Category Archives: global

Videoconference November 14 for a Culture of Peace Revolution

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

A press release from Uniting for Peace

On 14th November 2024, Uniting for Peace is hosting a conference on Culture of Peace. A panel of distinguished speakers will be giving their contribution. When all the speakers have spoken then we open up the Q/A which goes on for an hour. Free Online Event, All Welcome to attend.

Title: Why We Fight Wars? Can a Culture of Peace Revolution Work Towards Its End?


Date: Thursday, 14 November 2024
Time: 18:00 – 20:00 (UK time)


To register: https://cultureofpeace2024.eventbrite.co.uk/


Direct link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/3482765417?pwd=dXI1WXJRUS9TbHowWVhVNDVMRlR5QT09&omn=89125388863


Meeting ID: 348 276 5417


Passcode: 2022

(Press release continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

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

(Press release continued from left column)

Chair – Rita Payne, President Emeritus, Commonwealth Journalists Association


Speakers:


Federico Mayor Zaragoza, Former Director-General of UNESCO, Founder, Fundación Cultura de Paz and Author, The World Ahead: Our Future in the Making


Vijay Mehta, Chair, Uniting for Peace, Author, How Not To Go To War


David Adams, Former UNESCO Director, Unit for the International Year for the Culture of Peace, Coordinator, The Culture of Peace News Network


John Gittings, Former The Guardian Journalist Specialised on China and East Asia, Author, The Glorious Art of Peace


Rivera Sun, Editor, Nonviolence News, Program Coordinator for Campaign Nonviolence, Author, The Dandelion Insurrection


Ken Butigan, Senior Professional Lecturer in the Peace, Justice and Conflict Studies Program, DePaul University, Chicago USA

Blurb of the conference is below:

United Nations has declared the official theme for this year 2024 International Day of Peace as Cultivating a Culture of Peace. The pertinent question is: Is war a necessary evil or an organised crime to kill our own human species? Either way, war kills people bringing untold suffering and misery. Also, it’s a waste of vital resources which can be utilised for healthcare, education, jobs and boosting the growth of the economy. If the later argument is valid, then can we replace war by implementing Culture of Peace.

– – – – – –

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.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, global

Announcement of Finalists World Future Policy Award 2024 on Peace and Future Generations

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

A press release from World Future Council (slightly abridged)

The World Future Council is delighted to announce 12 exceptional finalists for the 2024 World Future Policy Award on Peace and Future Generations.

From 47 nominations across 29 countries, our distinguished panel of international experts has selected these finalists for their outstanding contributions to sustainable peacebuilding and the well-being of both present and future generations.

The five winners will be revealed and honoured at our high-level award ceremony on 27 November 2024 at the Maison de la Paix in Geneva.

The World Future Policy Award celebrates top policy solutions for current and future generations. We raise global awareness of exemplary laws and policies, accelerating policy action towards a common future where every person lives in dignity on a healthy, sustainable planet. As the world’s premier policy prize, we showcase inspiring and effective policies, not individuals, on the international stage. Each year, we focus on one topic where progress is particularly urgent and receive nominations from across the globe. This year’s topic is Peace and Future Generations.

Enduring peace is perhaps the most critical component for the sustainable development of societies and the protection of both people and the planet. Our global community is in desperate need of creative and inclusive policy solutions at all levels to resolve conflict, prevent war, and foster a culture of peace. The good news is, these policies exist!

Finalists (in alphabetical order)

Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy (2017)

Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP), focuses on promoting gender equality and empowering women and girls. Its feminist approach addresses systemic gender inequalities, engages men and boys, and fosters inclusive participation. The policy has been implemented in countries like Afghanistan (supporting women’s rights and economic empowerment), Iraq (establishing centres for survivors of sexual violence), Senegal (empowering women in agriculture), and Cambodia (improving food security through climate-resilient agriculture). The FIAP’s influence extends to international development policies, contributing to sustainable peace and security initiatives. .

Costa Rica’s Abolition of the Army (1948) and Affirmation of Active Neutrality (1983 and 2014)

Costa Rica abolished its army in 1948, embedding this in the Constitution (Article 12), followed by the Proclamation of Active, Unarmed, and Perpetual Neutrality in 1983 and the Proclamation of Peace as a Human Right and of Costa Rica as a Neutral Country in 2014. These milestones removed military influence from politics, promoted international peace, and directed resources to social and economic development.. .

Finland’s Women, Peace and Security National Action Plan (2018-2021)

Finland’s third National Action Plan (NAP) on Women, Peace, and Security builds on previous plans to enhance gender equality in conflict prevention and peacebuilding. It prioritises women’s participation in peace processes, mediation, gender mainstreaming in security sectors, and the protection of women and girls in conflict zones, while addressing new global security challenges. The plan exemplifies Finland’s leadership in the international WPS agenda, with strong civil society involvement ensuring an inclusive and adaptable approach. . . .

The Great Law of Peace of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy (Kaianere’ko:wa) (12th/13th Century- ongoing)

The Great Law of Peace, established in the 12th or 13th century, united the Haudenosaunee nations in what is now New York and Canada under a governance system prioritising peace, consensus decision-making, and sustainability. Key features include gender equity through the role of Clan Mothers and a commitment to long-term environmental stewardship. Its influence extended beyond its region, contributing to modern democratic principles and treaty law. . . .

Kauswagan – From Arms to Farms Program (Phillippines) (2010)

Launched in 2010 in Kauswagan, Philippines, the “From Arms to Farms” program reintegrates former combatants through sustainable agriculture, promoting peace between Christian and Muslim communities. By focusing on organic farming and community-led development, the program has transformed conflict zones into peaceful, productive areas. The program significantly reduced poverty from 80% in 2010 to 9.1 % in 2020, increasing food security, while enhancing social cohesion.

Mayor Rommel C. Arnado led consultations and dialogues to address concerns and build trust, encouraging all parties to embrace the program’s potential for positive change. This innovative, effective and holistic approach serves as an exemplary model for peacebuilding initiatives and sustainable development in conflict-affected areas.

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

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

(Article continued from left column)

The Moriori Peace Covenant (Nunuku’s Law) (16th Century – ongoing)

The Moriori Peace Covenant (Nunuku’s Law) is an extraordinary example of a long-standing commitment to peace, nonviolence, and future generations. Established in the 16th century, it prohibits violence among the indigenous Moriori of Rēkohu (Chatham Islands, New Zealand). Despite facing immense aggression and discrimination from Māori tribes Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama, and later European settlers, the Moriori upheld their commitment to non-violence.Though this led to tragic losses, the Covenant became a powerful symbol of resilience ad integrity. . .

The Nigerian National Action Plan on Youth, Peace and Security (NNAPYPS) (2021)

The Nigerian National Action Plan on Youth, Peace, and Security (NNAPYPS) was developed in response to UN Security Council Resolution 2250, making Nigeria the first African country and second globally to adopt such a policy. It seeks to engage youth in peacebuilding and conflict prevention, focusing on vulnerabilities like unemployment and empowering young people as peacebuilders. Despite contextual challenges, NNAPYPS shows great potential and has already improved youth engagement and representation, with incremental replication at the state level.
. . .

Peace Education – Executive Order No. 570: Institutionalising Peace Education in Basic Education and Teacher Education (2006)

Executive Order No. 570, implemented in the Philippines, institutionalises peace education in basic and teacher education. Its goal is to promote a culture of peace by equipping students and educators with conflict resolution and nonviolent skills. The policy integrates peace education into the formal curriculum and fosters collaboration among government agencies, NGOs, schools and universities. Key outcomes include reduced school violence and the empowerment of educators and students to address the root causes of conflict, contributing to national unity and social cohesion. . . .

Rwanda Peace Education Programme (2013)

Rwanda’s Peace Education Programme (RPEP) aims to promote peace, social cohesion, and reconciliation following the 1994 genocide. It integrates Peace and Values Education into the national curriculum, focusing on empathy, critical thinking, and conflict prevention. The programme uniquely employs a Competence-Based Curriculum (CBC) and narrativebased teaching, using survivor testimonies to deepen understanding of peacebuilding. Key outcomes include improved social cohesion and a stronger culture of reconciliation, positioning the programme as a strong model for peace education. . .

Supporting Bougainvillean-Owned Peace: The New Zealand-Led Pacific Partnership for Peace Monitoring and Mediation (1997-1998)

The Bougainville peace process is a uniquely successful example of regionally supported, locally led conflict resolution. The New Zealand-led Pacific Partnership for Peace (1997-1998) played a key role in this process after nearly a decade of civil war. The initiative’s main components, the Burnham Talks and the Truce Monitoring Group, used a ‘light intervention’ approach characterised by inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, unarmed truce monitoring, and diplomacy. This policy contributed to a sustainable, locally-led ceasefire and stabilisation of the conflict. . . .

Switzerland’s Active Neutrality Policy (1815/1848/1907)

Switzerland’s Active Neutrality Policy, declared in 1815 and embedded in the Swiss Constitution in 1848, was codified in international law through the Hague Conventions of 1907. Its aim is to safeguard Switzerland’s independence and security by avoiding military involvement in wars while actively promoting global peace through diplomacy and humanitarian aid. This blend of military neutrality with diplomatic engagement has led to Switzerland’s leadership in the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), mediation in international conflicts, and providing humanitarian aid and refuge during crises. Over time, it has strengthened Switzerland’s stability, security, and role in global peacebuilding.

Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015

The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is a landmark policy designed to promote sustainable development across all public bodies in Wales. Its core aim is to enhance the economic, social, environmental, and cultural well-being of Wales, ensuring that present decisions do not compromise future generations. The Act mandates legal accountability for public bodies and prioritises community engagement at all levels, fostering economic resilience, environmental preservation, and social cohesion.

“At a time when we are experiencing the highest number and intensity of armed conflicts this century, it is vital to find, analyse and learn from successful approaches in conflict resolution and peace-building. We are excited to have received a high number of nominations of successful policies from a wide variety of places around the world. We can be inspired by these to build a more peaceful world for current and future generations. “— Alyn Ware, Spokesperson for Peace and Disarmament, World Future Council & Jury Member, 2024 World Future Polic

– – – – – –

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.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, global

16th BRICS Summit adopts Kazan Declaration

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article from United News of India

The 16th BRICS Summit saw the leaders adopt the Kazan Declaration: “Strengthening Multilateralism For Just Global Development And Security” on Wednesday (October 23).

(Editor’s note: Click here for the full text of the Kazan Declaration as published by the Kremlin. In case this becomes unavailable, the full text may be found here as published by the government of India. See below for list of countries attending the Summit.)

The leaders reiterated the importance of further enhancing BRICS solidarity and cooperation based on their mutual interests and key priorities and further strengthening our strategic partnership.

Screenshot

They reaffirmed their commitment to the BRICS spirit of mutual respect and understanding, sovereign equality, solidarity, democracy, openness, inclusiveness, collaboration and consensus.

“As we build upon 16 years of BRICS Summits, we further commit ourselves to strengthening cooperation in the expanded BRICS under the three pillars of political and security, economic and financial, cultural and people-to-people cooperation and to enhancing our strategic partnership for the benefit of our people through the promotion of peace, a more representative, fairer international order, a reinvigorated and reformed multilateral system, sustainable development and inclusive growth.”

Under the head Need for reform of global institutions, it said:

The Bretton Woods international financial system’s institutions, including the World Trade Organization, should be reformed to better represent developing countries’ interests.

BRICS opposes “unilateral, prohibitive, discriminatory and protectionist” measures taken under the pretext of fighting global climate change, including carbon emissions adjustment mechanisms and taxes.

BRICS supports comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including the Security Council, to make it more representative, and notes its centrality in the system of relations between nations.

Under New initiatives, it said:

BRICS members recognize the potential of information and communication technologies in bridging the digital divide between nations to aid socio-economic development.

BRICS intends to transform the New Development bank to serve the needs of the 21st century.

BRICS supports the creation of a New Technology Platform to strengthen development cooperation, including by creating high-tech products using domestic technological potential to fuel ” sustainable and inclusive”growth.

The organization agrees to explore the creation of an independent cross-border settlement and depository infrastructure known as BRICS Clear.

BRICS is ready to strengthen cooperation to develop medicines, including vaccines and nuclear medicine projects.

BRICS welcomes the creation a united transport and logistics platform.

The declaration supports Russia’s proposal to create a Grain Exchange to “promote rules-based trade in agricultural products and fertilizers and minimize disruptions.”

(Article continued in the right column)

Question for this article:

What is the contribution of BRICS to sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

Under Expanding cooperation:

The declaration welcomes the expanded use of national currencies for transactions between BRICS members and their trade partners.

The document highlights the importance of expanding cooperation based on common interests and further building up strategic partnerships among BRICS members, and continuing to implement the bloc’s Economic Partnership Strategy.

The bloc welcomes interest shown by countries of the Global South toward BRICS, and calls for greater participation of the least developed nations, especially in Africa, in global processes.

Under Opposing global crises:

The document “condemns”the illegal use of discriminatory and politically motivated sanctions and highlights their negative impact on the world economy.

BRICS is opposed to the deployment of weapons in outer space, and supports strengthening the global non-proliferation and disarmament regimes, and implementing a Security Council resolution on measures to prevent WMDs from falling into the hands of terrorists. It calls for strengthened ties between law enforcement to aid in the fight against narcotics.

Bloc members outlined their positions on the Ukrainian crisis, and took note of proposals for mediation to bring the conflict to a conclusion through negotiations.

BRICS expressed support for Palestine’s full-fledged membership in the UN.

The declaration condemns Israel’s attack on UN employees in Lebanon, and the pager terror attack of September 17.

BRICS welcomes the creation of a Haitian Transitional Presidential Council and electoral council to resolve the crisis plaguing the Caribbean nation.

BRICS expresses concern over the escalating violence and worsening humanitarian situation in Sudan, and called for a ceasefire.

The declaration criticizes the politicization of human rights, and double standards in this area.

It also expressed opposition to all forms of discrimination in sports.

– – –

Editor’s note: A press survey by CPNN found the following participation by countries in the Kazan conference.

Heads of state came from 27 countries representing almost half of the world’s economy. Chief among them were the heads of state from the five original BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The President of Brazil spoke by videoconference and was represented in person by the foreign minister. Heads of state also came from all of the BRICS members added last year, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and United Arab Emirates.

The summit decided to invite an additional 13 countries as “partner states”. Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkey and Vietnam sent their head of state to Kazan. Cuba, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand were represented by their foreign minister, or in the case of Malaysia, the minister of the economy. Only Nigeria, and Uganda were not present.  

Eleven other countries sent their heads of state: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Congo, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mauritania, Mongolia, Palestine, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Venezuela.

To complete the list of the 37 countries at Kazan, four were represented at the ministerial level: Bangladesh, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka and Serbia.

And to complete the list of the 41 dignitaries in the group photograph, there was the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, the head of the New Development Bank, Dilma Rousseff, the Secretary-General of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the Chair of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission.

– – – – – –

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.

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

UN Women Leaders Network to convene a diverse group of women leaders worldwide to advance women’s rights and leadership

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from UN Women

The UN Women Leaders Network was launched this week on the sidelines of the 79th UN General Assembly. It is UN Women’s first permanent network of its kind, composed of intergenerational and intersectional women leaders, and its members represent the change needed in the traditional image of leadership today.

The network includes both emerging and more established leaders across ages, regions, and professions. The network will work together to promote the increase and advancement of women in leadership and decision-making spaces worldwide, and functions as a platform to a diverse group of women leaders to discuss and exchange ideas, solutions and experiences as leaders, community-builders and decision-makers.

Chaired by the Executive Director of UN Women, Sima Sami Bahous, and created in partnership with the Government of Iceland, the UN Foundation, and the Council of Women World Leaders, the network will operate in support of UN Women’s work on women’s leadership. As the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action approaches in 2025, and world leaders are being called on to recommit to gender equality and women’s rights and empowerment, the network will serve as champions for diversity in leadership.

(Article continues in right column.)

Questions related to this article:

Does the UN advance equality for women?

(Article continued from left column.)

The network includes leaders such as:

Amanda Nguyen, CEO and Founder, Rise;
Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, President of Mauritius (2015 – 2018);
Aya Chebbi, Former African Union Special Envoy on Youth and
      Founder of Nala Feminist Collective;
Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank;
Hibaaq Osman, Founder and Chairperson, ThinkTank for Arab Women,
      the Dignity Fund, Karama and the Centre for the Strategic Initiatives of Women;
Janet Mbugua, Author, Advocate and Founder, Inua Dada Foundation;
Joyce Banda, President of Malawi (2012 – 2014);
Julia Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia (2010 – 2013);
Julieta Martinez, Climate Justice and Gender Equality Youth Activist;
Kathleen Hanna, Musician, Author and Feminist Activist;
Kimberlé Crenshaw, Civil Rights Advocate, Scholar and Co-Founder
      and Executive Director, African American Policy Forum;
Leymah Gbowee, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, 2011;
Melanne Verveer, Executive Director, Georgetown Institute of
         Women, Peace and Security, GeorgetownUniversity;
Roxane Gay, Author, Professor and Advocate;
Tarja Halonen, President of Finland (2000 – 2012).

A full list of the current leaders can be found here.

Once fully mobilized, the network will consist of a group of 100 women leaders.

– – – – – –

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.

global, United Nations, WOMEN'S EQUALITY,

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?

(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

English bulletin October 1, 2024

. INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEACE-2024 .

Expressed in Russian or Ukrainian, English or French, Japanese or Hindi, Arab or Spanish, Italian or Portuguese, the message is the same. The people of the world want peace! For the International day of Peace, more than 800 events in these languages may be found on the Internet, and we have published excerpts from them in the pages of CPNN last week. This year the official United Nations slogan is “Cultivating a Culture of Peace.”

The greatest number, 391 or almost half of the actions, càme from Western Europe. Expressed mostly in French and organized for the most part by the Mouvement de la Paix and militant trade unions, there were rallies bearing the rainbow flag of peace in over half of the more than 100 departments of France. Expressed mostly in Italian, there were events for the International Day of Peace in 44 cities and towns of Italy, led by the annual peace march of Assisi that drew marchers from many other cities. In Belgium, 189 cities and towns hung the rainbow banner of peace from their public buildings. In Portugal, dozens of towns and schools hung white cloth in their windows to express their desire for peace. Spain and the United Kingdom also saw many actions. “If you want peace, prepare peace” was a frequent slogan.

In North America, there were 151 actions for the day of peace in 44 of the 50 states of the United States, with the most in California and Florida. City-wide celebrations took place in cities such as San Francisco, Chicago and Boston. In San Francisco the slogan was “You are a pathway to peace. Everyone is a pathway to peace.” School, universities and churches organized a great variety of actions to celebrate the day. While in Canada, there were events in 6 of the 10 provinces as well as an official declaration by the Prime Minister: “This week, as the UN General Assembly begins in New York City, let’s recommit ourselves to working together to build a better, safer, and more peaceful world.”

Despite the devastation of the war and the fact that it is illegal to mention it in Russia, there were 32 celebrations published on the Internet from Ukraine and 30 from Russia. While calling for peace, many of the actions emphasized support for their side of the war. In Moscow, where people have been sent to prison because they called for peace, many brought flowers and paper doves to put on the sculpture named “We demand peace!”. In the Ukraine, there were celebrations calling for peace that took place in air raid shelters during bombardments. As usual where it was possible, in many libraries and schools, children made paper doves and released colored balloons to mark the day. Perhaps most ironic was the article from Moldova where a school celebration was criticized for flying the rainbow flag of peace, because the rainbow flag can also be interpreted as support for homosexual rights.

There were 23 actions in 13 Arab and Middle Eastern countries, mostly reported in Arabic. Some of them emphasized the role of women for peace. The Syrian Women’s Council in Manbij Canton organized a dialogue seminar on the International Day of Peace, stressing the necessity of resolving the Syrian crisis and establishing peace there. In Aden, Yemen, An event was held with the participation of elite female cadres and members of the Women’s Solidarity Network, with discussions about the status of women and the importance of reflecting their priorities and needs in the Beijing Report.

In Asia and Pacific, there were 64 events in 14 countries, with the most published in Japanese and Hindi. In Japan, The organization “Wa Project TAISHI,” mobilized calligraphy clubs and 27 calligraphers from 49 schools nationwide to dedicate calliography messages of peace to Gokoku shrines around the country. At a conference in Mumbai sponsored by the International Institute for Peace through Tourism, Ajay Prakash its new president, spoke eloquently on the power of Tourism to connect people across all boundaries of race, religion or nationality. In Nanjing, China, Chinese and foreign young people from 11 countries gathered to sing songs of peace and sow purple gold grass seeds which symbolize peace. One student said: “It is very meaningful to sow these seeds with my own hands. I hope that when the Purple Grass flowers bloom in March next year, people can see these flowers and remember the history behind them.”

In Latin America and the Caribbean there were 59 actions in 19 countries, led by Argentina with 17 and Mexico with 16. In Nueva Leon, Mexico, The Nobel Peace Prize Laureates World Summit was timed to coincide with the International Day of Peace. 18 Nobel Peace Prize winners participated, as well as 1,200 young people from more than 70 universities across the country. vIn Mexico, the actions were especially emotions in the face of the violence that is tearing the country apart. The demonstration in Culiacán called on people not to normalize or accept the conditions of violence and fear that persist in the city, which have left more than 60 murders and more than 70 forced disappearances. In Colombia, events were dedicated to reconciliation and consolidation of the Peace Accords.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, there were 43 actions in 26 countries for the International Day of Peace. The official remarks of the African Union recognized the important role of the Biennale of Luanda. , the Pan-African Forum for the Culture of Peace. This year there was considerable participation by the military in African countries. In Nigeria, it was organized by the Security and Civil Defence Corps. In Ghana, it was organized by the Ghana Armed Forces at Airforce Base Takoradi. In Niger, it was organized by the by the High Authority for the Consolidation of Peace. In Gabon, the celebration took place in the stadium of the national gendarmerie. In Burkhina Faso the Ministry of Justice called for a return to endogenous values for the construction of peace and tolerance.

Among the many virtual events for the International Day of Peace, we may mention the following:
Dancing for Peace
Medicine for the Culture of War
Conference: Resisting the USA’s Military Empire
Songs for World Peace
Unite4Peace Worldwide Broadcast

The total number of actions this year was 834. This is greater than last year’s 942 if one adds the 153 new Montessori schools counted last year but no longer available on the Internet this year.

GLOBAL



What has happened this year: International Day of Peace

UNITED STATES AND CANADA



United States and Canada: International Day of Peace

EUROPE



Europe: International Day of Peace

ASIA AND PACIFIC



Asia and Pacific: International Day of Peace
  

EX-SOVIET COUNTRIES



Ex-Soviet Countries: International Day of Peace

ARAB STATES AND MIDDLE EAST



Arab States And Middle East: International Day of Peace

LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN



Latin America and Caribbean: International Day of Peace

AFRICA



Africa: International Day of Peace
global,

What has happened this year (2024) for the International Day of Peace

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION
This year we give links to 391 actions carried out in 16 countries of Western Europe and 84 in 7 countries that were once part of the Soviet Union. We link to 166 actions in 6 Canadian provinces and 44 of the 50 states of the United States. There are 64 actions cited in 14 countries of Asia and the Pacific, 59 from 19 Latin American and Caribbean countries, 43 from 26 African countries, and 23 from 13 Arab and Middle Eastern countries. See the CPNN bulletin for October for a synopsis.

Detailed data may be found on the following CPNN articles:

Europe: International Day of Peace

Ex-Soviet Countries: International Day of Peace

United States and Canada: International Day of Peace

Asia and Pacific: International Day of Peace

Arab and Middle Eastern States: International Day of Peace

Latin America and Caribbean: International Day of Peace

Africa: International Day of Peace

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global

For an Urgent change in Global Governance

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article by Federico Mayor Zaragoza* in Other News (translation by CPNN)

“No challenge is beyond the creative capacity of the human species.”
J. F. Kennedy, June 1963.

A turning point has arrived where situations of an irreversible nature have been reached. We must ensure that circumstances do not occur that inevitably require new solutions. And that despair does not spread. A citizenry that is aware of its equal dignity and capable of expressing itself that must, at last, put into practice the lucid Charter of the United Nations: “We, the peoples… have resolved to spare succeeding generations the horror of war.” War and other “horrors,” such as the deterioration of the environment and, therefore, of the habitability of planet Earth.

The urgent time has come to act, to move from being impassive spectators of what happens to being very diligent actors. Not one more day of “silent listeners.” It is time for action, not to be simple receivers of frequently biased information, but actors who participate, each in our own field, keeping in mind Burke’s maxim: “No one makes a greater mistake than he who does nothing because he thinks he could do only very little.” Every seed, without exception, is necessary. Every grain of sand. Every drop.

There are moments, very few, when suddenly change is possible. The radical change that is required can only be imagined as the result of a great global clamor of “We, the peoples”, finally capable, with a resolute attitude, of carrying out the transition from force to words, from imposition to joint reflection.

It is necessary and urgent that many voices be mobilized, aware that now – equal in dignity and capable of participating – we must act without further delay. Yes: now, for the first time in history, “We, the peoples…” can achieve the removal of the veto in the United Nations … and in the European Union, also disqualified from decision-making by the requirement of “unanimity”, the antithesis of democracy.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

It is imperative to address the great challenges on a global scale, before their solution is no longer possible. The major priorities of food, access to drinking water, quality health services, care for the environment, education, emigration… are challenges to which we must respond together.

Inventing the future. Through modern technology, the best expression of the voice of the people, of solidarity at a global level, can take place. Civil society now has, in addition to its undeniable leading role in solidarity aid, the possibility of making itself heard.

The human species yearns for, dreams of, a “new beginning”, where instead of preparing for war, it achieves peace by listening, understanding, uniting voices and efforts.

In 79 years (since 1945) it has NOT been possible to apply the UN Charter, to fulfill the will of “We, the peoples…”, always silenced by the veto, by plutocratic and supremacist governance. It was Eisenhower, the President of the United States, who had the courage, on January 20, 1961, to convey to his successor, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and to the American people, that it was not the president who really ruled in America, but the “military-industrial complex.” From President Wilson’s creation of the League of Nations at the end of the First World War to Roosevelt’s founding of the United Nations, the opportunities for the transition of the power of the word have progressively faded. Now, as I continue to stress the time has come for “We, the peoples…”

And what must we do immediately, thinking of future generations? It is not a question of economic, political, social dispositions… It is, above all, a question of inventing a different future. In this regard, I will never forget what Professor Hans Krebs, Nobel Prize winner in Biochemistry, told me in his Oxford laboratory: “The solution is not in these sophisticated instruments, nor in the collection of data… The solution is to think what no one has thought before”… Yes: each human being, is unique and capable of creating, our hope.

Let us give wings to the human species so that, without vetoes, it may act democratically for the great transition from the force to the word.

The world is entering a new era. We have many things to preserve for the future and many others to change decisively. At last, the people. At last, the voice of the people. At last, citizen power. At last, the word and not the force. A culture of peace and never again a culture of war.

– – – –

*Federico Mayor Zaragoza (Barcelona, ​​1934) Doctor in Pharmacy from the Complutense University of Madrid (1958), has been a professor at different Spanish universities and has held numerous political positions, including that of Minister of Education and Science (1981-82). Between 1987 and 1999 he was Director General of UNESCO. He is currently President of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global

UN General Assembly demands Israel end ‘unlawful presence’ in Occupied Palestinian Territory

. . HUMAN RIGHTS . .

An article from the United Nations

The United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday [September 18] voted overwhelmingly to adopt a resolution that demands that Israel “brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence” in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

With a recorded vote of 124 nations in favour, 14 against, and 43 abstentions, the resolution calls for Israel to comply with international law and withdraw its military forces, immediately cease all new settlement activity, evacuate all settlers from occupied land, and dismantle parts of the separation wall it constructed inside the occupied West Bank.

[Editor’s note: Click here for a full listing of how the countries voted.]


UN Photo/Evan Schneider Result of the General Assembly vote on a draft resolution on the ICJ advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

The General Assembly further demanded that Israel return land and other “immovable property”, as well as all assets seized since the occupation began in 1967, and all cultural property and assets taken from Palestinians and Palestinian institutions.

The resolution also demands Israel allow all Palestinians displaced during the occupation to return to their place of origin and make reparation for the damage caused by its occupation.

The resolution stems from the advisory opinion  issued by the International Court of Justice  (ICJ) in July, in which the Court declared that Israel’s continued presence in the Territory “is unlawful”, and that “all States are under an obligation not to recognize” the decades-long occupation.

Click here for the full text of the resolution  and here for our live coverage of the meeting.

Threat to peace and security

The Assembly “strongly deplored the continued and total disregard and breaches” by the Government of Israel of its obligations under the UN Charter, international law and UN resolutions, stressing that such breaches “seriously threaten” regional and international peace and security.

It also recognized that Israel “must be held to account for any violations” of international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including of international humanitarian and human rights laws.

The text says Israel “must bear the legal consequences of all its internationally wrongful acts, including by making reparation for the injury, including any damage, caused by such acts.”

The General Assembly highlighted the need for the establishment of an international mechanism for reparations to address damage, loss, or injury caused by Israel’s actions.

It also called for creating an international register of damage caused, to document evidence and related claims.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

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

How can a culture of peace be established in the Middle East?

(continued from left column)

International conference

The resolution also includes a decision to convene an international conference during the Assembly’s current session to implement UN resolutions pertaining to the question of Palestine and the two-State solution for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.

Additionally, the Assembly requested the UN Secretary-General to present proposals for a mechanism to follow up on Israel’s violations of article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, as identified by the ICJ.

Article 3 refers to racial segregation and apartheid and the undertaking by International Convention’s States Parties to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of this nature in territories under their jurisdiction.

Call on States

In its resolution, the General Assembly called upon all UN Member States to comply with their obligations under international law and take concrete steps to address Israel’s ongoing presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

The Assembly urged States to refrain from recognizing Israel’s presence in the Territory as lawful and to ensure that they do not provide aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the occupation. This includes taking measures to prevent their nationals, companies, and entities under their jurisdiction from engaging in activities that support or sustain Israel’s occupation.

Additionally, the Assembly called on States to cease importing products originating from Israeli settlements and to halt the transfer of arms, munitions, and related equipment to Israel in cases where there are reasonable grounds to suspect they may be used in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Moreover, the resolution urged States to implement sanctions, such as travel bans and asset freezes, against individuals and entities involved in maintaining Israel’s unlawful presence in the Territory. This includes addressing issues related to settler violence and ensuring that those engaged in these activities face legal and financial consequences.
Adjournment

Finally, the Assembly temporarily adjourned its tenth emergency special session and authorized the President of the General Assembly to reconvene the session upon request from Member States.

The special session is a continuation of the tenth emergency special session of the General Assembly that last met in May amid the ongoing crisis in Gaza, during which it adopted a resolution , laying out additional rights for the State of Palestine’s participation in Assembly meetings.

That resolution did not grant Palestine the right to vote or put forward its candidature to UN Main Organs such as the Security Council or the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

It also did not confer membership to the State of Palestine, which requires a specific recommendation from the Security Council.

– – – – – –

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.

global, HUMAN RIGHTS, United Nations,

Secretary-General’s remarks to the UN Peace Bell Ceremony

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from the United Nations

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,
 
We come together today to sound the call for peace. 

Here at the United Nations, peace is our raison d’être, our guiding light, and our founding creed. 


Secretary-General António Guterres rings the Peace Bell during the ceremony in observance of the International Day of Peace. PHOTO:UN/Cia Pak

Yet peace is under threat.

War is on the march. 

From the Middle East, to Sudan, Ukraine, and beyond, we see bullets and bombs maim and kill; bodies piled high; populations traumatised; and buildings reduced to rubble.  

Meanwhile, the foundations of a peaceful world are fracturing. 

Geo-political divisions are widening. 

Inequalities are growing. 

Disinformation is fanning the flames of hate. 

New technologies are being weaponised with no guardrails. 

And the climate crisis is fuelling instability: depleting resources, and forcing people from their homes. 

International institutions must be better positioned to respond. 

(continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:

What is happening this year (2024) for the International Day of Peace?

(continued from left column)

And we have a chance for change. 

Later this month, at the Summit of the Future, we can begin the process of reform and revitalisation: 

By adapting multilateral institutions to today’s reality, instead of the reality of the Second World War; 

By advancing a New Agenda for Peace;

By revitalising the Sustainable Development Goals; 

By protecting human rights;  

By tackling the point where climate and security meet;

By agreeing guardrails on new technologies in conflict; 

By defending and advancing gender equality; 

By combatting racism and discrimination;

And by securing full and meaningful participation in civic life and peacebuilding –particularly young people, women and girls, and other historically marginalised communities. 

In short, we must “cultivate a culture of peace.”

That is the theme of this year’s International Day of Peace. 

And it is a cause all us devotees of peace and justice must rally behind, this day and everyday – through the Summit of the Future and beyond. 

That is the call we make today. 

May it ring out around the world.  

Before I sound the peace bell, please join me in a moment of silence to reflect on the meaning and necessity of peace – and the way in which each of us can nurture the conditions needed for a peaceful world to flourish.

– – – – – –

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.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,