Category Archives: global

UN Security Council: ‘Radical change of direction’ needed in women, peace and security agenda

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from the United Nations

New goals and effective plans on women’s involvement in peacebuilding are needed before it is too late, the head of the UN agency leading global efforts to achieve gender equality warned the Security Council on Tuesday. 

Sima Bahous, Executive Director of UN Women, was speaking during a Council meeting to reaffirm the importance of Resolution 1325  on women, peace and security,  adopted in October 2000, and to take stock of implementation since it turned 20 nearly three years ago. 


UN Photo/Manuel Elías Verónica Nataniel Macamo Dlhovo, Minister for Foreign
Affairs and Cooperation of Mozambique and President of the Security Council
for the month of March, chairs the Security Council meeting on
Women and peace and security.

“As we meet today at the mid-point between the 20th and 25th anniversaries, on the eve of International Women’s Day, it is obvious that we need a radical change of direction,” she said

No significant change 

Ms. Bahous noted that although several historic firsts for gender equality occurred during the first two decades of the resolution, “we have neither significantly changed the composition of peace tables, nor the impunity enjoyed by those who commit atrocities against women and girls.” 

She said the 20th anniversary “was not a celebration, but a wake-up call,” pointing to situations from across the globe that have emerged since then.

They include the regression of women’s and girls’ rights in Afghanistan in the wake of the Taliban takeover, sexual violence committed in the war in the Tigray region in Ethiopia, and online abuse targeting women opposing military rule in Myanmar. 

Women and children also comprise a staggering 90 per cent of the nearly eight million people forced to flee the conflict in Ukraine, and nearly 70 per cent of those displaced within the country.
 
Military spending increasing 

Furthermore, women peacebuilders had hoped that the COVID-19 pandemic would cause countries to rethink military spending, as the global crisis revealed the value of caregivers and the importance of investing in health, education, food security and social protection. 

“Instead, that spending has continued to grow, passing the two-trillion-dollar mark, even without the significant military expenditure of the last months,” she said. “Neither the pandemic nor supply-chain issues prevented another year of rising global arms sales.”  

The way forward 

Ms. Bahous outlined two suggestions that show what a change of direction could look like for the international community. 

“First, we cannot expect 2025 to be any different if the bulk of our interventions continue to be trainings, sensitization, guidance, capacity building, setting up networks, and holding one event after another to talk about women’s participation, rather than mandating it in every meeting and decision-making process in which we have authority,” she stipulated. 

Her second point focused on the need to get resources to women’s groups in conflict-affected countries, particularly through the Women’s Peace and Humanitarian Fund

The UN-led partnership was established in 2015 and has so far supported more than 900 organizations. 

“We urgently need better ways to support civil society and social movements in these countries. That means being much more intentional about funding or engaging with new groups, and especially with young women,” she said. 

(Article continues in right column.)

Questions related to this article:

UN Resolution 1325, does it make a difference?

Does the UN advance equality for women?

Can the women of Africa lead the continent to peace?

(Article continued from left column.)

Women’s involvement equals success 

The meeting was chaired by Mozambique, which holds the rotating Security Council presidency this month.
  
The country’s Foreign Minister, Verónica Nataniel Macamo Dlhovo, expressed hope that the debate will lead to action, such as stronger strategies on gender equality, as well as women’s effective participation in peacekeeping and peacebuilding. 

“There is no doubt that by involving women in the peacebuilding and peacekeeping agenda in our countries, we will achieve success,” she said, speaking in Portuguese. 
“Under no circumstances do we want that the people who bring life into the world are negatively impacted. We must protect them. Use women’s sensitivity to resolve conflicts and maintain peace on our planet.” 

Respect international law 

Currently, more than 100 armed conflicts are raging around the world, according to Mirjana Spoljaric, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
 
The organization sees the daily brutal impacts of armed conflict on women and girls, she said, which include “shocking levels” of sexual violence, displacement, and deaths during childbirth because they lack access to care.
 
Ms. Spoljaric upheld the importance of international humanitarian law during conflict and urged States to apply a gender perspective in its application and interpretation. 

“Respect for international humanitarian law will prevent the enormous harm resulting from violations of its rules, and it will help to rebuild stability and reconcile societies,” she said. 

States also must ensure that the clear prohibition of sexual violence under international humanitarian law is integrated into national law, military doctrine and training. 

“Engaging more boldly and directly weapon bearers on this issue – with the ultimate goal that it does not occur in the first place – should become a de facto preventive approach, supported and facilitated in times of peace to prevent the worst in times of war,” she added. 


African women leaders network

Bineta Diop of the African Union Commission also addressed the Council, highlighting its work in getting countries to accelerate implementation of the resolution.
This is being done through a strategy focused on advocacy and accountability, and in building a network of women leaders on the continent.

“We are ensuring that women’s leadership is mainstreamed in governance, peace and development processes so as to create a critical mass of women leaders at all levels,” she said.

“We need to make sure that they are in all sectors of life. not just in peace processes.”

Partner with women activists 

Nobel Peace Prize winner Leymah Gbowee from Liberia called for amplifying the women, peace and security agenda. She recommended steps such as engaging and partnering with local women peace activists, who she called “the custodians of their communities.” 

Women must also be negotiators and mediators in peace talks. “It is amazing to see how only the men with guns are consistently invited to the table to find solutions, while women who bear the greatest brunt are often invited as observers,” she remarked. 

She also urged countries to “move beyond rhetoric” by ensuring funding and political will, because without them, Resolution 1325 “remains a toothless bulldog”.
  
Ms. Gbowee stressed that women, peace and security must be seen as a holistic part of the global peace and security agenda.  
 
“We will continue to search for peace in vain in our world unless we bring women to the table,” she warned.  “I firmly believe that trying to work for global peace and security minus women is trying to see the whole picture with your one eye covered.” 

Amnesty International: Human Rights wins in 2022 

… . HUMAN RIGHTS … .

An article by Amnesty International

Confronted withwhat can sometimes seem like an endless cycle of bad news in the media, it’s easy to feel despondent. But, amid the gloom, there were plenty of good news stories to celebrate this year.

Throughout 2022, Amnesty’s ongoing campaigning, media and advocacy workcontributed to positive outcomes for people all over the world whose human rightswere being violated. Individualsunjustly detained were freed from prison.Human rights abusers were held accountable. Vital legislationand resolutionswerepassed by governmentsat national and international level. Progress towards the global abolition of the death penalty continued.And important advances were made both for the rights of women and LGBTI people.

Here’s a round-up of human rights wins in 2022.

Individuals freed from unjust imprisonment

Amnesty’s ongoing work for individuals helped secure the release of people across the world, delivered justice for families, and held abusers accountable.

In January, university lecturer Professor Faizullah Jalal was released after being arbitrarily arrested and detained by the Taliban.

Hejaaz Hizbullah, a Sri Lankan lawyer and Amnesty prisoner of conscience, was granted bailin February after almost two years of pre-trial detention under Sri Lanka’s draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).Two other detainees held under the PTA, Ahnaf Mohamed Imran and Divaniya Mukunthan, were also released on bail in August and September respectively.

In Honduras, the “Guapinol eight”, a group of water rights defenders and prisoners of conscience, were unconditionally released in February, after spending more than two years in prison for their human rights work.

The following month, in neighbouring Guatemala, IndigenousMayan environmentalist and prisoner of conscience Bernardo Caal Xol was released early after being jailed on bogus charges related to his activism. More than half a million actions were taken on his behalf during Amnesty’s 2021 Write for Rights campaign.

Elsewhere, Magai Matiop Ngong — for whom more than 700,000 actions were taken during Write for Rights 2019— was released from prison in South Sudan in March, having been sentenced to death at the age of 15 in 2017.

August saw the release of schoolteacher Hriday Chandra Mondal, who was detained for discussing the difference between science and religion in his classes. All charges against him were subsequently dropped.

In May,18-year-oldPalestinian Amal Nakhleh, who suffers from a chronic autoimmune disorder, was released from Israeli administrative detention following 16 months of campaigning by Amnesty and others.

In July, a Russian court acquittedYulia Tsvetkova of “production and dissemination of pornographic materials” over her body-positive drawings of vaginas that were published online.

Following an Urgent Action by Amnesty, Maldivian activist Rusthum Mujuthaba, who was being held on blasphemy charges in relation to a social media post,was released from prison in August.

Palestinian national Dr.Mohammed al-Khudariwas released from prison in Saudi Arabia in October after spending more than three years in arbitrary detention along with his son, Dr.Hani al-Khudari. Both men were handed down prison sentences based on trumped-up charges. Dr.Hani al-Khudari remains in prison despite the expiry of his sentence in February andAmnesty continues to campaign for his release.

Six Palestinian men who reported that they had been tortured in Palestinian Authority prisons were released on bail within two weeks ofAmnesty’s intervention in November.

Thanks to the support of Amnesty Argentina, a Ukrainian familywas able to escape the war and settle in the country in November. A short film documenting their story is available here.

In Yemen, journalist Younis Abdelsalamwas released in December after being arbitrarily detained for over ayear for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression.

Justice for families, abusers held accountable

In Malawi, justice was served in April when a court convicted 12 men over the 2018 killing of MacDonald Masambuka, a person with albinism.

In June, partial justice was finally delivered for the 2016 murder of environmental and Indigenous rights activist Berta Cáceres, as David Castillo was sentenced to prison for co-authoring her killing. Amnesty continues its campaign to bring others suspected of responsibility for Berta’s murder to justice.

After pressure from the US authorities, and following a visit by President Biden to Israel, the Israeli Defense Ministry agreed in October to pay compensation to the family of Palestinian-American Omar As’ad, who died after Israeli soldiers ill-treated him at a checkpoint in January.

In November, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation informed the Israeli government that it would conduct an investigation into the May killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by an Israeli soldier.

In December, a Lebanese judge indicted five State Security members on charges of torture in the case of Syrian refugee Bashar Abdel Saud, who died in custody in August.

Continued progress towards the global abolition of the death penalty

Amnesty’s campaign for the global abolition of the death penalty saw further success in 2022, as a string of countries abolished or took significant steps towards abolishing the punishment.

The abolition of the death penalty for all crimes came into force in Kazakhstan inJanuary. Papua New Guinea followed suit in April, repealing the punishment 30 years on from its reintroduction.

Via social media , Zambia’s President announced in May that the country would begin the process of abandoning the death penalty and, in June, Malaysia’s government initiated the process of removing the mandatory death sentence for 11 offences.

In September, a new law which removed death penalty provisions from the penal code in Equatorial Guinea came into effect.

(Click here for the French version of this article, or here for the Spanish version .)

(Article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:
 
What is the state of human rights in the world today?

(Article continued from left column)

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa that have not yet abolished the death penalty for all crimes, including Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe, continued to carry out no executions.

Landmark national legislation and international agreements

At both national and international level, Amnesty’s work was vital in helping secure the passage of essential legislation and resolutions, as well as ensuring that companies were held accountable for their human rights responsibilities.

National

There were important wins on Refugee and Migrants’ Rights in the U.S. For example, in March, the Department of Homeland Security announced the designation of Afghanistan for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The move offers protection from deportation to Afghans without visa status and in the U.S. before March 15, 2022, allaying immediate fears of a return to a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Amnesty USA is Campaigning for a bill that would provide a path to citizenship for Afghans seeking safety, the Afghan Adjustment Act. 

In a win for the protection and promotion of the right to freedom of expression in May, the Supreme Court of India suspended the 152-year-old sedition law.

The government of Sierra Leone drafted a new mental health bill in June that is more aligned with international human rights standards than the outdated and discriminatory ‘Lunacy Act’ of 1902. This was a central call in Amnesty’s May 2021 report focusing on the issue.

In Niger,the country’s parliament adopted amendments to the cybercrime lawin Junethatlifted prison sentences for libel and insults. The law had been routinely used to target and arbitrarily detain human rights defenders, activists and journalists.

In the US, legislation on gun violence long campaigned for by Amnesty USA and partners was adopted, with the passage of the Safer Communities Act in June. The legislation provides an additional $250 million for community violence interruption (CVI) programmes.

Amnesty saw impact from our work on children in conflict zones in Niger, including increased UN monitoring of the situation. In July, the UN Secretary-General called on his Special Representative on Children and Armed Conflict to “promote enhanced monitoring capacity in the Central Sahel region”, which would cover the tri-border region of Niger, which was one of the main recommendations ofour September 2021 report.

Throughout the year, Amnesty also saw some businesses take their human rights obligations more seriously.

Following Amnesty’s request, the authorities of Sierra Leone asked the Meya mining company operating in Kono district to respond to our concerns about the negative impact of its activities on local people. The company replied that it was engaged in various actions to improve the safety of populations and access to drinking water for communities.

Amnesty’s investigation into the aviation fuel supply chain linked to war crimes in Myanmar played a role in several companies announcing their withdrawal from jet fuel sales to the country, where shipments risk being used by the Myanmar military to carry out deadly air strikes. The companies included Puma Energy, which announced its exit less than two weeks after being presented with Amnesty’s findings. Thai Oil and Norwegian shipping agent Wilhelmsen also confirmed they would pull back from the supply chain, with more expected to follow.

International

Following Amnesty’s report, in March, UN Special Rapporteur (SR) Michael Lynk said that Israel is practising apartheid, followed by UN SR Balakrishnan Rajagopal in July, joining a growing chorusof expert assessments.

In April, the European Union reached political agreement on the Digital Services Act (DSA), a landmark regulatory framework that will, among other things, require Big Tech platforms to assess and manage systemic risks posed by their services, such as advocacy of hatred and the spread of disinformation.

Important progress was made on environmental justice, with the passage of a resolution at the UN General Assembly in July recognizing the right to a healthy environment. The news followed a similar resolution passed by the UN Human Rights Councilat the end of 2021.

In July, ten European countries: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden rejected the Israeli Defense Ministry designation of seven Palestinian civil society organizations as“terrorist” and “illegitimate”. The US government expressed its concern when theIsraeli military raided the offices of the organizations in August, and UN experts condemned the Israeli attacks on Palestinian civil society in October.

At its 51st session, the UN Human Rights Council released a special resolution on Afghanistan in September. Amnesty suggested the inclusion of a call for the UN Special Rapporteur to prepare a thematic report on the situation of women and girls. Several countries supported the idea, and it was included in the final resolution.

In October, the UN Human Rights Council renewed the mandateof the Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela—a key independent international mechanism actively investigating and regularly reporting on past and ongoing international crimes and other human rights violations—until September 2024. And, in November, the Human Rights Council passed a landmark resolution to establish a new fact-finding mission to investigate alleged humanr ights violations in Iran related to the ongoing nationwide protests that began on 16 September 2022.

The mandate of the OHCHR’s Sri Lanka Accountability Project was extended for a further two-year period in October. The project has a mandate to collect and preserve evidence for future accountability processes — a key aspect of ensuring pressure remains on the Sri Lankan government to remedy and stop both historical and current human rights violations.

Victories for women’s rights

The year saw a number of victoriesf or women’s rights, with Amnesty at the forefront.

In the latest progress on sexual and reproductive rights in Latin America, Colombia decriminalized abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy in February.The news followed the legalization of abortion in Argentina in 2020 and the decriminalization of abortion in Mexico 2021.

In May, the lower chamber of Spain’s parliament passed a bill containing important measures to prevent and prosecute rape. Finland’s parliament passed similar measures in June, adopting reforms that make lack of consent key to defining rape. Finland also passed reforms in October that eased the strictest abortion laws in the Nordic region.

September saw the acquittal of Miranda Ruiz, a doctor who had been unjustly prosecuted in Argentina for having guaranteed a legal abortion.

Notable wins for LGBTIrights

Amnesty contributed to some notable wins for LGBTI rights throughout 2022.

In an important affirmation of transgender individuals’ rights to dignity, happiness and family life, South Korea’s Supreme Court ruled  that having children of minor age should not immediately be the reason to refuse to recognize the legal gender of transgender persons.

In July, same-sex marriage became legal in Switzerland, after almost two-thirds of the population voted in favour of it in a referendum. Slovenia followed suit in October, legalizing same-sex marriage after a constitutional court ruling.

A ban on the award-winning film Joyland, which features a transgender person as a central character, was reversed in Pakistan in November.

Historic UN Ocean Treaty agreed – Greenpeace statement

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from Greenpeace (reprinted according to CC-BY International License)

A historic UN Ocean Treaty has finally been agreed at the United Nations after almost  two decades of negotiations. The text will now go through technical editing and translation, before officially being adopted at another session. This Treaty is a monumental win for ocean protection, and an important sign that multilateralism still works in an increasingly divided world.


A school of fish swim in the Pacific Ocean in Australia. © Ocean Image Bank/Jordan Robin  published by the United Nations.

The agreement of this Treaty keeps the 30×30 target – protecting 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030  – alive. It provides a pathway to creating fully or highly protected areas across the world’s oceans. There are still flaws in the text, and governments must ensure that the Treaty is put into practice in an effective and equitable way for it to be considered a truly ambitious Treaty. 

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Sustainable Development Summits of States, What are the results?

(Article continued from the left column)

Dr. Laura Meller, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace Nordic, said from New York: “This is a historic day for conservation and a sign that in a divided world, protecting nature and people can triumph over geopolitics. We praise countries for seeking compromises, putting aside differences and delivering a Treaty that will let us protect the oceans, build our resilience to climate change and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people.

“We can now finally move from talk to real change at sea. Countries must formally adopt the Treaty and ratify it as quickly as possible to bring it into force, and then deliver the fully protected ocean sanctuaries our planet needs. The clock is still ticking to deliver 30×30. We have half a decade left, and we can’t be complacent.”

The High Ambition Coalition, which includes the EU, US and UK, and China were key players in brokering the deal. Both showed willingness to compromise in the final days of talks, and built coalitions instead of sowing division. Small Island States have shown leadership throughout the process, and the G77 group led the way in ensuring the Treaty can be put into practice in a fair and equitable way.

The fair sharing of monetary benefits from Marine Genetic Resources was a key sticking point. This was only resolved on the final day of talks. The section of the Treaty on Marine Protected Areas does away with broken consensus-based decision making which has failed to protect the oceans through existing regional bodies like the Antarctic Ocean Commission. While there are still major issues in the text, it is a workable Treaty that is a starting point for protecting 30% of the world’s oceans.

The 30×30 target, agreed at Biodiversity COP15, would not be deliverable without this historic Treaty.  It’s vital that countries urgently ratify this Treaty, and begin the work to create vast fully protected ocean sanctuaries covering 30% of oceans by 2030.

Now the hard work of ratification and protecting the oceans begins. We must build on this momentum to see off new threats like deep sea mining and focus on putting protection in place. Over 5.5 million people signed a Greenpeace petition calling for a strong Treaty. This is a victory for all of them.

The Global South refuses pressure to side with the West on Russia

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by  by Vijay Prashad in Peoples Dispatch

Europe and the US ignore Africa, Latin America, and Asia’s calls to find a solution that ends the war in Ukraine—and, as Namibia’s prime minister put it, redirect funds spent on weapons toward solving global issues.


Francia Márquez Vice President, Republic of Colombia speaking at the Munich Security Conference next to Namibia’s Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila, Enrique Manalo (Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Republic of the Philippines) and Mauro Luiz Iecker Vieira (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Federative Republic of Brazil). Photo: MSC/Baier

At the G20 meeting in Bengaluru, India, the United States arrived with a simple brief. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said at the February 2023 summit that the G20 countries must condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and they must adhere to US sanctions against Russia. However, it became clear that India, the chair of the G20, was not willing to conform to the US agenda. Indian officials said that the G20 is not a political meeting, but a meeting to discuss economic issues. They contested the use of the word “war” to describe the invasion, preferring to describe it as a “crisis” and a “challenge.” France  and Germany  have rejected this draft if it does not condemn Russia.

At the G20 meeting in Bengaluru, India, the United States arrived with a simple brief. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said at the February 2023 summit that the G20 countries must condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and they must adhere to US sanctions against Russia. However, it became clear that India, the chair of the G20, was not willing to conform to the US agenda. Indian officials said that the G20 is not a political meeting, but a meeting to discuss economic issues. They contested the use of the word “war” to describe the invasion, preferring to describe it as a “crisis” and a “challenge.” France and Germany have rejected this draft if it does not condemn Russia.

Just as in Indonesia during the previous year’s summit, the 2023 G20 leaders are once again ignoring the pressure from the West to isolate Russia, with the large developing countries (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa) unwilling to budge from their practical view that isolation of Russia is endangering the world.

The next two G20 summits will be in Brazil (2024) and South Africa (2025), which would indicate to the West that the platform of the G20 will not be easily subordinated to the Western view of world affairs.

Most of the leaders of the G20 countries went to Bengaluru straight from Germany, where they had attended the Munich Security Conference. On the first day of the Munich conference, France’s President Emmanuel Macron said  that he was “shocked by how much credibility we are losing in the Global South.” The “we” in Macron’s statement was the Western states, led by the United States.

What is the evidence for this loss of credibility? Few of the states in the Global South have been willing to participate in the isolation of Russia, including voting  on Western resolutions in the United Nations General Assembly. Not all of the states that have refused to join the West are “anti-Western” in a political sense. Many of them—including the government in India—are driven by practical considerations, such as Russia’s discounted energy prices and the assets being sold at a lowered price by Western companies that are departing from Russia’s lucrative energy sector. Whether they are fed up with being pushed around by the West or they see economic opportunities in their relationship with Russia, increasingly, countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America have avoided the pressure coming from Washington to break ties with Russia. It is this refusal and avoidance that drove Macron to make his strong statement about being “shocked” by the loss of Western credibility.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

(Article continued from the column on the left)

At a panel discussion  on February 18 at the Munich Security Conference, three leaders from Africa and Asia developed the argument about why they are unhappy with the war in Ukraine and the pressure campaign upon them to break ties with Russia. Brazil’s Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira—who later that day condemned  the Russian invasion of Ukraine in a tweet — called  upon the various parties to the conflict to “build the possibility of a solution. We cannot keep on talking only of war.”

Billions of dollars of arms have been sent by the Western states to Ukraine to prolong a war that needs to be ended before it escalates out of control. The West has blocked  negotiations ever since the possibility of an interim deal between Russia and Ukraine arose in March 2022. The talk of an endless war by Western politicians and the arming of Ukraine have resulted in Russia’s February 21, 2023, withdrawal from the New START treaty, which—with the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019—ends the nuclear weapons control regime.

Vieira’s comment about the need to “build the possibility of a solution” is one that is shared across the developing countries, who do not see the endless war as beneficial to the planet. As Colombia’s Vice President Francia Márquez said  on the same panel, “We don’t want to go on discussing who will be the winner or the loser of a war. We are all losers, and, in the end, it is humankind that loses everything.”

The most powerful statement in Munich was made by Namibia’s Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila. “We are promoting a peaceful resolution of that conflict” in Ukraine, she said, “so that the entire world and all the resources of the world can be focused on improving the conditions of people around the world instead of being spent on acquiring weapons, killing people, and actually creating hostilities.” When asked why Namibia abstained at the United Nations on the vote regarding the war, Kuugongelwa-Amadhila said, “Our focus is on resolving the problem… not on shifting blame.” The money used to buy weapons, she said, “could be better utilized to promote development in Ukraine, in Africa, in Asia, in other places, in Europe itself, where many people are experiencing hardships.” A Chinese plan for peace in Ukraine—built on the principles of the 1955 Bandung Conference—absorbs the points raised by these Global South leaders.

European leaders have been tone-deaf to the arguments being made by people such as Kuugongelwa-Amadhila. The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell had earlier shot himself in the foot with his ugly remarks  in October 2022 that “Europe is a garden. The rest of the world is a jungle. And the jungle could invade the garden… Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us.” In the February 2023 Munich Security Conference, Borrell—who is originally from Spain — said  that he shared “this feeling” of Macron’s that the West had to “preserve or even to rebuild trustful cooperation with many of the so-called Global South.” The countries of the South, Borrell said, are “accusing us of [a] double standard” when it comes to combating imperialism, a position that “we must debunk.”

A series of reports published by leading Western financial houses repeat the anxiety of people such as Borrell. BlackRock notes  that we are entering “a fragmented world with competing blocs,” while Credit Suisse points  to the “deep and persistent fractures” that have opened up in the world order. Credit Suisse’s assessment of these “fractures” describes them accurately: “The global West (Western developed countries and allies) has drifted away from the global East (China, Russia, and allies) in terms of core strategic interests, while the Global South (Brazil, Russia, India, and China and most developing countries) is reorganizing to pursue its own interests.”

This reorganization is now manifesting itself in the refusal by the Global South to bend the knee to Washington.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor, and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter. He is an editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including The Darker Nations and The Poorer Nations. His latest books are Struggle Makes Us Human: Learning from Movements for Socialism and (with Noam Chomsky) The Withdrawal: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Fragility of US Power.

Nobel Peace Prize 2023: PRIO Director’s Shortlist Announced

…. HUMAN RIGHTS ….

An article from the Peace Research Institute Oslo

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

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


Left to right: Mahbouba Seraj and Narges Mohammadi

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

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

Narges Mohammadi and Mahbouba Seraj

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

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

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

Kyaw Moe Tun and Myanmar’s National Unity Consultative Council

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

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

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

(Article continued in the right column)

Question related to this article:

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

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

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

(Article continued from the left column)

International Court of Justice

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

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

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

Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Juan Carlos Jintiach

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

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

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

Human Rights Data Analysis Group

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

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

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


Background on the Nobel Peace Prize

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

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

Tourism as a force for Global Peace

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Ajay Prakash from Peace Tourism

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


 Ajay Prakash, President – Travel Agents Federation of India

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can tourism promote a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

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

So how do we do this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IIPT Credo of the Peaceful Traveller©

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

United Nation General Assembly divides over Ukraine resolution and Belarus amendment

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Analysis by CPNN

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

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

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


Voting on Belarus resolution condemning arms shipments to Ukraine

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

(Article continued from the column on the left)

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

15 countries voted for the Belarus amendment

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

52 countries abstained on the Belarus amendment

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

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

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

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

Armenia
Central African Republic
Kazakhstan
Vietnam

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

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

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

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

World Radio Day: Celebrating radio as a tool for feminist peace

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom

What role does radio play in advancing social movements, including feminism and the peace movement? This World Radio Day, we’re exploring the answer to this question — and taking a look at how radio is used by WILPF members around the world today to broadcast messages of peace, justice, and equality for all.


Image credit: UN Photo/Michael Ali

From the time modern radio became popular as a means of broadcasting news and entertainment in the early 1920s, it has played an important role in disseminating messages of peace — including those shared by women.

In recognition of the unique relationship between radio and efforts for peace, this year’s World Radio Day theme  is “Radio and Peace” — a reflection of the medium’s powerful contributions to peacebuilding, conflict prevention, knowledge sharing, democracy, and activism. 

At WILPF, our movement has evolved alongside the advent of radio since our earliest days. Founded in 1915 in the midst of the First World War, generations of WILPF leaders and members across the globe have used radio as a critical tool for raising awareness of our cause and for bringing the voices of women to airwaves around the world.

Today, WILPF Sections and Groups continue to explore the possibilities of radio to advance movement building, dialogue, education, and action toward a future of feminist peace. Today, we’re glad and honoured to share just a few examples of how radio and peace go hand-in-hand through the work of WILPF members around the world. 

WILPF Sections in Burundi, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, and Togo 

In Africa, radio is the primary mode of mass communication, with broad geographic reach and large audiences across all demographics. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, WILPF Sections throughout Africa made use of radio to share critical messages of peace and safety. WILPF Burundi, WILPF Côte d’Ivoire, and WILPF Togo broadcast important information about COVID-19 prevention techniques, while WILPF Nigeria raised awareness about the rise in instances of domestic violence during COVID-19 lockdowns. And in conjunction with the 33rd International Congress, WILPF Cameroon joined Radio Audace  to talk about WILPF’s International Programme 2022-2025.

(Article continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:

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

How can peace be promoted by radio?

(Article continued from left column)

WILPF Argentina: Radio is essential for the people 

In April 2021, WILPF Argentina — with support from WILPF — partnered together with other organisations working for peace to develop a radio programme called “I’ll Give You My Voice, Sister.” 

Broadcast on Radio Rebelde 740AM, the radio spot has provided space for the partners to interview women politicians, popular militants, trade unionists, activists, deputies, senators, and other officials. Following a brief break, the half-hour show will resume this March with a broadcast every Wednesday morning. 

“Our humble task is to make other voices heard, the voices of the protagonists, without filters that add more confusion to the existing ones,” says María de los Ángeles Pagano of WILPF Argentina. “No matter how small the audience is for a radio programme, it will always be heard. We know that it is very useful for our work with WILPF.” 

WILPF Germany: A space for dialogue and knowledge sharing 

On the first Monday of every other month, members of WILPF Germany can be heard on Radio Lora’s Radio International programme

During the one-hour live broadcast, the team reports on their activities, shares their opinions on current events, discusses critical issues impacting women and peace, and educates listeners about all things WILPF: its history, its feminist approach to peace, its focus areas, and much more. Listen online now

WILPF Italy: Making ourselves known to the public 

For years, WILPF Italy has engaged with Radio Radicale  to speak about human rights, nuclear disarmament, and the arms trade. In 2019, the radio station even recorded and broadcast an entire conference organised by the Section. 

WILPF Italy has also partnered with local radio stations to record and broadcast live protests and sit-ins, co-organised with the “Disarmisti Esigenti”, or “Demanding Disarmament,” which are broadcast on Florence’s Nuova Resistenza radio. 

“Undoubtedly, radio helps us make ourselves and our work known to the public,” says Patrizia Sterpetti of WILPF Italy. 

From radio to podcasting: The future of listening  

In recent years, podcasting has joined radio as an exciting new means of sharing news and stories, engaging in dialogue, and elevating voices through the power of audio. 

At WILPF, we have leaned into this new mode of communication with the creation of a number of new podcasts, including Think & ResistCaesura, and Political is Personal. Each takes a different approach to showcasing the work of the activists leading the feminist peace movement and shedding light on some of the most critical issues impacting peace and human security today. 

Havana Declaration Outlines Vision for Building Just World Economy

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Kenny Stancil in Common Dreams

Delegates to the Havana Congress on the New International Economic Order—a gathering organized  by the Progressive International and attended by more than 50 scholars and policymakers from 26 countries across all six inhabited continents—agreed over the weekend on a declaration that outlines a “common vision” for building an egalitarian and sustainable society out of the wreckage of five decades of neoliberal capitalism.


(Click on photo to enlarge)

“The crisis of the existing world system can either entrench inequalities,” the declaration asserts, or it can “embolden” popular movements throughout the Global South to “reclaim” their role as protagonists “in the construction of a new world order based on justice, equity, and peace.”

Delegates resolved to focus their initial efforts on strengthening the development and dissemination of lifesaving technologies in low-income nations.

This decision comes one year after Cuban officials announced, at a press conference convened by the Progressive International (PI), their plan to deliver 200 million homegrown  Covid-19 vaccine doses to impoverished countries abandoned by their wealthy counterparts and Big Pharma—along with tools to enable domestic production and expert support to improve distribution.

It also comes as Cuba assumes the presidency of the Group of 77 (G77), a bloc of 134 developing countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America where “the combined crises of food, energy, and environment” are escalating, PI noted.

“What is the common vision to guide the Global South out of this crisis?” the coalition asked. “What is the plan to win it? What is the New International Economic Order for the 21st century?”

“After two days of detailed discussions about how to transform our shared world, delegates agreed that a key priority must be to secure science and technology sovereignty,” PI general coordinator David Adler said  Sunday at the conclusion of the Havana Congress. “From pharmaceuticals to green tech, from digital currencies to microchips, too much of humanity is locked out of both benefiting from scientific advances and contributing to new ones. We will, as today’s declaration calls for, work to build ‘a planetary bloc led by the South and reinforced by the solidarities of the North’ to liberate knowledge and peoples.”

Speaking at the January 12 ceremony  during which Cuba ascended to the G77 presidency, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla emphasized the need for coordinated action across the Global South on science and tech, arguing that “scientific-technical development is today monopolized by a club of countries that monopolize most of the patents, technologies, research centers, and promote the drain of talent from our countries.”

The G77 Summit on Science, Technology, and Innovation, scheduled for September in Havana, seeks to “unite, complement each other, integrate our national capacities so as not to be relegated to future pandemics,” said Parrilla.

During his speech  on the first day of the Havana Congress, meanwhile, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis called for a new non-aligned movement to “end the legalized robbery of people and Earth fueling climate catastrophe.”

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

Questions related to this article:

How can ensure that development is equitable?

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

Read the full Havana Declaration on the New International Economic Order:

The Havana Congress,

Recalling the role of the Cuban Revolution in the struggle to unite the Southern nations of the world, and the spirit of the 1966 Havana Tricontinental Conference that convened peoples from Asia, Africa, and Latin America to chart a path to collective liberation in the face of severe global crises and sustained imperial subjugation;

Hearing the echoes of that history today, as crises of hunger, disease, and war once again overwhelm the world, compounded by a rapidly changing climate and the droughts, floods, and hurricanes that not only threaten to inflame conflicts between peoples, but also risk the extinction of humanity at large;

Celebrating the legacy of the anti-colonial struggle, and the victories won by combining a program of sovereign development at home, solidarity for national liberation abroad, and a strong Southern bloc to force concessions to its interests, culminating in the adoption of the U.N. Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order (NIEO);

Acknowledging that the project of decolonization remains incomplete, disrupted by concerted attacks on the unity of the South in the form of wars, coups, sanctions, structural adjustment, and the false promise that sovereign development might be won through integration into a hierarchical world system;

Emphasizing that the result has been the sustained divergence between North and South, characterized by the same dynamics that defined the international economic order five decades prior: the extraction of natural resources, the enclosure of ‘intellectual property,’ the plunder of structural adjustment, and the exclusion of the multilateral system;

Recognizing that despite these setbacks, the flame of Southern resistance did not die; that the pursuit of sovereign development has yielded unprecedented achievements—from mass literacy and universal healthcare to poverty alleviation and medical innovation—that enable a renewed campaign of Southern cooperation today;

Stressing that this potential for Southern unity is perceived as a threat to Northern powers, which seek once again to preserve their position in the hierarchy of the world system through mechanisms of economic exclusion, political coercion, and military aggression;

Seizing the opportunity of the present historical juncture, when the crisis of the existing world system can either entrench inequalities or embolden the call to reclaim Southern protagonism in the construction of a new world order based on justice, equity, and peace;

The Havana Congress calls to:

* Renew the Non-Aligned Movement: In the face of increasing geopolitical tensions born from a decisive shift in the global balance of power, the Congress calls to resist the siren song of the new Cold War and to renew the project of non-alignment, grounded in the principles of sovereignty, peace, and cooperation articulated at the 1955 Bandung Conference, 1961 Non-Aligned Conference, 1966 Tricontinental Conference, and beyond.


* Renovate the NIEO: To accompany the renewed non-aligned movement, the Congress calls to renovate the vision for a New International Economic Order fit for the 21st century; a vision that must draw inspiration from the original Declaration, but also account for the key issues—from digital technology to environmental breakdown—that define the present conditions for sovereign development; and to enshrine this vision in a new U.N. Declaration on the occasion of its 50th anniversary.


* Assert Southern Power: The Congress recognizes that economic liberation will not be granted, but must be seized. As the original call for a New International Economic Order was won through the exercise of collective power in the coordinated production of petroleum, so our vision today can only be realized through the collective action of the South and the formation of new and alternative institutions to share critical technology, tackle sovereign debt, drive development finance, face future pandemics together, as well as coordinate positions on international climate action and the protection of national sovereignty over the extraction of natural resources.


* Accompany Cuba in the G77: The Congress recognizes the critical opportunity afforded by Cuba’s presidency of the Group of 77 plus China to lead the South out of the present crisis and channel the lessons of its Revolution toward concrete proposals and ambitious initiatives to transform the broader international system.


* Build a Planetary Bloc: The Congress calls on all peoples and nations of the world to join in this struggle to definitively achieve the New International Economic Order; to build a planetary bloc led by the South and reinforced by the solidarities of the North, whose peoples recognize their obligation to resist the crimes committed in their names; and to bring the spirit of this Havana Congress into the communities that we call home.

What Steps Can the US Take to Foster Peace Talks in Ukraine?

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Medea Benjamin and Nicholas Davies in Common Dreams

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has just issued its 2023 Doomsday Clock statement, calling this “a time of unprecedented danger.” It has advanced the hands of the clock to 90 seconds to midnight, meaning that the world is closer to global catastrophe than ever before, mainly because the conflict in Ukraine has gravely increased the risk of nuclear war. This scientific assessment should wake up the world’s leaders to the urgent necessity of bringing the parties involved in the Ukraine war to the peace table.

So far, the debate about peace talks to resolve the conflict has revolved mostly around what Ukraine and Russia should be prepared to bring to the table in order to end the war and restore peace. However, given that this war is not just between Russia and Ukraine but is part of a “New Cold War” between Russia and the United States, it is not just Russia and Ukraine that must consider what they can bring to the table to end it. The United States must also consider what steps it can take to resolve its underlying conflict with Russia that led to this war in the first place.

The geopolitical crisis that set the stage for the war in Ukraine began with NATO’s broken promises not to expand into Eastern Europe, and was exacerbated by its declaration in 2008 that Ukraine would eventually join this primarily anti-Russian military alliance.

Then, in 2014, a U.S.-backed coup against Ukraine’s elected government caused the disintegration of Ukraine. Only 51% of Ukrainians surveyed told a Gallup poll that they recognized the legitimacy of the post-coup government, and large majorities in Crimea and in Donetsk and Luhansk provinces voted to secede from Ukraine. Crimea rejoined Russia, and the new Ukrainian government launched a civil war against the self-declared “People’s Republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The civil war killed an estimated 14,000 people, but the Minsk II accord in 2015 established a ceasefire and a buffer zone along the line of control, with 1,300 international OSCE ceasefire monitors and staff. The ceasefire line largely held for seven years, and casualties declined substantially from year to year. But the Ukrainian government never resolved the underlying political crisis by granting Donetsk and Luhansk the autonomous status it promised them in the Minsk II agreement.

Now former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande have admitted that Western leaders only agreed to the Minsk II accord to buy time, so that they could build up Ukraine’s armed forces to eventually recover Donetsk and Luhansk by force.

In March 2022, the month after the Russian invasion, ceasefire negotiations were held in Turkey. Russia and Ukraine drew up a 15-point “neutrality agreement,” which President Zelenskyy publicly presented and explained to his people in a national TV broadcast on March 27th. Russia agreed to withdraw from the territories it had occupied since the invasion in February in exchange for a Ukrainian commitment not to join NATO or host foreign military bases. That framework also included proposals for resolving the future of Crimea and Donbas.

But in April, Ukraine’s Western allies—the United States and United Kingdom in particular—refused to support the neutrality agreement and persuaded Ukraine to abandon its negotiations with Russia. U.S. and British officials said at the time that they saw a chance to “press” and “weaken” Russia, and that they wanted to make the most of that opportunity.

The U.S. and British governments’ unfortunate decision to torpedo Ukraine’s neutrality agreement in the second month of the war has led to a prolonged and devastating conflict with hundreds of thousands of casualties. Neither side can decisively defeat the other, and every new escalation increases the danger of “a major war between NATO and Russia,” as NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently Questions related to this article:

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

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Continued from left column)

For years, President Putin has complained about the large U.S. military footprint in Eastern and Central Europe. But in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. has actually beefed up its European military presence. It has increased the total deployments of American troops in Europe from 80,000 before February 2022 to roughly 100,000. It has sent warships to Spain, fighter jet squadrons to the United Kingdom, troops to Romania and the Baltics, and air defense systems to Germany and Italy.

Even before the Russian invasion, the U.S. began expanding its presence at a missile base in Romania that Russia has objected to ever since it went into operation in 2016. The U.S. military has also built what The New York Times called “a highly sensitive U.S. military installation” in Poland, just 100 miles from Russian territory. The bases in Poland and Romania have sophisticated radars to track hostile missiles and interceptor missiles to shoot them down.

The Russians worry that these installations can be repurposed to fire offensive or even nuclear missiles, and they are exactly what the 1972 ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty between the U.S. and the Soviet Union prohibited, until President George W. Bush withdrew from it in 2002.

While the Pentagon describes the two sites as defensive and pretends they are not directed at Russia, Putin has insisted that the bases are evidence of the threat posed by NATO’s eastward expansion.

Here are some steps the U.S. could consider putting on the table to start de-escalating these ever-rising tensions and improve the chances for a lasting ceasefire and peace agreement in Ukraine:

* The United States and other Western countries could support Ukrainian neutrality by agreeing to participate in the kind of security guarantees Ukraine and Russia agreed to in March, but which the U.S. and U.K. rejected.

* The U.S. and its NATO allies could let the Russians know at an early stage in negotiations that they are prepared to lift sanctions against Russia as part of a comprehensive peace agreement.

* The U.S. could agree to a significant reduction in the 100,000 troops it now has in Europe, and to removing its missiles from Romania and Poland and handing over those bases to their respective nations.

* The United States could commit to working with Russia on an agreement to resume mutual reductions in their nuclear arsenals, and to suspend both nations’ current plans to build even more dangerous weapons. They could also restore the Treaty on Open Skies, from which the United States withdrew in 2020, so that both sides can verify that the other is removing and dismantling the weapons they agree to eliminate.

* The United States could open a discussion on the removal of its nuclear weapons from the five European countries where they are presently deployed: Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Turkey.

If the United States is willing to put these policy changes on the table in negotiations with Russia, it will make it easier for Russia and Ukraine to reach a mutually acceptable ceasefire agreement, and help to ensure that the peace they negotiate will be stable and lasting.

De-escalating the Cold War with Russia would give Russia a tangible gain to show its citizens as it retreats from Ukraine. It would also allow the United States to reduce its military spending and enable European countries to take charge of their own security, as most of their people want.

U.S.-Russia negotiations will not be easy, but a genuine commitment to resolve differences will create a new context in which each step can be taken with greater confidence as the peacemaking process builds its own momentum.

Most of the people of the world would breathe a sigh of relief to see progress towards ending the war in Ukraine, and to see the United States and Russia working together to reduce the existential dangers of their militarism and hostility. This should lead to improved international cooperation on other serious crises facing the world in this century—and may even start to turn back the hands of the Doomsday Clock by making the world a safer place for us all.

Authors

Medea Benjamin is co-founder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace. She is the co-author, with Nicolas J.S. Davies, of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, available from OR Books in November 2022.

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist and a researcher with CODEPINK. He is the co-author, with Medea Benjamin, of War in Ukraine: