Category Archives: DISARMAMENT & SECURITY

Nobel Peace Prize 2024 to Nihon Hidankyo against the menace of nuclear weapons

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Excerpts from presentation speech by Jørgen Watne Frydnes, Chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, 10 December 2024.

Nihon Hidankyo, a grassroots movement of atomic bomb survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, is receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating through witness testimony that nuclear weapons must never be used again. . . . Thirteen Nobel Peace Prizes have been awarded, in full or in part, for peace efforts of this kind. On each occasion, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has warned against the menace of nuclear weapons. This year, that warning is more urgent than ever before. 


Frame from video of Tanaka’s speech

As 2025 approaches, the world is entering what many analysts characterise as a new, more unstable nuclear age. The role of nuclear weapons in international affairs is changing. The nuclear powers are modernising and upgrading their arsenals. New countries appear to be preparing to obtain nuclear weapons. Key arms control agreements are expiring without being replaced. And threats to use nuclear arms in ongoing warfare have been made openly and repeatedly. . . .

Nihon Hidankyo and the Hibakusha – the survivors of the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – have never wavered in their efforts to erect a worldwide moral and legal bulwark against the use of nuclear weapons. . .

To our dear guests from Nihon Hidankyo – to Terumi Tanaka, Toshiyuki Mimaki and Shigemitsu Tanaka – and to all the Hibakusha here today: It is an honour to be your hosts on this historic occasion, and we wish to express our deep gratitude for the outstanding and vital work you have performed in the course of your lives, and for all that you continue to do.

You did not resign yourselves to victimhood. You defined yourselves as survivors. You refused to sit in silent terror as the great powers led us through long periods of nuclear armament. You stood tall and shared your unique personal testimony with the entire world.  

A light in the darkest night. A path forward. You give us hope. . . .

– – – –

Excerpts from the speech of Terumi Tanaka on behalf of Nihon Hidankyo

Thank you for your introduction. I am Terumi Tanaka, one of the three Co-Chairpersons of Nihon Hidankyo. I am honored to speak on behalf of Nihon Hidankyo, the Nobel Peace laureate this year.

We established Nihon Hidankyo, the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organizations, in August 1956. Having ourselves survived the inhumane impacts of the atomic bombings, damage unprecedented in history, we launched this movement to ensure such suffering would never be repeated, with two basic demands. The first demand is that the State which started and carried out the war should compensate victims for the damage caused by the atomic bombs, in opposition to the Japanese government’s assertion that, “the sacrifice of war should be endured equally by the whole nation.” The second is to demand the immediate abolition of nuclear weapons, as extremely inhumane weapons of mass killing, which must not be allowed to coexist with humanity. . . .

I am one of the survivors of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki. At the time, I was 13 years old, at home, around 3 kilometers east of ground zero.

It was August 9, 1945. I suddenly heard the buzzing sound of a bomber jet, and was soon after engulfed in a bright, white light. Surprised, I ran downstairs and got down on the floor, covering my eyes and ears with my hands. The next moment, an intense shock wave passed through our entire house. I have no memory of that moment, but when I came to my senses, I found myself under a large, glass sliding door. It was a miracle that none of the glass was broken, and I was somehow spared injuries.

Three days later, I sought out the families of my two aunts who lived in the area near the hypocenter. It was then that I saw the full devastation of the bombing of Nagasaki. Walking with my mother, we went around a small mountain. Reaching a pass, we looked down in horror. Blackened ruins spread out as far as the port of Nagasaki, some three kilometers away. . . .

(Continued in right column)

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

The Nobel Peace Prize: Does it go to the right people?

(Continued from left column)

By the end of that year, 1945, the death toll in the two cities is thought to have been approximately 140,000 in Hiroshima and 70,000 in Nagasaki. 400,000 people are estimated to have been exposed to the atomic bombs, suffering injuries and surviving exposure to radiation. 

The survivors, the Hibakusha, were forced into silence by the occupying forces for seven years. Furthermore, they were also abandoned by the Japanese government. Thus, they spent more than a decade after the bombings in isolation, suffering from illness and hardship in their lives, while also enduring prejudice and discrimination.

The United States hydrogen bomb test at Bikini Atoll on March 1, 1954 resulted in the exposure of Japanese fishing boats to deadly radioactive fallout, or the “ashes of death.” Among others, all 23 crew members of the Daigo Fukuryu Maru were exposed to radiation and developed acute radiation sickness, and the tuna they caught were discarded. This incident triggered a nationwide petition calling for a total ban on atomic and hydrogen bombs and tests, which spread like wildfire throughout Japan. This gained over 30 million signatures and in August 1955, the first World Conference against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs was held in Hiroshima, followed by the second in Nagasaki the following year. Encouraged by this movement, A-bomb survivors who participated in the World Conference formed the Japan Confederation of A- and H-bomb Sufferers Organizations, Nihon Hidankyo, on August 10, 1956 in Nagasaki.

In our founding declaration, Nihon Hidankyo expressed our determination to “save humanity from its crisis through the lessons learned from our experiences, while at the same time saving ourselves.” We launched a movement demanding both “the abolition of nuclear weapons, and State compensation for the atomic bomb damage suffered.”

Our initial campaign resulted in the enactment of the “A-Bomb Sufferers’ Medical Care Law” in 1957. However, the content of the law was limited: besides issuing “Atomic Bomb Survivor Certificates” and providing free medical examinations, medical expenses would be paid only for illnesses recognized as atomic bomb-related by the Minister of Health and Welfare. . . .

In April 2016, A-bomb survivors around the world launched the “International Signature Campaign in Support of the Appeal of the Hibakusha for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons,” as proposed by Nihon Hidankyo. This campaign grew significantly, and over 13.7 million signatures were collected and submitted to the United Nations. We are overjoyed that on July 7, 2017, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons was adopted with the support of 122 countries.

It is the heartfelt desire of the Hibakusha that, rather than depending on the theory of nuclear deterrence, which assumes the possession and use of nuclear weapons, we must not allow the possession of a single nuclear weapon.

Please try to imagine — there are 4,000 nuclear warheads, ready to be launched immediately. This means that damage hundreds or thousands of times greater than that which happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki could happen right away. Any one of you could become either a victim or a perpetrator, at any time. I therefore plead for everyone around the world to discuss together what we must do to eliminate nuclear weapons, and demand action from governments to achieve this goal.

The average age of the A-bomb survivors is now 85. Ten years from now, there may only be a handful of us able to give testimony as firsthand survivors. From now on, I hope that the next generation will find ways to build on our efforts and develop the movement even further. . . .

To achieve further universalization of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the formulation of an international convention which will abolish nuclear weapons, I urge everyone around the world to create opportunities in your own countries to listen to the testimonies of A-bomb survivors, and to feel, with deep sensitivity, the true inhumanity of nuclear weapons. Particularly, I hope that the belief that nuclear weapons cannot — and must not — coexist with humanity will take firm hold among citizens of the nuclear weapon states and their allies, and that this will become a force for change in the nuclear policies of their governments.

Let not humanity destroy itself with nuclear weapons!

Let us work together for a human society, in a world free of nuclear weapons and of wars!

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, East Asia, global,

Lula, The “Only Adult in the Room”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Un artículo por Andy Robinson* en CTXT Contexto y Acción (non-comercial use)

While Western leaders were trivializing the nuclear threat over caipirinhas, Brazil was seeking consensus in the face of the risk of World War III

There can be no tougher test for the G20 sherpas – the diplomats in charge of achieving consensus at meetings of the most powerful countries in the world – than the news of the preamble to a possible Third World War.

But something similar happened at the beginning of the Rio summit last week, when the still president of the United States, Joe Biden, gave the green light to Ukraine to fire long-range ATACMS missiles at targets in Russia. Keir Starmer, the prime minister of the obedient United Kingdom, a junior partner, would soon follow suit with British Storm Shadow missiles.

The news reached the Copacabana and Ipanema hotels, where the heads of state of dozens of countries were staying – led by Xi Jinping, Joe Biden, Shigeru Ishiba, the prime minister of Japan; Emmanuel Macron, Olaf Scholz and the host and mediator, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Ukraine launched the first ATACMS missile against Russia during the opening of the summit, after a heavy Russian offensive the day before. To further tense the atmosphere in Rio, Russia announced the same day that it had modified its defence protocols to allow the use of nuclear weapons against a conventional offensive.

To anyone in Rio who had seen Doctor Strangelove or read Annie Jacobsen’s new book Nuclear War: A Scenario, it all seemed like a dangerous provocation from one nuclear superpower to another. Even thoughtful columnists like David Sanger, a nuclear strategy expert for the New York Times, recalled that “until this weekend, President Biden had refused to allow these attacks (…) for fear that they could provoke World War III.” Newsweek headlined: “Will Biden’s decision regarding ATACMS missiles provoke World War III? Our experts give their answer.”

Despite the routine tone used to talk about the end of humanity, the news made a dent in the bars of Rio de Janeiro. “Você entendeu o que eu entiende?” said a Carioca as the news was reported on GloboNews. Even evangelicals with apocalyptic convictions, who attended Sunday mass on the eve of the G20, seemed somewhat uneasy.

But European and American leaders and their advisers were enjoying the city of wonders and caipirinhas. Emmanuel Macron strolled through Copacabana and allowed himself to be photographed. Keir Starmer played football with a local children’s team and tried to convince the little ones that his team, Arsenal, is “the best in the world”. Biden’s daughter was photographed in front of the enormous Samauma tree in the Botanical Garden.

Curiously, there was no official announcement about the decision to authorise the attacks. When the news broke, Biden was in Manaus, and it was hard not to wonder whether the octogenarian president, lost in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, had heard that the decision had been taken to take the first step towards catastrophe. The deep state in Washington seemed to be in charge, perhaps in order to make life difficult for Donald Trump, who has promised to “end the war in 24 hours” once in the White House. Not even Kubrick would have imagined such a staging.

(Continued in right column)

(Click here for the original Spanish version.)

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

(Continued from left column)

When they finally had to comment, Western leaders took Putin’s warnings about a possible nuclear response as one of the Machiavellian Russian leader’s bluffs. NATO missile strikes on Russia would serve as a final lesson before Trump takes office. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer criticised all of us who worry about the possibility of a Third World War as “irresponsible”.

In the face of the attitude of Western leaders in Rio, I could only recall what Jeffrey Sachs, the veteran economist at Columbia University, had told me. Sachs negotiated an economic rescue plan for the USSR (Russia) in 1990 with Gorbachev and Yeltsin, which was sabotaged by the then administration of George Bush Sr., bent on weakening Russia and expanding NATO as far as possible.

Authorizing long-range missiles against Russia, he explained to me, “could lead to escalation, and eventually to nuclear war. It is part of the continuing recklessness and arrogance of the US deep state, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Pentagon, the National Security Agency and the arms contractors. It is also part of the UK’s continuing destructive role in the world system, which of course goes back to the British empire.” (The entire interview, with parts still unpublished, will be available to read shortly on my new Substack account.)

To quote Yanis Varoufakis, the Brazilian diplomats and Lula seemed “the only adults in the room” at the avant-garde Museum of Modern Art, where the summit was held. When the European and American delegations pressed for Russia to be explicitly condemned in the final communiqué, Lula refused. Aware that any hardening of neutral language would raise hackles in delegations from China and much of the global south, he opted for “a more moderate tone,” Celso Amorim, Lula’s veteran foreign policy adviser who met Putin in April last year, told me. In the end, the statement simply says: “The G20 condemns the war in Ukraine and its impacts on the global economy and supply chains.”

Lula has tried since the start of the war in Ukraine to seek a negotiated multilateral solution – meeting Zelensky in New York, but also holding talks with Putin – and has always criticised NATO expansion. Biden’s decision “is a dangerous escalation,” said Guilherme Casarões, of the Getúlio Vargas Foundation in São Paulo. “Brazil has not specifically spoken out on the issue, but its position is to defend respect for international law, (…) and the principle of nuclear disarmament.”

European leaders lashed out at the final statement. “Disappointing,” Starmer said. “Insufficient,” agreed Olaf Scholz. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, on the other hand, praised him for “calling for an honest and reasonable conversation about a peace based on realistic criteria.”

But Lula knew that “any different formulation could harm the consensus,” said Casarões. Brazilian diplomacy “always tries to build bridges,” summed up Olicer Stuenkel, another expert from the Getulio Vargas Foundation.

However, there may be a paradox in the dramatic story of the G20 in Rio de Janeiro. Because it is not only NATO that plays with reckless frivolity in the game of roulette that could end with the end of the world. Putin, of course, is a player as reckless as the neocons of the deep state in Washington: “Lula and Amorim wanted to put on the table the idea of ​​a broader, more multilateral negotiation to get out of the impasse in Ukraine,” said Rodrigues. “And that Russian offensive was, I believe, a tactic to undermine that possibility of seeking peace. Putin is no longer interested in negotiating anything; he is on the offensive and has a United States with Donald Trump at the helm that is going to offer him interesting things.”

*Andy Robinson is a correspondent for ‘La Vanguardia’ and a contributor to Ctxt since its founding. In addition, he belongs to the Editorial Board of this media. His latest book is ‘Oro, gasolina y aguacates: Las nuevas venas abiertas de América Latina’ (Arpa 2020)

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

Friends Committee on National Legislation Awarded 2024 US Peace Prize

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Excerpts from the website of the US Peace Prize

The 2024 US Peace Prize has been awarded to the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) “For Efforts Over 81 Years to Educate, Build Coalitions and Influence Congress to Stop Funding War and Nuclear Weapons.”

The US Peace Prize was presented on November 16, 2024, at the FCNL Annual Meeting by Michael Knox, Chair and Founder of the US Peace Memorial Foundation. In his remarks, Dr. Knox said, “We greatly appreciate the crucial work that FCNL is doing to end war, militarism, and nuclear weapons by educating the public, building coalitions, and lobbying Congress and the administration. For over eight decades, the Friends Committee has developed an impressive portfolio of antiwar actions. Most recently, demanding that the U.S. call for a ceasefire in Palestine and Israel, de-escalation, and humanitarian access to Gaza. The US Peace Prize is a commendation that will help call attention to and reinforce your important work for peace.”


The award was accepted by Bridget Moix, General Secretary, who responded, “On behalf of our board and staff, thousands of advocates around the country persisting for peace with us, and all those who have been part of FCNL’s work over the years, we are honored and grateful to receive this 2024 US Peace Prize. For over 80 years, FCNL has sought to be a clear and consistent voice for peace and justice on Capitol Hill. Receiving this prize is especially significant as we face escalating war in the Middle East, growing global violence and authoritarianism, and enormous threats to our own democracy here at home. A world of justice and peace for all people may seem a distant dream, but our Quaker faith and the powerful communities with whom we work every day sustain us in this ongoing struggle for the world we seek.”
 

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can the peace movement become stronger and more effective?

(Article continued from left column)

Friends Committee on National Legislation is a nonpartisan Quaker organization that lobbies Congress and the administration to advance their priorities of peace, justice, environmental stewardship, and a world free of war and the threat of war. FCNL played a pivotal role in helping to create the Peace Corps and promoting the slogan “War is Not the Answer” through signs and bumper stickers. The organization also advocates for peacebuilding and against nuclear weapons and U.S. Militarism. FCNL works with a grassroots advocacy network of tens of thousands of people across the country and leads a coalition of organizations pushing for U.S. support for a ceasefire in Israel/Palestine.
 
The other US Peace Prize final nominees this year were Community Peacemaker Teams, Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal, Louis H. Pumphrey, and Ellen Thomas. You can read about all nominees’ antiwar/peace work in the US Peace Registry.

– –

The US Peace Memorial Foundation  awards the US Peace Prize to recognize and honor the most outstanding and prominent American antiwar leaders. These courageous people and organizations have publicly championed peaceful solutions to international conflicts involving the U.S. and/or opposed U.S. war(s), militarism, and interventions including invasion, occupation, production and distribution of weapons of mass destruction, use of weapons, threats of war, or other hostile actions that endanger peace. We celebrate these extraordinary role models to inspire other Americans to speak out against war and work for peace. Recipients have been designated as Founding Members of the US Peace Memorial Foundation. Read details about the inspiring antiwar/peace activities of the recipients and all nominees in the US Peace Registry
.

Previous US Peace Prize recipients are National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth, Costs of War, World BEYOND War, Christine Ahn, Ajamu Baraka, David Swanson, Ann Wright, Veterans For Peace, Kathy Kelly, CODEPINK Women for Peace, Chelsea Manning, Medea Benjamin, Noam Chomsky, Dennis Kucinich, and Cindy Sheehan.

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

The Real Nobel Peace Prize: Join the World, not the U.S. Empire

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A speech published by War is a Crime (the version here is abbreviated. The original speech that you may read by following this link is more than twice as long, as it also contains the arguments used to justify war preparations and a detailed critique of NATO.)

Remarks by David Swanson upon acceptance of Real Nobel Peace Prize, Oslo, Norway, November 10, 2024.

It’s wonderful to be here with many of you whose work I’ve known but whom I’ve rarely if ever been with in person. I am very grateful to John Jones and Tomas Magnusson for arranging this event. I am thrilled to be here at the start of what I expect will be years of terrific work by the Lay Down Your Arms Foundation — an appropriate name here in the House of Literature. The great [Fredrik Heffermehl, who has been gone from us for nearly a year now, often stressed the influence on Alfred Nobel in the creation of the Nobel Peace Prize by Bertha von Suttner, the author of the 1889 novel Lay Down Your Arms.


The impact of that book was not, I think, due to the characters or the plot or any depiction of how horrific war can be, but rather to the way the book framed war abolition within a story of advancing civilization. . .
.
In 1889, war itself was being civilized. The Red Cross was seeking to tend the wounded. Atrocities were being banned. Disputes among royals were being mocked by republicans as proper grounds for wars. Arbitration was proving itself as an alternative to slaughter. With slavery and pillage being left behind, with religion beginning to fade, with the technology of weaponry rapidly advancing, war was losing its economic motive, its theocratic justification, and its suitability as a test of individual skill or courage. The ending of war was an idea that went from fringe craziness to mainstream popularity during Bertha von Suttner’s lifetime, and in great measure because of her.

And here we are, well over a century later, with many forms of violence fading fast. . . . And yet, war is on the rise, the risk of nuclear war is on the rise, and the weapons business through which a small number of countries fuel war around the world has lost all shame, replacing it with the pride of performing a laudable public service. Worst of all, the vision of successful war abolition has been set aside by a too easily discouraged public. In the words of Fredrik Heffermehl, “the main obstacle to global peace is the common belief that it is impossible.” . . .

In fact, nothing ever justifies war, and nothing ever justifies preparing for war. Even if we imagine a war that has never been, a necessary and noble war that does more good than harm, that protects against subhuman monsters, that does not slaughter the innocent for the gleam in a politician’s eye . . . even if we imagine such a war, the fact will remain that keeping around the bases, weapons, ships, and personnel that make war possible does more harm than war itself — and will until war goes nuclear. The institution of war wastes money that could save many more lives than are lost in wars. War preparation, like war, is a major destroyer of the environment, and the chief impediment to international cooperation on the environment, on disease, on poverty, on homelessness. War is, of course, the chief cause of homelessness. War preparation is the justification for government secrecy and surveillance. It is a major source of bigotry and hatred, and the biggest influence in our culture in favor of continued violence. It concentrates wealth, corrupts politicians, erodes liberties, and celebrates sadism.

Fredrik Heffermehl understood the need to abolish the entire institution of war. I think he would probably have cheered for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize recipients and considered them the first such recipients in at least six years to have merited the award based on the purpose for which it was created. Abolishing nuclear weapons is essential to our survival. But when some nations maintain nuclear weapons as a misguided response to the dominance of another nation in non-nuclear warmaking, we are faced with the need to abolish the entire war enterprise if we are going to abolish its worst weapons.

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can the peace movement become stronger and more effective?

The Nobel Peace Prize: Does it go to the right people?

(Article continued from left column)

Reforming war isn’t going to work. Taboos on certain weapons aren’t going to hold. Restrictions on war’s cruelty are not going to be honored. During each war in recent years, we have heard the cries of the outraged: “This is not a war, it’s a genocide!” “This is not a war, it’s an occupation!” “This is not a war, it’s terrorism!” “This is not a war, it’s a crime!” And so forth. All perpetuating the myth that there ever has been or can be a war that isn’t cruel, that doesn’t terrorize, that kills only the proper people for killing. The desire to reform war has always been a noble one, but survival requires that we End it, Not Mend It. . .

What can we do to move the world in that direction?

Some of us try, as Fredrik Heffermehl did so well, to nudge the world along through books, as well as articles and speeches. I work for two organizations — RootsAction.org and World BEYOND War that, like many others, have an impact through online actions, organizing, and webinars. At World BEYOND War we also create in-depth online courses that provide an education often missing in schools. And we work with universities and schools to change that.

Most importantly, we organize local chapters with volunteer organizers who get assistance from our paid staff. World BEYOND War chapters hold meetings, book clubs, rallies, demonstrations, protests. They pass resolutions through local governments. They persuade institutions to divest from weapons profits. They put peace messages into local media. They oppose new and existing military bases.

On the World BEYOND War website we’ve created a tool that lets you spin a globe and zoom in on any of 917 U.S. military bases outside of the United States. We need your help with making sure we’ve got all the new ones. But we’re also taking them off when they’re closed, and never adding them when they’re planned but those plans are stymied. We’ve helped people in Montenegro prevent a major new NATO base from being built. People in the Czech Republic have kept a U.S. base out of their country. In Colombia, activists have blocked base construction on one island and are now protecting another. In Italy, activism failed to prevent a new base but kept it to a smaller size than planned. People have gotten bases out of Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Ecuador. The president of Ecuador told the United States that it could keep a base in Ecuador if Ecuador could have a base in the United States. Now there’s a new president who wants to bring U.S. bases back, so the struggle never ends. But can you imagine the Norwegian government demanding a Norwegian military base in Wisconsin in exchange for the U.S. having bases here? I certainly cannot imagine the U.S. government allowing it.

The lesson I draw from having worked to oppose bases in several countries while based in the Washington, D.C., area or not too far from it, is that we are stronger when we have solidarity across borders, and in particular when we are working together both at the location of a base or a proposed base and at the location of the heart of the empire in Washington. A number of times now I have worked with opponents of U.S. bases in distant corners of the globe and watched as they were asked the inevitable question by U.S. Congress members or staffers, namely: “Well, if you don’t want the base there, then where do you want it?” And in each case, to their everlasting credit and praise, these good people have responded “We do not want it anywhere.”

That kind of principled opposition should be coordinated globally. We should have days of protest at U.S. bases across Scandinavia, together with protests delivering the same message in Washington, D.C. We should put our organizers, but also our writers and video producers and photographers, artists and song writers to work building a movement to get the bases out. But not because war will be better without a particular base, rather because closing a particular base can move us a bit closer to the total abolition of war.

That’s what we need to recover from the days of Bertha von Suttner, the vision of success ahead. That we’ve had more wars, that we’ve seen more years go by, is really not relevant. This is now a matter of survival. We desperately need to turn our attention to non-optional crises instead of these ginned up festivals of the lowest depravity that Russia calls special military operations and the U.S. calls overseas contingency operations or Israel’s right to defend itself, but the rest of us call war. No more now than in 1889 is there anything in our genes or the laws of physics requiring war. There is just something in our culture that says the most useful thing you can do, as done in virtually all Hollywood movies, is to pick up a weapon. We need a culture in which the most admirable and courageous thing you can do is to Lay Down Your Arms. Let’s work on getting there.

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe, global,

Approaching election day in the United States

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An email received from Search for Common Ground

As we approach Election Day in the United States, we are reminded of All We Share as fellow humans.

Across the country, 99.994% of Americans, regardless of identity, do not choose acts of political violence, and 87% are tired of political division. In partnership with One Million Truths, we are focused on amplifying the voices of peacebuilders in the US, the visionary leaders and everyday folks who are bridging divides in their communities and choosing respect over division.

We want to shine a light on productive individual actions that are building a better future for everyone. But we need your help in creating a movement that amplifies the stories and experiences we all want to see.

Share your stories with us:

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
How Can a Civil War Be Avoided in the United States?

(Continued from left column)

Have you worked together with someone you disagree with? Share your story by tagging  @allweshare and @searchforcommonground on Instagram and inspire others to do the same.

Across the nation, people are finding ways to unite and solve problems, regardless of political views. Join this movement by hosting a Love Anyway Feast.

We know we’re better together. It’s time we listen to one another and create unity in our communities. Because together, we can find real solutions, not by avoiding differences, but by embracing them and working through them collaboratively. We’re more than just opposing sides, so let’s focus on All We Share.

Public Agenda reports that 79% of people believe that creating opportunities for open dialogue can reduce divisiveness, and 86% believe it’s possible for people to disagree in a healthy way. How can you cultivate that mutual respect and create positive change within your circle today?

Learn more about All We Share

With peace,
Search for Common Ground

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

Survey finds over half of pro-Putin Russians support peace negotiations with Ukraine

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from Novaya Gazeta

Over half of Russians who support Vladimir Putin are open to peace negotiations with Ukraine according to a survey, independent Russian news outlet Meduza reported on Tuesday (October 22).


People pass a billboard showing a Russian soldier in St. Petersburg.
Photo: EPA-EFE/ANATOLY MALTSEV

Independent research project Chronicles surveyed a random sample of 800 Russians in September and found that 61% of those who supported Putin were in favour of peace negotiations with mutual concessions and 43% were in favour of restoring relations with the West.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

Survey respondents who supported Putin overwhelmingly reported wanting the Kremlin to focus on domestic policy, with 83% stating it should shift its focus to “domestic social and economic issues”, the survey found.

Continued mobilisation proved to be unpopular with Putin’s supporters, with only a quarter of respondents stating that they would like more men to be mobilised for the war in Ukraine.

Those figures were much higher among anti-Putin Russians, according to Chronicles, with 79% in favour of a peace treaty with Ukraine and 90% wanting to restore relations with the West.

However, Putin continues to enjoy popularity among Russians, with the survey revealing 78% support.

In September, Chronicles collaborated with Extreme Scan, a non-profit international association of independent researchers, to reveal that 63% of Russians would support peace negotiations and mutual concessions between Russia and Ukraine in the next year.

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

Mexico supports the launch of the Third World March for Peace and Nonviolence

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Olivier Turquet on the website of The World March

The Colegio Jesús de Urquiaga I.A.P. in Mexico City joined the Third World March for Peace and Nonviolence (The 3MM). They showed their support by holding two ceremonies dedicated to Peace and Nonviolence in which the entire educational community participated (500 primary and preschool students and 200 secondary and high school students).

(Continued in right column)

(Click here for the original article in Spanish.)

Questions related to this article:
 

The World March for Peace and Nonviolence: What is its history and its effects?

Latin America, has it taken the lead in the struggle for a culture of peace?

(Continued from left column)

The two ceremonies were very emotional ceremonies as the need to unite voices was discussed, not only to denounce injustices, the horrors of war and violence, but to show the positive actions of the community to ensure that the new generations live in a world of peace and harmony. The importance of exalting values ​​such as respect and tolerance to build a culture of peace and non-violence that guarantees unity among peoples was also discussed.

In addition to the heartfelt words of the students, human symbols of Peace and Non-violence were formed. A poetic performance about the tragedy that individuals experience in violence and revenge was symbolized by a human chain. There was also a song for Peace (Imagine by John Lennon) and a joyful and hopeful dance performance called the human conquest of peace. which The activities join in spirit the start of the March on October 2 in San José, Costa Rica, the international day of non-violence and the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi.

It is worth noting that in addition to the ceremonies, a graphic exhibition prepared by the students themselves was held, showing the types of violence, raising awareness about the normalization of violence; an original recipe book for peace and inspiring phrases about building a culture of peace and non-violence.

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Latin America

Nihon Hidankyo’s Nobel Peace Prize Win Could Not Have Come at a More Important Moment

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Joseph Gerson from Common Dreams

The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Nihon Hidankyo is long overdue and could not come at a more important time.

The Hibakusha (A-bomb witness/survivors) of Nihon Hidankyo have been among the world’s most courageous and steadfast advocates of nuclear disarmament. The organization has focused on three core demands: Preventing nuclear war, eliminating nuclear weapons, and obtaining essential medical care for A-bomb victims.


Members of Nihon Hidankyo, a grassroots Japanese organization of atomic bomb survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki attend a press conference on October 12, 2024 in Tokyo, Japan. (Photo: Tomohiro Ohsumi/Getty Images)

Hidankyo was founded in 1956, in the wake of the Bravo H-Bomb test 1,000 times more powerful that the Hiroshima A-bomb, which poisoned Japanese fishermen and Marshall Islanders.

As Wilfred Burchett, the first Western journalist to witness the ruins and suffering in Hiroshima in 1945 later reported, despite their excruciating physical and emotional suffering, the Hibakusha became the world’s most powerful and influential force for the abolition. With the award of the Nobel Peace Prize, the voices of the Hibakusha, their tortured testimonies, and their truth that human beings and nuclear weapons cannot coexist will now ring out more powerfully around the world.

Nihon Hidankyo was repeatedly nominated for its now well-earned Peace Prize, and the Nobel Committee is now to be celebrated for finally making this year’s decision. With the world, our species, facing the greatest danger of nuclear apocalypse since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, this year’s Peace Prize will refocus world attention on the urgency of renewing nuclear disarmament diplomacy. In addition to Russian nuclear threats related to the continuing Ukraine War, an accident, incident, or miscalculation growing out of provocative U.S., allied, and Chinese military operations in and around the Taiwan Strait and the South China/West could ignite escalation to a nuclear cataclysm.

With uncertainties about a possible Trump election victory, there are growing demands among Japanese and South Korean elites for their nations to become nuclear powers. The U.S. and Russia have lowered their official operational thresholds for launching their nuclear weapons. All of the nuclear weapons states are upgrading their nuclear arsenals and delivery systems, with the U.S. committing an estimated two trillion dollars to “modernize” its systems when that money could be spent to stanch and reverse the climate emergency and to address other urgent human needs.

Let us marvel and learn from the reality that Hibakusha, who were literally the last people on earth, once seen by U.S. leaders and media as “vermin” to be eliminated, have awakened the conscience of the world after suffering what was probably the world’s worst war crime. And contrary to the myth propagated by President Truman, the A-bombs were not necessary to defeat Japan. Senior U.S. military officials from Eisenhower to LeMay and Leahy advised the president that “it wasn’t necessary to hit Japan with that awful thing” Secretary of War Stimson had already advised that Japan’s surrender on terms acceptable to the U.S. could be negotiated.”

Hibakusha’s friends, families and neighbors were incinerated, irradiated, and physically ripped apart by the radiation’s heat and blast waves of the world’s first A-bombs. An entire city was destroyed and burned to the ground. Midst their own agonies, Many Hibakusha were unable to save their families in their shattered and burning homes. They witnessed ghostlike figures, no longer recognizable as human beings, some holding their eyeballs or intestines in their hands marching to their deaths, often in cisterns or the city’s rivers. In the months and years that followed, many died from radiation inflicted cancers and other diseases. Memories remain of the birthing of mutant babies and of other young children whose lives were cut short by radiation diseases.

(Continued in right column)

(Click here for an article in French on this subject.)

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

The Nobel Peace Prize: Does it go to the right people?

(Continued from left column)

With initial fears that the radiation diseases might be contagious and about genetic damages, Hibakusha’s suffering was compounded by marginalization and discrimination. As a result of the U.S. military occupation which continued until 1952 and subsequently with Japan functioning as the United States’ subservient ally, essential medical and other support services were long denied to Hibakusha.

Among the achievements of Nihon Hidankyo and its allies are the collaborations they have built with other “global hibakusha.” These included forced laborers who had brought from Japanese occupied Korea who also suffered the A-bombings. Compassionately and strategically they supported and joined with nuclear weapons test victims from the Marshall Islands, the United States, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tahiti, the Christmas Islands, and other Pacific Islands.

Together with their testimonies in communities across the world and in the United Nations they forged the powerful but still inadequate taboo against the use of nuclear weapons. With their testimonies at the U.N. and elsewhere they have won the majority of the world’s governments to the understanding that for the human species to survive, priority must be given to the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, not so-called “state security” interests. Hibakusha’s testimonies were essential to the successful negotiation of the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which seeks to hold the nuclear weapons states accountable to their Article VI Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligation to engage in good faith negotiations for the complete abolition of nuclear weapons.

That nuclear weapons have not been used since the Nagasaki A-bombing was an unfortunate misstatement in the Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s award announcement. As Daniel Ellsberg, a principal author of the United States’ nuclear war planning in the Kennedy administration. taught during many international crises and wars, the U.S. has used its nuclear arsenal in the same way that an armed robber uses his gun when pointed at his victim’s head. Whether or not the trigger is pulled, the gun has been used. Tragically, this is playbook with which the Russian government has been working from with its Ukraine-war nuclear threats.

It is worth noting that in response to the announcement of the award, Hidankyo referenced the terrible assaults on the people of Gaza. The Hibakusha have identified with victims of other holocausts and massacres going back to Vietnam when they identified with the people under the bombs. They then warned of the danger that the U.S. might resort to nuclear attack (which the U.S. prepared and threatened in 1954, 1957 and with President Nixon’s 1969 “madman” nuclear mobilization.

Numerous popular initiatives are at work in the world which will be boosted by the Peace Prize award to Nihon Hibakusha. In the U.S., the Back from the Brink campaign, initiated by Physicians for Social Responsibility, has been at the cutting edge. It’s call for negotiation of a verifiable agreement to eliminate nuclear weapons, renunciation of first-use policies, ending the president’s sole authority to launch nuclear weapons, taking U.S. nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert, and to cancel the plan to replace the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal with enhanced weapons has been endorsed by 43 members of congress and numerous U.S. cities and states.

The Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security works to prevent nuclear war and achieve a nuclear weapons-free world via its advocacy of Common Security. This is the ancient truth that no nation can achieve security at the expense of its rival. As with the INF Treaty that ended the Cold War before the fall of the Cold War, peaceful coexistence and security can be achieved only through mutual recognition, and respectful, if difficult, win-win negotiations between rivals.

In the face of the horrors on nuclear weapons and drawing on the courage of Hibakusha, this is the paradigm on which the Hibakusha’s vison of a nuclear weapons free world can be achieved.

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

John Paul Lederach: How a Civil War Can Be Avoided in the United States?

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A review of The Pocket Guide for Facing Down a Civil War by John Paul Lederach

In this Pocket Guide, internationally renowned peace practitioner John Paul Lederach reflects on his experience across over four decades mediating and transforming conflicts in places including Northern Ireland, Colombia, Nepal, Somalia, South Sudan, Nicaragua, and Tajikistan, among many others. His experiences grant him a unique perspective not only on what precipitates, propels, and sustains violent conflict, but also into key understandings and approaches that help shift dynamics of harm toward practices of social healing.

Screenshot

The Guide is framed to reflect on questions increasingly posed about the likelihood of divisive polarization in the United States leading toward political violence and even civil war. To consider this question, Lederach offers a comparative view. He suggests that despite the tendency in the U.S. to hold to exceptionalism, the country is not exempt from the toxic dynamics that have been faced in other settings where open armed conflict, once unleashed, became nearly impossible to end. In each chapter, Lederach describes a challenging pattern that repeats across contexts and animates toxic polarization and sustained armed conflict. He illustrates these dynamics with stories, observations, and wisdom gathered from his work with local communities and national leaders in places impacted by such toxicity, describing how they faced down and shifted seemingly ceaseless cycles of violence. 

This Pocket Guide does not offer quick fixes. Rather, it explores the way ordinary people resisted and countered patterns of violence in their communities. Their curiosity, persistence, and creative innovation suggest that to face down a civil war and heal long-standing wounds that stoke cycles of violence, people must resist the pull of toxic polarization that legitimates violence as the only option. The challenge is to innovate pockets of vitality that embody the basic idea that politics without violence where we live is possible. Such innovation requires a web of courageous relationships that reach across divides, creating the connective tissue that fosters dignity and respect within, between, and across deep political and cultural difference.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
How Can a Civil War Be Avoided in the United States?

(Continued from left column)

In addition to the Pocket Guide, John Paul Lederach has written an op-ed in the Washington Post on this subject.

Based on the analysis above, his op-ed proposes three actions that we should all take:

1. We need to reach beyond our isolated bubbles and open conversations with the perceived enemies in our communities.

2. We have to rehumanize our adversaries; We must have the courage to confront dehumanizing language and behavior, especialy when it comes from within our closest circles.

3. We need to stick with it. We can’t just pull away when difficult issues emerge.

In the article he lists six websites that tell about good initiatives to overcome polarization and develop a peaceful society.

He concludes the op-ed by saying:

The best way to end a civil war is to stop it before it happens.

Will Americans have the courage to nurture these initiatives demonstrating that politics — honest partisan politics — can thrive without violence? I believe we can, and we must.

– – – – – –

(Editor’s note: One is reminded of the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi who said that we never have an enemy, what he have are opponents that we have yet to convince. And we should keep trying to convince them. Gandhi went each week to see the English viceroy who ran the occupation of his country, to tell him of the actions he was going to take for liberation, and to try to convince him that liberation was inevitable and that the British should leave and give India its freedom. In one sense he was successful. The British left without need for a violent revolution. But unfortunately, despite Gandhi’s valiant efforts, India was not able to escape an ensuing civil war between Hindus and Muslims that left a million dead and the division of India into three countries based on religious affiliation.)

– – – – – –

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.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

UN chief warns of nuclear ‘danger’ as world remembers Hiroshima; urges elimination of weapons

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from the United Nations News Service

The UN Secretary-General called for nuclear disarmament on Tuesday as the world marked 79 years since the bombing of Hiroshima, promising that the UN will “spare no effort to ensure the horrors of that day are never repeated.”


UN Photo/Yoshito Matsushige. Wounded civilians who escaped the blaze gather on a sidewalk west of Miyuki-bashi in Hiroshima, Japan, around 11 a.m. on August 6, 1945.

On 6 August 1945, the United States dropped a bomb dubbed ‘Little Boy’, on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, as World War Two continued. The bombing resulted in immense devastation which killed and injured tens of thousands of people.

The Secretary-General insisted that the threat of the use of nuclear weapons is not just “confined to history books” but a “real and present danger” today – once again looming large “in the daily rhetoric of international relations.”

(Continued in right column)

(Click here for a version in French or here for a version in Spanish

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

(Continued from left column)

The lessons of Hiroshima

In a message delivered in the Japanese city by UN disarmament chief Izumi Nakamitsu, Mr. Guterres said the lessons of Hiroshima which encourage disarmament and peace have been “pushed aside” but he recognised the people of Hiroshima’s efforts to ensure nuclear weapons are never used again.

He further insisted that the use of nuclear weapons is unacceptable and “a nuclear war cannot be won – and must never be fought.”

He said this is a lesson that shows we need disarmament now.

The message for the future

As the Hiroshima Peace Memorial ceremony continued, Mr. Guterres said that global mistrust and division have grown, but we must ensure not to “press our luck again.”

“Some are recklessly rattling the nuclear saber once more,” he said. “The world must stand together to condemn this unacceptable behaviour.”

Looking ahead to the Summit of the Future in New York next month, the Secretary-General said it is a “critical opportunity for governments to renew their commitment to multilateralism, sustainable development and peace, and adopt an actionable and forward-looking Pact for the Future.”

He said that conflict prevention, disarmament and a nuclear weapons-free world need to be at the heart of these efforts.

“We will never forget the lessons of 6 August 1945,” he said. “No more Hiroshimas. No more Nagasakis.”

Renewed determination

On Tuesday, UN disarmament chief, Ms. Nakamitsu echoed that message online.

In a statement on X, she also renewed her determination “to continue to work towards a world without nuclear weapons. For the security of all peoples.”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,