” The Declaration is open for signatures here.

As discussed in a blog this month, during times of radical change, a collective vision for a new social order, such as that for a culture of peace, could give shape to the future.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY



The UN Summit of the Future: a fight at the end of the tunnel?

HUMAN RIGHTS



World Court to Review 57-Year Israeli Occupation

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT



Greenpeace: Here are the REAL culprits of the agricultural crisis in France

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION



The Biennale of Luanda 2023 – Through eyes of its young participants

  

WOMEN’S EQUALITY



Proposal to the UN Summit of the Future from the International Alliance of Women

EDUCATION FOR PEACE



Johan Galtung: In Memoriam

TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY



Powerful Protest Against Racism Sweeps Germany

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION



Manifesto for Peace Media in the 21St Century

Proposal to the UN Summit of the Future from the International Alliance of Women

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

A submission on the UN Website for the Summit of the Future (abridged)

website: https://womenalliance.org/
President Alison Brown iawpresident@womenalliance.org
Secretary General Tunica Miranda Rosario iawsecgen@womenalliance.org

Chapeau

International Alliance of Women (IAW) is an international non-governmental organization in consultative status with ECOSOC since 1947. It firmly believes that a strengthened well-functioning United Nations, working on the basis of “trust, solidarity and universality” will be able to build peace through “multilateral cooperation and collective security” as well as advance economic independence for all.

Chapter I. Sustainable development and financing for development (not copied here)

Chapter II. International peace and security

IAW strongly supports the New Agenda for Peace and wishes to contribute constructively to Member States’ and civil societies’ deliberations in preparation for the *2024 Summit of the Future.*

At its 39th Triennial Congress 2022, IAW adopted a series of resolutions of relevance to the five priority areas, as they relate to a culture of peace, greenhouse gas emissions and the military as well as the necessary UN Security Council Reform.

Culture of Peace:

The 39th Congress affirming the commitment to secure and foster a global Culture of Peace by ensuring such a culture in the homes, communities, and between nations;

noting that global peace must be restored to ensure human security and sustainable development; is of the opinion that gender equality and women’s empowerment must be at the centre of the UN Secretary-General’s New Agenda for Peace and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development so that future generations may thrive;

trusts in the spirit of respect, sharing, solidarity, non-violent conflict resolution, arbitration and reconciliation to be practiced in everyday life and promoted by peace education;

recalls the banner in front of the NGO peace tent in Huairou during the 4th UN World Conference on Women 1995 reading

“Change the Culture of War to a Culture of Peace

calls on the UN and all stakeholders to increase political and financial resources for social protection, prevention, and early intervention for girls and women of all ages and abilities affected by violence and conflict.

(Article continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

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

(Article continued from left column)

Greenhouse Effects and the Military:

The 39th Congress alarmed by global warming and the neglect of the greenhouse effect caused by the military

is of the opinion that the dangerous pollution caused by the military activities worldwide has to be formally recognized and made public. It is grotesque to scandalize the citizens’ footprints and to close one’s eyes in the face of the monstrous pollution caused by the military worldwide;

is deeply concerned about the fact that since the Kyoto protocol, 1997 (in force since 2005) through the Paris Climate Agreement, 2015 (in force since 2016) until today, the CO² and other climate relevant emissions caused by the military either in times of combat or in times of preparations for military activities is not included in the statistics of worldwide emissions;

believes that there will be no reduction and mitigation on the impact of climate change by the military without holistic and gender differentiated data and that it is particularly important to work on the basis of these data on the scientifically proven immense amount of emissions produced by the military;

is convinced that in order to save the planet and people’s survival and well-being, these statistics are needed to advocate for a profound change of people’s mindset and the military system.

Chapter III. Science, technology and innovation and digital cooperation (not copied here)

Chapter V. Transforming global governance

UNSC Reform:

The 39th Congress considering that the UN Security Council structure should be reformed as soon as possible on the basis of equal responsibilities and shared power;

is of the opinion that the UN General Assembly should urgently setup a task force mandated for creating structural changes of the UNSC in order to become operational and serving the UN Charter. This process should urgently come into force and produce a first draft in a timely manner;

calls on the UNGA, UNSG and this upcoming task force to change the structure in such a way that all UN member states will be in charge to keep, shape and sustain peace by shared and equal power of member states of all regions by alternating terms and in a balanced relation of regions. The veto powers’ rights must be eliminated;

further calls on the UNGA and the UNSG and all members states that this task force should discuss their proposals system wide within the UN and ensure that it shall be composed by 50 percent of women delegates and the stakeholders involved as experts shall be consisting of 50 percent of women, also young women, youth in general, indigenous women and men, vulnerable groups and minorities and citizens from regions under war shall be invited for contributions and listened to;

finally calls on the UNGA, the UNSG, the permanent and former and current non-permanent UNSC members and all member states, civil society and all stakeholders to support these efforts and donate resources and capacities for any support to this reforms end.

(Editor’s note: The International Alliance of Women was founded in 1902 as the International Alliance of Women for Suffrage and Legal Citizenship. At the present time its membership includes 43 women’s organizations in 32 countries.)

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

The Role of Universities in Supporting Young People to Become Effective Peace Builders: The Experience of Hawassa University in Ethiopia

… EDUCATION FOR PEACE …

An article by  Fikrewold Yeneneh from Ukfiet, the Education and Development Forum

Before the political change in Ethiopia in 2018, when political upheavals and recurring conflicts intensified throughout the country, a number of public universities in the country were exposed to violent clashes. These clashes resulted in the loss of life and the destruction of property, and the teaching, learning and research functions of many public universities in the country have been repeatedly disrupted. In addition, these clashes have weakened the social bonds among students and have made our universities more vulnerable to conflicts, evident in the increased frequency of violent incidences that are occurring in universities across the country. This security threat is so serious that the federal government decided that all public universities should be guarded by the federal police and the army. Accordingly, the federal police have now been stationed in all public universities.


Hawassa University, where I am an Assistant Professor in the School of Governance and Development Studies, is one of these public universities. It is situated in Southern Ethiopia in Sidama National Regional State and has an enrolment of about 40,000 students. Before 2019, Hawassa University was under the administrative region known as the South Nations and Nationalities Regional State, but following years of conflict and active campaigning for regional statehood, in which young people played a significant role, this region has been divided into four separate regions along ethnic lines, following different groups’ quest for self-administration.

In view of the prevailing conflict environment in public universities, intervening in peacebuilding has become a practical imperative for our university. In addition to helping stem conflicts with police involvement, we believe that universities, through their teaching, research and community service mandates, can make an important contribution to conflict resolution and the improvement of the conflict situations on their campus by helping their students to become effective peacemakers.

In this respect, Hawassa University, in collaboration with international organisations (including the EU and the British Council in our Enabling University Peace Education project, and activities supported by USAID), has focused on three main interventions that enhance the capacity of the students and enable them to take up an active role in peacebuilding activities, within the university as well as in their respective communities. It is these practical steps taken by our university to promote peace in difficult conflict-affected circumstances that I focus on in this article.

1. Strengthening the peacebuilding role of student clubs

To rebuild the social bonds among students and facilitate a constructive dialogue for peace, we have strengthened and empowered our student clubs. The five main student clubs at our university (two of which are women’s clubs) have been given more resources for their activities and their student leaders provided with leadership training.

We also supported the clubs to host events on the theme of peace values within the university, including dialogues and debates on the role of youth in conflict prevention and peacebuilding, in which over 1,000 students have participated to date. Through these events, we have enabled the student clubs to provide institution-wide platforms for mainstreaming a culture of peace in students’ social lives. The positive impact this has had is evident in the students’ increasing participation and their eagerness to host even more of these events. Moreover, we have observed a growing commitment among our students to support others who are adversely affected by violent conflicts. For instance, one of the clubs hosted an event to welcome displaced students from the universities in the Tigray region, which have been devasted by conflict, with the aim of demonstrating their compassion and empathy.

(Article continued in right column.)

Questions for this article:

Where is peace education taking place?

University campus peace centers, What is happening on your campus?

(Article continued from left column.)

2. Providing peace education courses

To enhance the capacity of the students’ peacebuilding role, we have provided training to nearly 350 students on conflict management, conflict resolution and peace values, particularly aimed at club leaders and those who are active in student affairs. Half of the trainees are female students. The training has spurred the students on to increased civic activism on issues pertaining to peacebuilding. Notably, under their own initiative, they established a peace club, which is the first of its kind in the University.

3. Communicating a culture of peace

To integrate a culture of peace within the social fabric of our diverse study body, a billboard that reflects the value of peace has been mounted at each of the four different campuses of Hawassa University. In addition, brochures that promote democratic and peace values have been distributed to 4,000 students. As a more permanent and visible reminder of the ideation of peace and peace values among students, and to provide a space where students can meet in groups to discuss and enforce positivity and peace, we established a peace park on the main campus of Hawassa University.

Hawassa University’s peacebuilding initiatives and the results achieved so far are showing us that we can facilitate students to become better agents of peace through establishing, in collaboration with them, the spaces to discuss and debate peace, by providing good quality capacity-building interventions that enhance their conflict analysis, conflict management and critical thinking skills, and by mainstreaming a visible culture of peace in our institution. However, this does not mean that the activities that we have conducted thus far are alone sufficient to enable students to be as effective as peace agents as they could be. Looking to the future, we believe we could do more:

Firstly, our capacity-building interventions have to encompass many more students. To date, the peace education courses have reached less than 1,000 students, that is one 40th of the university’s 40,000 students.

Secondly, we need to facilitate activities that link the students and communities in future interventions. Thus far, students’ peace initiatives have not extended beyond the walls of the university campus, constraining their peacebuilding impact and visibility as peace agents within wider society.

Thirdly, to enhance the effectiveness of students’ peacebuilding role, the university should extend its future capacity-building interventions to within the local communities in which students undertake their peacebuilding activities. To this end, the university should conduct more peace research to understand in more depth their local contexts. Our Enabling University Peace Education Project is supporting these three ambitions by enabling us to develop and offer peace education training to many more students of all disciplines, form local community partnerships for peace and by funding eight new context-relevant research projects.

We suggest that our experiences at Hawassa University can contribute to the learning about how universities in conflict-affected settings can play a positive role in peacebuilding. We would welcome further contact with other universities that are interested in sharing and exchanging learning and knowledge of peace education journeys and our efforts to make a difference in the peacebuilding processes in our societies.

This article was supported by ‘Enabling University Peace Education’, a three-year project funded by the EU and British Council with the aim of improving the participation of young people, particularly women, in peacebuilding activities in Sudan and Ethiopia. It is one of a series of articles ‘Telling our story’ which share the experiences and learning of our partner universities with a focus on one or more of the project’s main thematic areas. Through these articles, we hope to highlight to the wider higher education sector, communities and policymakers the important role that universities can play in peace education, and to encourage more universities to enable young people in and outside their institutions to participate in peacebuilding. You can learn more about the EUPE project here.

Ukrainian Pacifists Decide to Participate in Implementation of the Ukrainian Peace Formula

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A report by video from the Ukrainian pacifist movement

At the general assembly of Ukrainian Pacifist Movement on 24.02.2024, on the sad occasion of two years anniversary of lethal and devastating Putin’s invasion, a statement was adopted regarding participation of unarmed pacifist forces in implementation of the Ukrainian peace formula. Also, practical approaches to nonviolent resistance to Russian aggression, human rights defense and organizational questions were discussed. New members Afanasiy Kolisnyk, Viacheslav Zastava, and Oleksandr Ivanov solemnly proclaimed the WRI declaration.

Executive secretary Yurii Sheliazhenko reported about advocacy of legal guarantees of the right to conscientious objection to military service, protests against anti-constitutional draft laws with draconian measures to impose mandatory military registration, situation with the persecution of conscientious objectors to military service and activists of the peace movement. The general assembly unanimously approved a decision of the executive secretary to expel Ruslan Kotsaba for refusal to participate in nonviolent resistance to Russian aggression and violations of principles of peaceful communication.

Participation of unarmed pacifist forces in implementation of the Ukrainian peace formula (A statement, adopted by the general assembly of the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement on 24 February 2024).

Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, bearing in mind the formula that peace is not equal to war (Peace≠war), supports and will implement in our activities the values of peace, democracy, and justice, declared in the Ukrainian peace formula of President Zelensky.

° We agree with condemnation of Russian aggression, demands of withdrawal of troops and compensations of damages.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

° Nobody could feel safe while the war is considered normal and dictates its rules of lawlessness.

° We will act on the basis of belief that democratic society and democratic world must be united for common good and common security.

° We will resist nonviolently to Russian aggression and all forms of militarism and war.

° We will support preservation and development of democracy. We will protect  human rights and rule of law.

° Pacifism is a vital part of diversity of thoughts and beliefs in the democratic society. We will preserve pacifist identity, which gives hope for better future without wars, and we will uphold our right to refuse to kill.

Practical approaches to nonviolent resistance to Russian aggression

– Society and the state must unite for nonviolent resistance and unarmed protection of civilians.

– The basis of nonviolent resistance is individual and collective action as a manifestation of values: reason, conscience, hope, truth, love, dialogue, work.

– Keeping the light and banishing the darkness from your home is also a resistance to the aggression that awakens our dark instincts

– In the unofficial discussion group of the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, methods and joint actions for non-violent resistance to Russian aggression and all forms of war, tyranny and militarism should be discussed, starting with the simplest ones, which can be practiced both independently and together with others: spreading hopes, visions, knowledge for a future just peace; to seek honest and dignified reconciliation and understanding in peaceful dialogue; care about your own safety by avoiding risks (shelter, relocation, etc.); to speak the truth against war propaganda; protect human rights, especially the absolute right to conscientious objection to military service, by all legal means; to refuse cooperation and manifest civil disobedience to Russian aggression and violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by the military and militant authorities.

– We confirm the decision: to endorse refusal to kill, protection of human rights, peace education, truth telling, political protests, international solidarity as forms of nonviolent resistance; support activists of peaceful resistance to militarism and war in Ukraine and everywhere in the world, including the occupied territories of Ukraine; prepare a report on perspectives of resistance.

African Union Calls for a 4th Edition of the Luanda Biennale Forum for the Culture of Peace

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An excerpt from tha African Union Assembly published on horseedmedia

ASSEMBLY OF THE AFRICAN UNION Thirty-Seventh Ordinary Session 17 – 18 February 2024 Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA

DRAFT DECISION ON THE REPORT ON THE THIRD (3RD) EDITION OF THE PANARICAN FORUM FOR THE CULTURE OF PEACE AND NON-VIOLENCE – “LUANDA BIENNALE”

The Assembly,

1. COMMENDS the Government of the Republic of Angola, the African Union and UNESCO for the excellent organization of the 3rd Edition of the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial”, held in Luanda from 22 to 24 November 2023.

2. ACKNOWLEDGES the connection between the theme “Education, Culture of Peace and African Citizenship as a Tools for the Sustainable Development of the African Continent” of the 3rd Edition of the Pan-African Forum on Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial” and the African Union´s theme for the year 2024 “Educating an adequate African for the 21st Century: Building resilient education systems to increase access to inclusive, lifelong, quality and relevant learning in Africa.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

The Luanda Biennale: What is its contribution to a culture of peace in Africa?

(Continued from left column)

3. GUIDES the African Union Commission and UNESCO in preparing and disseminating activities and programs inherent in the Roadmap of the theme of the 3rd Edition of the Pan-African Forum on Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial” during the year 2024

4. REQUESTS the Member States and the Regional Economic Communities, within the framework of the implementation of the roadmap of the theme of the year 2024, to include activities related to theme of the 3rd Edition of the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial”

5. CONSIDERS the crucial role played by the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial” in the process of continental pacification and stability and ENCOURAGES the Government of the Republic of Angola, together with the African Union and UNESCO, to organize the 4th Edition of the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial”.

6. CALLS FOR the active participation of Member States and Regional Economic Communities in the 4th Edition of the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence “Luanda Biennial”.

7. FURTHER DIRECTS that future editions of the Pan-African Forum on the Culture of Peace and Non-Violence be henceforth held during the month of October.

The Biennale of Luanda 2023 – Through eyes of its young participants

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

The transcript of the UNESCO Youtube video

(Editor’s note: The 2023 Biennale of Luanda included 790 participants from all of Africa including some young people since the Biennale “advocated the establishment of partnerships between political leaders and young people, in sustainable social and economic projects, which could benefit society as a whole.” In addition to those listed below, three youth were invited from Togo. The previous Biennale in 2021 included 118 young people from 49 African countries and 14 countries of the Diaspora.)

Hello, my name is Mpule. I am from Botswana and I was selected together with eleven other young people from across Africa to participate in the third edition of the Biennale of Luanda. Every two years since 2019. the Biennale brings together heads of state, international organizations, the private sector, artists, academics and young people to boost dialogue and foster collective actions for peace in Africa. The event lasted three days with many discussions between youth and political leaders, thematic forums as well as cultural festivities.

Palmira Cassova from Angola: This third edition of the Biennale of Luanda is of great importance for us, young people, because it was a learning moment and a moment to share experiences with young people from other countries such as Egypt, Botswana, Ghana, Mozambique, We believe that we will remember this for life and we will be able to contribute with what we learned here to peace in Angola and Africa.

(Continued in right column)

(click here for the French version of this article. or here for the Portuguese version )

Question related to this article:

The Luanda Biennale: What is its contribution to a culture of peace in Africa?

(Continued from left column)

60% of Africans are under 25 and the Biennale placed young Africans at the heart of the discussions. We engaged in dialogue with heads of states and focused on the vital role young Africans play in education, culture, climate change and many more.

Genila Hiel from Tanzania: The Biennale of Luanda 2023 is a very important platform for me because it gave me a chance to have intergenerational dialogue with very good African leaders to be on the same table expressing my ideas on behalf of my fellow youngsters from Africa in general. But the Biennale is above all a great opportunity for us to build networks and strengthen our knowledge for our work back home.

Hello, my name is Hakim, I am 30 years old. I am Algerian. I am also one of the young people selected for the Biennale. I am honoured to be able to develop solutions with our heads of state for African youth. In my opinion, entrepreneurship is key to reducing inequalities and fostering a culture of peace on the continent. We discussed during the Biennale, inclusive growth as a lever for peace, I strongly believe in it because the sustainability of family businesses and support for entrepreneurship can highlight the potential of our youth so that everyone finds their place in our societies. We also discussed the key role of education and higher education. I am the first of eight children to go to university. I became aware of the importance of getting involved in issues like equal opportunities, education and social justice. Education plays a crucial role in shaping free and well-informed African citizens.

Yasmein Abdelghany from Egypt: Education for peace is an education that provides learners with knowledge, skills and competences to be active agents of the change in their community. It aims to learn to teach them about tolerance, about acceptance, about diversity. Education for peace is very important because at the heart of our African aspirations is to build an integrated, peaceful and prosperous Africa and this won’t be achieved without education, without teaching our future generations the values of peace and nonviolence.

Mpule from Botswana: I’ve always been actively engaged in promoting women’s empowerment. Today, my mission is to increase women’s participation in leadership and decision making processes. The Biennale highlighted the role of women in peace, security and development processes. On this occasion, we had the opportunity to stress the crucial link between women’s political participation and peace and security. Young people are crucial as catalysts for building a culture of peace. Our presence was felt and our voices were heard. The spirit of the Biennale of Luanda inspires a new generation of young Africans that paved the way towards a peaceful and prosperous Africa.

Join the Pan-African Movement for a Culture of Peace.

Luanda. Capital of Peace in Africa. Join the movement.

Greenpeace: Here are the REAL culprits of the agricultural crisis in France

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from Greenpeace France (translation by CPNN)

Why are many farmers unable to make a decent living from their work, even though they feed us? To this vital question, at the heart of the social and environmental crisis that the agricultural world is going through, the government has still not answered, preferring to attack ecological standards and favor agro-business, without looking at the root causes. . However, those responsible for this agricultural crisis are known: the massive industrialization of our production system and the ultra-liberal trade policies pursued for decades.

In order to denounce the real culprits of the agricultural crisis, this morning we carried out simultaneous actions in six cities in France, targeting groups in the agro-food industry, agrochemicals, seeds and mass distribution, as well as than the majority agricultural union. So many symbols of a system that profits from free trade agreements and impoverishes farmers, to the detriment of our health and our environment.


Photo Credit : © Micha Patault 2024

Who are the culprits of the agricultural crisis? Here are 5 very concrete examples of this agro-industrial system that we point out:  LDC, Avril, Bayer, Lactalis, E.Leclerc and the FNSEA.

LDC, the poultry giant that defeathers the breeders

Its name is little known, but it controls 40% of the poultry market in France! LDC is the owner, among others, of the Le Gaulois and Maître Coq brands, and it contracts with almost half of the broiler poultry breeders in France, owns slaughterhouses, manufactures animal feed, etc. This all-powerful group in its areas of establishment is capable of depriving breeders of alternative outlets . With its industrialized system, LDC relegates the breeder to the rank of “subcontractor”, a real an uncomfortable situation .

This chicken giant is also developing its activities in Belgium, the United Kingdom and Poland, not hesitating to resort to imports . During a highway blockade in France, breeders discovered Polish chickens imported for LDC in a truck . A real goose that lays golden eggs: LDC generated 5.8 billion euros in turnover in 2022, an increase of 8% compared to 2021. The fortune of the Lambert family, co-founders of the group, is as for it estimated at 825 million euros.

Avril, the big fish of the agro-industry

The fifth French agri-food group, Avril is the perfect example of the clever mix of economic, financial and political interests in the agricultural sector . The chairman of the board of directors of this agro-industrial behemoth is none other than Arnaud Rousseau, recently put in the spotlight as president of the majority agricultural union, the FNSEA (see below).

We are far, very far from small-scale farming. This multinational generates more than half of its turnover abroad, through multiple activities: food production, chemicals, energy, agrofuels, finance, etc. In France, the group is number 1 in the vegetable oils market. (via its Lesieur and Puget brands, among others) and commands 25% of the oleochemicals market share. Its influence is therefore considerable: Avril is very clearly one of the proponents of the policy of industrialization of French agriculture which is fueling the crisis in the agricultural world.

Bayer, the powerful lobby of pesticides and seeds

World number one in seeds and pesticides, Bayer is particularly famous for having bought Monsanto and its famous Round Up, a cocktail based on glyphosate , the most used herbicide in the world, classified as “probably carcinogenic” by the International Center for Research on WHO cancer. Not content with poisoning farmers and the environment, its commercial weight on the seeds and pesticides market makes farmers dependent on its products.

Bayer is also a powerful lobby, whose activities have disastrous consequences on the agricultural world, health and the environment. The German pharmaceutical and agrochemical giant spent more than 7 million euros on its lobbying activities at European level in 2022 alone. For decades, Bayer has actively fought for the development of GMOs and against the ban and reduction of pesticides, not without some success, unfortunately: the regulation of GMOs is now threatened, glyphosate has been re-authorized for 10 years and the European legislative project aimed at reducing the use of pesticides has just been purely and simply withdrawn…

Lactalis, the multinational that butters its bread on both sides

Dairy products are at the heart of the current agricultural crisis. And Lactalis (the world’s leading group in the sector which has joined forces with number 2, Nestlé, within the Lactalis-Nestlé company), bears a heavy responsibility for the impoverishment of the small farmer. In 2022, while consumers paid more for their liter of semi-skimmed milk, breeders saw the amount of their gross margin on this product drop by 4% compared to 2021, while agri-food companies experienced an increase of their gross margins of 64% and those of mass distribution of +188%! An extremely inequitable distribution observed across all dairy products, as denounced by the Foundation for Nature and Man in its report “ Farmers and consumers, big losers from the rise in dairy product prices ”.

(article continued in right column)

(Click here for the original article in French

Question for this article:

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

What is the relation between movements for food sovereignty and the global movement for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the left column)

Nearly 20% of dairy farmers live below the poverty line and are extremely dependent on public subsidies to survive. A concern that Lactalis does not experience, whose turnover increased by 28.4% in 2022 compared to 2021, climbing to 28.3 billion euros! Added to this are various scandals: salmonella in infant milk, pollution of waterways, non-compliance with environmental standards, concealment of information. The company, known for its President, Lactel and Galbani brands, is described as a “lawless” firm by the investigative media Disclose, in an edifying investigation into the “milk ogre”.

E. Leclerc, the leader in mass distribution and secrecy

Today six groups control 90% of the mass distribution market. Among them, the leader E. Leclerc, with almost a quarter of market share, has become a dominant player in the lives of French consumers and farmers . In 2022, the French number 1 has increased its turnover, but not its transparency… The E. Leclerc group is regularly suspected of circumventing the French Egalim law in order to obtain lower prices from producers, in particular via a central d Eurelec purchase located in Belgium, where the law is much more flexible.

From their dominant position, the mass distribution giants do not hesitate to compress the prices paid to farmers to make more profits . Producer remuneration thus serves as an adjustment variable, with farmers going so far as to sell at a loss. Also at issue: products imported and sold at very low prices on the shelves of these major brands. Products that Michel Édouard Leclerc would like to sell even cheaper: he has denounced in the past the obligation of a 10% margin on food products from abroad, a measure precisely intended to protect the remuneration of producers.

FNSEA, historical defender of industrial agriculture

With 212,000 claimed members, the FNSEA is the majority agricultural union in France. But far from fighting for the interests and remuneration of small producers, its leaders continue to defend the agro-industrial and productivist model serving the largest farms. The very ones who receive the largest share of subsidies from the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). For decades, the FNSEA has ensured true co-management of agricultural policies, hand in hand with successive governments, successfully fighting in favor of industrial agriculture and agro-industry, to the detriment of peasant and organic agriculture. , and against environmental measures.

Its current president, Arnaud Rousseau, is himself at the head of a cereal farm of more than 700 hectares, ten times the average size of a French farm… In 2021, he received more than 170,000 euros from the CAP, or 5.6 times the average amount received by a farm in France. He is also Chairman of the Board of Directors of the agro-industrial group Avril (see above).

Faced with those responsible for the agricultural crisis, what should we do?

If the culprits are known, the solutions are also known to overcome this agricultural crisis, allow farmers to live with dignity from their work and protect the health and environment of all.

Several measures seem essential to us today to meet the expectations of farmers regarding their remuneration, support them in the ecological transition and sustainably transform the agricultural sector. In particular, it is necessary:

° Put an end to Free Trade Agreements , by reviewing the agreements in force and establishing a moratorium on current negotiations (in particular between the European Union and Mercorsur, and with Chile).

° Establish a floor price , i.e. a ban on the sale of agricultural products below cost prices (including costs, labor remuneration and contributions).

° Regulate the margins of processors and large retailers , for better distribution of value.

° Establish a minimum entry price for imported products , particularly for the sectors most in difficulty, to deal with unfair imports on social and environmental levels.

° Reform the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) , in particular in order to direct public money as a priority towards the most vulnerable farmers, organic farming operations and towards supporting the agroecological transition.

° Massively increase support for farmers in the agroecological transition.

Environmental standards and the reduction of pesticides are necessary, both for the health of farmers and for that of consumers and the preservation of biodiversity. We must therefore maintain them and help producers in their implementation.

To find out more about the causes and solutions to farmers’ difficulties: The agricultural crisis (and how to get out of it) in 4 questions.

The Catalan Forum for Peace is born, a participatory process to create Catalan public peace policy

.. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION ..

An article from the Instituto Catalan Internacional para la Paz

The Catalan Forum for Peace  was publicly presented this Wednesday, February 14, within the framework of the Second Day of Peace held in the Parliament of Catalonia. The forum is a participatory process of reflection and debate that was born with a double objective: to create a public peace policy in Catalonia and to reinforce the agendas and social and political advocacy capacities of Catalan peace organizations.


screenshot from their website

The Catalan Forum for Peace is an initiative promoted by the Government of Catalonia, the Catalan Council for the Promotion of Peace, the ICIP and the Catalan associative network for the promotion of peace. It arises, therefore, from social and institutional collaboration, and will be developed throughout 2024 and 2025. The Forum will consist of a process of citizen participation based on five axes of debate: Culture of peace; Security and justice; Armed conflicts; Global challenges; Women, peace and security.

Coinciding with the public presentation, the website www.forumcatalapau.cat has been inaugurated, from which the participation of citizens, entities and institutions committed to the values of the culture of peace and social justice will be encouraged.

“For a public policy of peace”

The public presentation of the Catalan Forum for Peace was made during the celebration of the II Peace Day of the Parliament of Catalonia, co-organized by the Catalan chamber, the ICIP and Lafede.cat. With the title “For a public policy of peace”, the conference brought together representatives of numerous peace organizations and experts in the field of research and work for peace, as well as representatives of the Government and several city councils. and institutions.

(continued in right column)

(Click here for the Spanish original of this article)

Questions for this article:

The culture of peace at a regional level, Does it have advantages compared to a city level?

(continued from left column)

At the opening of the day, the vice president of the Catalan Council for the Promotion of Peace and director of the ICIP, Kristian Herbolzheimer, called on the Catalan institutions and entities committed to the values of the culture of peace and social justice to join the Catalan Forum for Peace: “it is time to open the reflection on how we understand a Catalonia in peace and on how we can contribute, from Catalonia, to peace in the world. It is time to tell each other, meet and explain to all the people, groups and institutions that we share the values of the culture of peace and that we share the commitment to a more just and supportive world.”

For her part, the president of Lafede.cat, Arés Perceval , highlighted that the Catalan Forum for Peace must allow “the design of a public peace policy endorsed by all parliamentary groups, a pending subject” and added that the process also “It has to serve us to strengthen the movement for peace and nonviolence that we lead from civil society.”

The day was inaugurated by the president of the Parliament of Catalonia, Anna Erra , who highlighted the tradition of promoting peace in Catalonia, a “country of peace” that “has not hesitated to embrace the values of democracy and freedoms.” fundamental.” In her intervention, Erra predicted that the Catalan Forum for Peace will help strengthen the culture of peace, “become a useful tool for the international community,” and “shape some responses based on the collective intelligence of the country.”

The day included two round tables: the first focused on the challenges and opportunities for peace in the context of global threats, and the second was dedicated to the five axes of debate that will guide the Catalan Forum for Peace. when the participatory process begins, in the month of April. Carme Colomina , CIDOB researcher ; Luca Gervasoni , director of NOVACT; Maria Josep Parés , consultant; Jesús Vinyes , president of the School Council of Catalonia; Nora Miralles , president of the Delàs Center; Albert Caramés , director of FundiPau; Jordi Armadans , journalist and political scientist; and Blanca Camps , researcher at the Autonomous University of Barcelona.

– – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

Manifesto for Peace Media in the 21St Century

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article from Comunicacion y paz

The manifesto presented below has been agreed upon by the Spain chapter of the Latin Union of Political Economy of Communication, Information, and Culture (ULEPICC-Spain) and the Research Network on Community, Alternative, and Participatory Communication (RICCAP). The initiative emerged from the presentations and dialogues that took place within the framework of the VIII International Congress on Communication and Peace of ULEPICC-Spain (Complutense University of Madrid, March 2023) and the II International Congress on Communication and Citizenship of RICCAP (University of Extremadura, May 2023). It urges media outlets and political representatives to be mindful of the analyses and representations they provide of conflicts, as well as to take firm steps to update the media system and improve its role in the prevention and peaceful and fair resolution of conflicts. It also encourages the academic community and citizens to get involved in peace processes through co-responsibility and participation.

For the short term, it proposes a guide of good journalistic and communicative practices. Although the dominant journalistic structure, business model, and culture of the media are important obstacles to its implementation, we encourage professionals to take advantage of opportunities to advance towards peace communication. For the medium term, it poses the need to carry out structural reforms that create the necessary conditions to make peace communication effective in a systematic way. 

The manifesto includes an agenda of priorities to favor democratization in access, production of content, ownership and governance of media and communication. To this end, it is essential to reach agreements through participation and solidarity among all the actors involved in the transition towards total peace. The improvement of the communication system, together with the transformation of eco-social and geostrategic structures, would not only curb the organized barbarity of war, but would also contribute to the good conviviality of citizens, improve the autonomy and working conditions of communication professionals and increase the credibility of journalism.

The #PeaceMediaManifesto is a living document, so we encourage you to send your suggestions for strengthening it to comunicacionypaz@ulepicc.org. All individuals, media, institutions, associations and research groups that share its principles and proposals are invited to sign it.

MANIFESTO

° For a Peace Communication that favors the just transformation of conflicts and helps to stop wars, to rebuild relationships through reconciliation, and to create more egalitarian social and geostrategic structures.

° For communicative justice that promotes social and environmental justice through collective and democratic participation.

° For the improvement of the quality of journalism and communication, and for the radicalization of democracy.

° In the face of media coverage that marginalizes causes, contexts, and solutions, and reproduces conflict and structural violence.

° In the face of media that do not act as a counter-power but as accessories to the military-industrial complex at the service of the dominant power structures.

° In the face of the emergence or prolongation of armed conflicts that are presented as irresolvable…

… this Manifesto urges the media and those responsible for media and politics to:

1. Produce an in-depth diagnosis of the nuances, roots, results, and responsibilities of any conflict, portraying the complexity of eco-social problems based on their structural elements.

2. Promote approaches that include the voices of the people who suffer the consequences of conflicts and that prioritize agents promoting transformation and dialogue.

3. Support social, negotiated, and diplomatic solutions for the resolution of any conflict, offering examples and practical evidence that have proven successful in the past.

4. Carry out a preventive, slow and contextualized journalistic work that contributes to the de-escalation of conflicts and prioritizes the prospects for peace, before, during, and after the outbreak of violence.

(Article continued in right column)

(Click here for the 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)

5. Prevent negative and stereotyped representation of historically marginalized social groups, drawing a line to avoid journalistic coverage that incites hatred or discrimination.

6. Foster community communication to understand the global roots of local problems (and how large-scale conflicts also impact smaller contexts).

7. Defend and promote the achievement of human rights (and other emerging rights) as a criterion of newsworthiness to avoid false objectivity and false equidistance.

8. Provide ways for citizens and their organizations to access, participate in, or appropriate the media system in order to represent their cultures, rights, interests and solutions for peace and dialogue.

9. Promote meetings between journalists, universities, and the third sector to foster social dialogue and share knowledge on conflicts and peace practices.

10. Transform the framework of individual security based on warmongering discourse to one of positive and shared security based on restorative narratives and values of participation, equality, co-dependence and eco-social justice.

We consider that these are practices that the media can begin to apply, even if it is to a limited extent, through the application of protocols to identify ideological biases and shortcomings, as well as good practice guides that orient the processes of content production towards peace journalism and communication.

However, the systematic production of peace communication also requires deep structural reforms that generate conditions that allow professionals to be free from the economic and ideological interests of conflict and violence. History and the critical analysis of current coverage and treatment show that the media and large technology companies tend to promote dominant narratives of conflict and war, which contributes to the self-serving propaganda of only one side and avoids critical, preventive, and pro-conflict resolution positions. With the popularization of technological networks, there has been an expansion of fake news and hate speech fueled by the ultra-right and ‘deniers’ (scientific, climate, gender, etc.), which target the most disadvantaged sectors and promote extreme positions of confrontation and social and emotional polarization. 

Beyond direct violence, there are more invisible structural, cultural, and symbolic inequalities that are just as threatening as the first and that are often neglected and help the established media economic model. The datafication of social experience and mass surveillance through Big Data are fundamental phenomena of violence that, based on their opacity, can have a decisive influence on social behavior according to dominant economic and political interests. Likewise, the logic of profit maximization has led to the proliferation of clickbait in commercial media as a consumption and business model. These phenomena, which are central to today’s media systems, are opposed to data justice, corporate transparency, user privacy, professional integrity and ethics, and genuine and independent public service media practices. The most recent threat comes from the uncritical use of Artificial Intelligence in journalism, such as the complete writing of news stories without checking sources or biases based on class, gender, culture or ethnicity.

In order to exist, peace requires not only the absence of physical violence, but also the promotion of ideals of social, economic, and environmental justice that contribute to eradicate structural violence. At the present juncture and fueled largely by conflicts and their economic, ideological and cultural interests, the enormous threat posed by historical problems such as class, ethnic and gender inequalities, chronic economic crises, and the climate emergency is being revealed. 

In this context, it is equally necessary to analyze, criticize and improve both the use and access and the impact of the technological devices that provide material support to communications in the different phases of the contemporary linear economic system: extraction, production, distribution, consumption, and generation of waste. Without media education and environmental awareness that favors structures and practices for fairer, more egalitarian and eco-sustainable access to technologies, it will not be possible to promote the elimination of violence and conflicts. In this sense, it is absolutely necessary to open a social conversation about the current harmful relationship between technology, peace, and environmental sustainability in order to think of viable alternatives.

Likewise, based on a critical analysis of the dominant media system, it is essential to think of public policies that promote structural reforms that will facilitate the democratization of access, production, ownership, and governance of the media. This would benefit communication professionals and improve their autonomy, working conditions and motivation. More time, security, incentives, and freedom to inform and communicate will favor good journalism and communication practices that contribute to the visibility of initiatives for peace and eco-social justice.

Authoritarian phenomena such as war, inequality, and polarization, on the one hand, and peace, diversity, and the construction of the commons, on the other, are extremes in a dispute currently underway in which different interests oppose each other with a profoundly asymmetrical correlation of forces. Only by coming together and generating spaces for reflection, empowerment and collective action will we be able to tip the balance in favor of democratic deepening in a society of free and equal people.

In an effort to contribute to these processes, today, as yesterday, we reflect, share and shout “No to war” and to the intensification of conflicts. Instead, we offer our collaboration to the movements committed to peace and eco-social justice. We need real democracy so that we do not have to shout

NEVER AGAIN