Category Archives: East Asia

Peace in Wellington, New Zealand

.. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION ..

by Celia Wade-Brown, Mayor of Wellington, in Wellington Peace Newsletter

When Wellington became a Nuclear Free capital in 1982, I was protesting against nuclear missiles at Greenham Common in the UK. Given my interest in ending nuclear warfare, it’s a real pleasure to write this first annual newsletter as Wellington’s Mayor for Peace

Wellington

Wellington City has been a member of Mayors for Peace since 1988. Mayors for Peace started in Japan, there are now 6,940 cities in 161 countries around the world who are part of Mayors for Peace. The Mayors for Peace 2020 Vision Campaign pushes for a nuclear-weapon-free world by the year 2020.

The Mayor of Hiroshima, Matsui Kazumi, invited me to become an Executive Leader of Mayors for Peace. The other thirty New Zealand Mayors for Peace supported me taking up this coordinating role. This newsletter is one outcome.

Wellington City Council endorsed the invitation and recognised that, internationally, Mayors for Peace “strive to raise international public awareness regarding the need to abolish nuclear weapons and contribute to the realisation of genuine and lasting world peace.”

This year’s Wellington Women’s Walk for Peace theme was, “Peace is everyone’s responsibility.” It was an opportunity for women of all ethnicities and beliefs to send a message to the rest of the world that we care about peace.

Peace is something that everyone here has a part in creating. It is noisy, protest-filled and democratic. It is full of debate and differing opinions. From this active view of peace, we can build collective wisdom, common action and collaboration against nuclear weapons. There are many excellent organisations and individuals acting in the interests of peace in New Zealand. Coordinating communication, events and conferences has been busy in 2015.

I also called on cities around the world to join with me in sending a simple post of a “wave goodbye to nuclear weapons” on social media on 27 April 2015 as part of Global Wave 2015.

Our pledge, as Mayors for Peace, is to engage our constituencies and cooperate in eliminating nuclear weapons. The Council focuses on supporting a number of peace events, especially International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Hiroshima Day, International Peace Day and Gandhi’s birthday, the International Day of Non-Violence.

There is a strong link between peace and resilience and I’m delighted Wellington was chosen to be part of the Rockefeller 100 Resilient Cities. Resilience is about social cohesion, neighbourhood connections and access to resources as well as physical infrastructure and long-term planning.

The Climate Change talks in Paris also highlight how, like nuclear weapons, emissions and effects are not confined by national boundaries.

Resilience, nuclear abolition and greenhouse gas emission reductions are three issues, among many, where cities can take a lead, whatever their country’s national policies. Citizens and Mayors can consider wisely, commit positively to the community’s future and act locally with a global perspective. Enjoy the following snippets about 2015 events here and abroad and I look forward to working with you in 2016!

Questions for this article:

2015 MacBride Prize to Lampedusa (Italy) and Gangjeon Village, Jeju Island (S. Korea)

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

A press release by The International Peace Bureau

The International Peace Bureau is delighted to announce its decision to award the annual Sean MacBride Peace Prize to two island communities who, in different circumstances, show proof of a profound commitment to peace and social justice.

ipb prize

LAMPEDUSA is a small island in the Mediterranean and is the southernmost part of Italy. Being the closest part of the territory to the African coastline, it has been since the early 2000s a primary European entry point for migrants and refugees. The numbers of persons arriving has been rapidly increasing, with hundreds of thousands at risk while travelling, and over 1900 deaths in 2015 alone.

The people of the island of Lampedusa have given the world an extraordinary example of human solidarity, offering clothing, shelter and food to those who have arrived, in distress, on their shores. The response of the Lampedusans stands out in stark contrast to the behaviour and official policies of the European Union, apparently intent only on reinforcing their borders in the attempt to keep these migrants out. This ‘Fortress Europe’ policy is becoming more and more militarised.

Aware of its multi‐layered culture, which epitomizes the evolution of the Mediterranean region where over the centuries different civilizations have blended and built on each others’ developments, with mutual enrichment, the island of Lampedusa also shows the world that a culture of hospitality and respect for human dignity are the most effective antidotes to nationalism and religious fundamentalism.

To give but one example of the heroic actions of the people of Lampedusa, let us recall the events of the night of 7‐8 May 2011. A boat full of migrants crashed into a rocky outcrop, not far from the shore. Although it was in the middle of the night, the inhabitants of Lampedusa turned out in their hundreds to form a human chain between the shipwreck and the coast. That night alone more than 500 people, including many children, were carried to safety.

At the same time the people of the island are very clear that the problem is a European one, not theirs alone. In November 2012, Mayor Nicolini sent an urgent appeal to Europe’s leaders. She expressed her outrage that the European Union, which had just received the Nobel Peace Prize, was ignoring the tragedies occurring on its Mediterranean borders.

The IPB believes that the dramatic situation in the Mediterranean – constantly visible in the mass media ‐ must be at the top of Europe’s urgent priorities. Much of the problem springs from social injustices and inequalities resulting in conflicts in which the West has – over centuries ‐‐ played an aggressive role. We recognise that there are no easy solutions, but as a guiding principle, Europe should be honouring the ideals of human solidarity, over and above the cynical considerations of governments and profit/power/resource‐seeking entities. When Europe contributes to the ruining of the livelihoods of people, as for instance in Iraq and Libya, Europe will have to find ways to help rebuild those livelihoods. It should be below the dignity of Europe to spend billions on military interventions, and yet not to have the resources available to meet the basic needs. The most vital question is how to develop cooperation between people of goodwill on both sides of the Mediterranean in a long‐term, constructive, gender‐sensitive and sustainable process.

(article continued on the right side of the page)

Question for this article

The refugee crisis, Who is responsible?

Readers’ comments are invited on this question and article. See below for comments box.

(article continued from the left side of the page)

GANGJEON VILLAGE is the site of the controversial 50‐hectare Jeju Naval Base being constructed by the South Korean government on the southern coast of Jeju Island, at a projected cost of nearly $1 billion. The waters around the island are protected by international law as they are within a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (in October 2010, nine geological sites on on the island were recognised as Global Geoparks by the UNESCO Global Geoparks Network). Even so, the construction of the base continues, although building work has been halted many times by mass protests of people concerned about the base’s environmental impact. These people see the base as a US‐driven project aimed at containing China, rather than enhancing South Korean security In July 2012, the South Korean Supreme Court upheld the base’s construction. It is expected to host up to 24 US and allied military vessels, including 2 Aegis destroyers and 6 nuclear submarines, plus occasional civilian cruise ships on completion (now scheduled for 2016).

Jeju Island has been dedicated to peace ever since around 30,000 were massacred there from 1948‐54, following a peasant uprising against US occupation. The South Korean government apologized for the massacre in 2006 and the late President Roh Moo Hyun officially named Jeju an “Island of World Peace”. This violent history helps to explain why the people of Gangjeon Village (population 2000) have been protesting non‐violently for around 8 years against the naval base project. According to Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, “About 700 people have been arrested and charged with hefty fines that amount to over $400,000, fines that they cannot or will not pay. Many have spent days or weeks or months in jail, including a well‐known film critic Yoon Mo Yong who spent 550 days in prison after committing multiple acts of civil disobedience.” The energy and commitment shown by the villagers has attracted the support (and participation) of activists from around the world. We endorse the construction of a permanent Peace Center on the site which can act as a focus for activities reflecting alternative views to those represented by the militarists.

IPB makes the award in order to increase the visibility of this exemplary non‐violent
struggle at a crucial time. It takes great courage to physically oppose the government’s growing aggressive and militaristic policies, especially as they are backed by, and at the service of, the Pentagon. It takes even more courage to maintain that struggle over a period of many years.

CONCLUSION
There is an important connection between the two situations. Not only do we recognise the common humanity of those who resist without weapons the forces of domination in their own island. We make the argument that public resources should not be spent on massive military installations that only increase the tension between nations in the region; rather they should be devoted to meeting human need. If we continue devoting the world’s resources to military rather than humanistic purposes, it is inevitable that we will continue to witness these inhuman situations with desperate people, refugees and migrants, at risk while crossing the seas and at the prey of unscrupulous gangs. Thus we repeat also in this context the basic message of IPB’s Global Campaign on Military Spending: Move the Money!

New Zealand: International Day of Peace

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from Scoop Independent News (reprinted as Creative Commons)

The UNANZ [United Nations Association of New Zealand] celebration for the International Day of Peace will take place on Monday 21st September 2015, 5.30 – 8.30 pm at Parliament in the Legislative chamber.

new newzealand

Our Keynote Speaker, Dr Kennedy Graham MP, will set the scene by speaking on the ‘invincible power of community spirit’.

The event will take the form of a panel discussion of ideas contributed from various community groups around NZ on actions which can be taken to create a culture of peace locally. The basis for the discussion will be the 9 point summary of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals – “Transforming the World by 2030 – A New Agenda for Global Action” – to be presented for adoption at the United Nations at the end of September 2015.

The outcome of our discussion will act as a contribution from New Zealand, and will be sent to the NZ Permanent Representative to the UN and the government of NZ.

The evening will conclude with a lively performance by the Multicultural Council of Wellington; highlighting how New Zealand continues to emerge as a kaleidoscope of multiculturalism, peace and unity among nations.

Event outline

5.30pm

* Refreshments

* Welcome:

– Maori welcome

– City welcome – Her Worship the Mayor, Celia Wade-Brown

* Key-note speaker: Kennedy Graham MP, on “The Invincible Power of Community Spirit”

* Panel Chair: Dr Graham Hassall (President of the United Nations Association of New Zealand)

Questions for this article:

Freedom of Expression and Assembly in Vietnam and Cambodia

… HUMAN RIGHTS …

An article from Amnesty International Canada

On September 2, 17,000 prisoners are expected to be released in an act of mass amnesty marking Vietnam’s National Day. This is the largest expected prisoner release in Vietnam’s history.

amnesty
Housing rights march, Cambodia, December 2013

We are working to ensure that the governments of Vietnam and Cambodia adhere to international human rights laws and standards related to freedom of expression and assembly. We will not only take action ourselves towards government officials but we will support those parts of civil society in each country which are aware of their rights under international law and are attempting to enforce them. In particular there is an increased willingness on the part of many Cambodians to stand up for their rights. Information about the lack of access to freedom of expression and assembly – and its place in international human rights law – will be shared with local activists.

Vietnam has at least 75 prisoners of conscience and 100’s of political prisoners, in addition to many national human rights defenders and activists whose activity is criminalized rather than seen as acceptable under international standards. Also Cambodia harasses, intimidates and imprisons those who attempt to exercise their right to expression and assembly – and offers impunity to those who perpetrate human rights abuses against them.

We will work through online awareness campaigns and individual actions on behalf of prisoners of conscience and those in need of urgent action.
In 2014 we managed to initiate a mission to Vietnam – the first in decades. In both countries there were welcome releases of small numbers of individuals for whom Amnesty had campaigned. 2015 will see us continue our research leading to action on behalf of individual prisoners of conscience and human rights defenders. A report on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in Cambodia is planned.

(Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article.)

Question(s) related to this article:

In Japan, Tens of Thousands Anti-War Protesters Reject Return to Militarism

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Jon Queally, Common Dreams (reprinted according to guidelines of Creative Commons)

Tens of thousands of people gathered outside the Japanese parliament building on Sunday to reject plans put forth by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that would see an aggressive expansion of the nation’s armed forces despite a long-standing constitutional mandate for a “defense only” military posture.

japan
Protesters hold up banners reading ‘No To War,’ during a rally to protest against Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s drive to enact two controversial security bills on Sunday in Ogimachi Park in Osaka’s Kita Ward. (Photo: KYODO)

The enormous crowd—estimated by organizers as more than 120,000 people—is opposing a set of bills moving through the country’s legislature which would allow the country’s military to engage in overseas fighting and ratchet up spending on new weapons systems. Despite loud public protest against the plan, Abe has continued to defend the plan. Demonstrators carried banners reading “Peace Not War” and “Abe, Quit!”

“Sitting in front of TV and just complaining wouldn’t do,” Naoko Hiramatsu, a 44-year-old associate professor in French and one of the Tokyo protesters, told Reuters. Holding his four-year-old son in her arms, she continued, “If I don’t take action and try to put a stop on this, I will not be able to explain myself to my child in the future.”

As the Asahi Shimbum reports:
In one of the largest postwar demonstrations in Japan, tens of thousands of protesters swarmed in front of the Diet building in Tokyo on Aug. 30 to oppose the Abe administration’s contentious security legislation.

Following a wave of weekly protests near the Diet building in recent months, rally organizers had worked to mobilize 100,000 participants from across the nation.

Amid the gloomy and rainy weather, protesters held up placards and banners and chanted slogans against the legislation, which is being pushed through the Diet.
A huge banner hanging from dozens of balloons read: “Abe, Quit!”

Opponents blasted the security bills on concerns that they would drag Japan into unwanted conflicts overseas.

Organized by a union of three different anti-war citizens’ groups, the Japan Times reports Sunday’s rally was arguably the most massive in a string of similar protests in recent months.

Question for this article:

Should Japan be allowed to militarize?

The Global Movement Of Moderates: An Effective Counter To Islamic State? – Analysis

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

An article by Kumar Ramakrishna, Eurasia Review (Reprinted by permission)

International concern at the rapidly metastasising global threat of the brutal Al Qaeda “mutation” known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), has generated concerted discussions on effective strategies to counter its highly virulent ideology that has been widely disseminated through the Internet.

moderates

High-level summits on countering violent extremism (CVE) were held in Washington and in Sydney in the first half of this year, while more recently British Prime Minister David Cameron unveiled the United Kingdom’s new multi-faceted CVE strategy as well. In Southeast Asia, one potentially powerful idea – moderation – has been promoted as a means of neutralising the extremist appeal of ISIS.

The Global Movement of Moderates

First mentioned by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak at the UN General Assembly in September 2010, the concept of moderation gained traction at the 18th ASEAN Summit in Jakarta in 2011 when ASEAN leaders endorsed the initiative to establish the Global Movement of Moderates to help shape global developments, peace and security. Subsequently the ASEAN Concept Paper on the Global Movement of Moderates (GMM) was adopted at the 20th ASEAN Summit in Phnom Penh, Cambodia in 2012.

Most recently, at the 26th ASEAN Summit in Langkawi, Malaysia on 27 April 2015, ASEAN leaders reiterated in the so-called Langkawi Declaration that the GMM initiative promotes a culture of peace and complements other initiatives, including the United Nations Alliance of Civilisations. The GMM Concept Paper recommended establishing dedicated ASEAN units to coordinate and evaluate all GMM-related activities within ASEAN and globally.

The Langkawi Declaration Programme

The Langkawi Declaration identifies several clusters of functional activities to promote the moderation norm, via collaboration between the GMM, the ASEAN Foundation and the ASEAN Institute of Peace and Reconciliation. The first cluster of activities includes organising outreach programmes, interfaith and cross-cultural dialogues at the national, regional and international levels. The second cluster involves the convening of forums to share best practices in understanding and countering violent extremist ideologies. An example is the East Asia Summit Symposium on Religious Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration held in Singapore in April 2015.

A third cluster encourages enhanced information-sharing on best practices in promoting moderation among ASEAN member states. A fourth cluster involves creating mechanisms to cultivate emerging leadership especially amongst women and youth that can help invigorate ASEAN’s drive and innovation in effectively addressing CVE issues as well as other global challenges. Importantly, a fifth cluster recognises education as an effective means of socialising the moderation norm and associated values such as respect for life, diversity and mutual understanding; this is a means of preventing the spread of violent extremism whilst addressing its root causes.

(article continued on the right side of the page)

Question for this article

Islamic extremism, how should it be opposed?

Readers’ comments are invited on this question and article. See below for comments box.

(article continued from the left side of the page)

Another cluster seeks to foster formal scholarly exchanges to amplify the collective voices of moderate intellectuals, while a seventh recognises the need for exchanging ideas with extra-regional dialogue partners, international organisations and other relevant stakeholders on successful case studies of engagement and integration policies that support moderation.

“God is in the Details”: Operationalising moderation

While this multifaceted plan of action by the GMM to promote the norm of moderation as a means of countering the violent extremism is commendable, as an ancient saying goes, “God is in the details”. A roundtable held in Singapore on 29 July 2015 identified several issues that need to be addressed for moderation to be effectively operationalised at the grassroots level, where the “immunisation” of vulnerable Southeast Asian Muslim constituencies against the digitised, apocalyptic-tinged Salafi Jihadism of ISIS is most needed.

But first, what exactly is “moderation” anyway?

Within Islam – from whose intellectual and theological resources a sustained counter-narrative campaign against ISIS must be fashioned – the idea of wasatiyah or the “Middle Way” of a “just and balanced community” seems to be one possible elucidation of the moderation norm. In this sense a true Muslim embodying wasatiyah effectively preserves his religious integrity whilst embracing tolerance toward both co-religionists of differing convictions on certain matters, as well as members of other – or even no – faiths.

Importantly, operationalising moderation must also involve developing clearer legal principles for regulating the ISIS penchant for takfir or excommunication of other groups – a habit that has all too frequently religiously legitimised their subsequent acts of extermination in grisly fashion.

Operationalising moderation further implies that Southeast Asian Muslims should be wary of uncritical acceptance of certain puritanical strains of the faith emanating from the Middle East. It has been suggested that Southeast Asian Islam – famously, Islam with a “smiling face” – is “lived Islam” which possesses ample religious authenticity vis-a-vis the imagined, virulently re-interpreted “desert Islam” of ISIS.

It is hence timely that in early August 2015 the two largest Islamic groups in Indonesia, Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama – boasting 90 million members between them – affirmed their desire to promote a “progressive” Islam and more tellingly, an “Islam Nusantara” or “Islam of the archipelago” and that these ideas will be promoted in cyberspace as well.

Moderation is not for Muslims only

Finally, it should be recognised that the norm of moderation is not just an issue for the Muslim community alone. ISIS aside, Southeast Asia and the world has witnessed violent extremism of other religious and ethnic stripes as well. Hence within Southeast Asia at least, encouraging broader participation in further “ASEANising” the moderation concept so that is applies beyond regional Muslim constituencies would also help ensure it gets embedded in the socio-cultural and political DNA of the nascent ASEAN Community.

Ultimately, how would we know if the GMM initiative has succeeded? One clue would be when a Southeast Asian – although it is his right of “free expression” – voluntarily decides not to say or publish anything that might hurt the religious sentiments of a fellow Southeast Asian of another faith. Ancient religious texts summarise this as the principle of “not stumbling my brother”. Hence, rather than cynical self-censorship, what really lies at the heart of genuine moderation is quite simply, charity. Once Southeast Asians and others imbibe this idea, the days of ISIS and its ilk would surely be numbered.

Japanese expressing a clear and strong disapproval – No to their future with wars

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

An article from Pressenza New York (reprinted according to Creative Commons Attribution)

Many witnessed a rare historical event last weekend in Japan. Hundreds and thousands of the same posters were ubiquitous nationwide. The posters read, “We say NO to Abe,” a strong disapproval directed towards the prime minister Abe and his government after the lower house of parliament passed the controversial security bills earlier in the week, without securing the public support, and potentially changing the Japan’s ability to go in wars in the future.

japan
(Image by Tokyo Bureau of Pressenza)

It was a nationwide protest orchestrated by a non-fiction writer, Ms. Hisae Sawachi. The striking calligraphy on the poster was done by a haiku poet, Mr. Tota Kaneko who is 95 years old and a former Imperial Japanese Navy officer. It went viral when Ms. Sawachi made an announcement on her website asking the public to display the poster simultaneously and ambiguously on Saturday, July 18 at 1PM, calling for the nationwide public demonstration. Her statement read, “If you are not sure about being in a public rally, then you can display the poster in front of your house and on windows.” She asked for demonstrations in train stations, schools, and any public places in Tokyo and elsewhere. Her statement ended with, “Expressing one’s opinion may require a courage to do so, and our courage to “say NO (to the Abe government) ” is being challenged right now. It is our duty and our right to stop this political violence.”

Known for its virtue of not expressing one’s opinions or not becoming a nail that sticks out, the Japanese tend to shy away from public demonstrations. But this campaign brought uniquely remarkable outcomes because it allowed anyone, regardless of one’s location or viewpoint towards organized rallies, to participate. Anyone could print the poster and display it wherever they wished, and it allowed people to express their grave feelings towards the government while providing the safe environment where people could experience the solidarity. It was reported 29 prefectures and over 110 cities and towns responded to this campaign, and the poster went up over in 1000 sites nationwide. A plethora of responses with pictures of people holding the poster at home, in their cars, in stores, in public and in private places were sent to Ms. Sawachi’s site. In Tokyo, over 5000 demonstrators gathered and stood alongside Ms. Sawachi, with other public figures such as Mr. Shuntaro Kawagoe, a famous journalist, and Ms. Keiko Ochiai, an acclaimed political writer, and other critics of Abe administration in front of the parliament house. At 1PM, the crowd raised the posters towards the direction of the parliament house in sync, making their opinion clear, “We say NO to Abe.”

Ms. Sawachi spoke to the crowd, “The poster represents all our thoughts and feelings that we are outraged, and we will not tolerate what is happening. I’m sure there are current members of parliament who share the same sentiment. Let us all continue in this endeavor, each of us making wise decisions and choosing our own path.”

Question related to this article:

Why Are We Planning to Walk Across the Demilitarized Zone That Separates North and South Korea?

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

an article by Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate – TRANSCEND Media Service (abridged)

On May 24, 2015, which is International Women’s Day for Peace and Disarmament, 30 women peacemakers from 12 countries plan to walk across the demilitarized zone (DMZ) that separates North and South Korea. This will be an important first step in establishing a peace process and supporting Koreans who are working towards reconciliation and hoping to reunite their families.

Korea

Mairead Maguire

Some of the women who will be participating in this historic walk are Nobel Peace Prize laureate Leymah Gbowee, feminist author Gloria Steinem, retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright, Suzuyo Takazato from Okinawa Women Act Against Military Violence, and American filmmaker Abigail Disney.

Last week, the government of North Korea agreed to support the walk, but officials from South Korea have yet to voice a decision. The United Nations Command at the DMZ has said it will facilitate the crossing once the South Korean government gives its approval.

In many countries around the world, women are walking and calling for demilitarization and an end to war. As the DMZ is the most highly militarized border in the world, women peacemakers believe it is only right that they should walk there in solidarity with their Korean sisters, who want to see an end to the 70-year-old conflict and reunite millions of Korean families.

Seventy years ago, as the Cold War was being waged, the United States drew a line across the 38th parallel – later with the former Soviet Union’s agreement – dividing an ancient country that had just suffered 35 years of Japanese colonial occupation. Koreans had no desire for their country to be divided, but had no say in the matter. Now, seven decades later, the conflict on the Korean peninsula threatens peace in the Asia Pacific and throughout the world.

In Korean culture, family relations are deeply important, and millions of families have been painfully separated for 70 years. Although there was a period of reconciliation during the Sunshine Policy years between the two Korean governments in which many families had the joy of reunion, the vast majority of families remain separated. Many elders have sadly died without ever seeing their families reunited. . .

The DMZ, with its barbed wire, armed soldiers on both sides, and thousands of explosive landmines, is a tragic physical manifestation of how much the Korean people have suffered and lost in war. Yet, from all my encounters with the Korean people, it seems all they wish for is to be reconciled and live in peace with each other.

On May 24, we want to walk for peace in North and South Korea, and hope that all governments will support our crossing of the DMZ, recognizing that we are doing this because we care for our Korean brothers and sisters. We want to plant a seed showing that Koreans, too, should be free to cross the DMZ in their work towards reconciliation, putting an end to the division and fear that keep them in a state of war.

Question for this article

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

The 30 articles in CPNN linked to this question make it clear that women indeed have a special role to play in the peace movement. See the following for an historical explanation of why this is true.

Japan Gets Rid of All Cluster Munitions

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

an article by Cluster Munition Coalition

Japan announced this week having destroyed its entire stockpile of cluster munitions. As a State Party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Japan had until 1 August 2018 to finish destroying its stocks. The task was completed way ahead of the obligatory deadline. Congratulations, omedetou gozaimasu!

japan
click on photo to enlarge

Japan signed the Convention in December 2008 in Oslo (Norway) along with nearly 100 other states

With this important accomplishment, Japan joins the United Kingdom, Denmark, Chile, The Netherlands, Belgium, Ecuador and many other countries that have destroyed their entire stockpiles of cluster munitions, ensuring these unacceptable weapons can never be used again.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported that the destruction was completed on 9 February 2015. The President-Designate of the First Review Conference of the Convention, Croatia, welcomed the good news from Japan and encouraged other States Parties to follow the example.

All States Parties to the Convention that are currently in the process of destroying their stockpiles have indicated that they will meet their obligatory deadlines. Over 80% of these states’ cluster munitions have been destroyed already.

According to Albania and France, who coordinate a working group on the issue: “States’ achievements to date … highlight stockpile destruction as a success story of this Convention, directly contributing to its aims of preventing the proliferation and use of cluster munitions.”

Japan is an important donor for the clearance of cluster munition remnants in affected countries, and for assistance to survivors. “But at least three major financial institutions in Japan still invest in producers of cluster munitions abroad,” said Suzanne Oosterwijk from PAX (The Netherlands) who coordinates the Stop Explosive Investments initiative together with the CMC. “It is high time for Japan to adopt strong legal measures prohibiting investments in companies that produce these weapons.”

Japan participated in the Oslo Process that created the Convention and its position evolved significantly over time to allow it to join in the consensus adoption in 2008. It has continued to actively engage in the work of the Convention on Cluster Munitions since then.

The Cluster Munition Monitor provides more information on Japan. More information in Japanese is available through the Japan Campaign to Ban Landmines, a member of the Cluster Munition Coalition.

[Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article.]

Question related to this article:

Can cluster bombs be abolished?

The cluster bombs treaty was reported as follows by Agence France Presse while there was very little coverage in the US media, as usual for peace matters.

……………………..

Observers laud landmark cluster bomb ban

May 28, 2008

DUBLIN (AFP). — Observers on Thursday lauded a landmark treaty agreed by delegates from 111 countries in Dublin to ban cluster bombs, though the deal lacks the backing of major producers and stockpilers.

After 10 days of painstaking negotiations at Croke Park stadium in Dublin, diplomats agreed the wording of a wide-ranging pact to outlaw the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions by its signatories.

It also provides for the welfare of victims and the clearing of areas contaminated by unexploded cluster bombs.

The agreement will be formally adopted on Friday, and signed in Oslo on December 2-3. Signatories would then need to ratify it.

It was hailed in The Independent newspaper in London as a “significant step forward”, describing cluster bombs as “little more than air-delivered landmines” and declaring that “there can be no compromise when it comes to cluster bombs.”

The newspaper acknowledged in its editorial, however, that the document was weakened by the absence of the United States, Russia, China, India, Israel and Pakistan from the Dublin talks, and thus the agreement.

Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin said the treaty was a “very strong and ambitious text which nevertheless was able to win consensus among all delegations.”

“It is a real contribution to international humanitarian law,” he added.

The Irish Department for Foreign Affairs said 111 participating states and 18 observer countries attended.

The treaty requires the destruction of stockpiled munitions within eight years — though it leaves the door open for future, more precise generations of cluster munitions that pose less harm to civilians.

Britain was widely cited by campaigners as being at the forefront of a group of states seeking to water down the treaty.

But in a dramatic move Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced in London that Britain would withdraw all its cluster bombs from service in a bid to “break the log jam” in the Dublin talks.

The draft treaty agreed in Dublin read:

“Each state party undertakes never under any circumstances to:

“(a) Use cluster munitions;

“(b) Develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, cluster munitions;

“© Assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a state party under this convention.”

Much of the wrangling focused on what signatories could and could not do in joint operations with states still using cluster bombs.

The draft text said signatories “may engage in military cooperation and operations”.

But the Cluster Munition Coalition, an umbrella group of non-governmental organisations, hopes that the treaty will stigmatise the use of cluster munitions — as the similar Ottawa Treaty did for landmines — and stop countries from helping others to use them.

CMC co-chair Simon Conway told AFP the treaty was a compromise but nonetheless “incredibly strong”.

“We’re going to end up with a strong treaty that prohibits every cluster bomb that’s ever been used, with no transition periods, with strong obligations on clearance and particularly strong obligations on victim assistance,” he said.

Hildegarde Vansintjan, advocacy officer for disability campaigners Handicap International, said the convention made states responsible for providing assistance to cluster bomb victims.

The treaty “would be a real step forward for the people suffering from cluster munitions all over the world,” she told AFP.

The cluster munitions ban process, started by Norway in February 2007, took the same path as the 1997 Ottawa Treaty by going outside the United Nations to avoid vetoes and seal a swift pact.

Cluster munitions are among the weapons that pose the gravest dangers to civilians, especially in heavily bombed countries such as Laos, Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Dropped from planes or fired from artillery, they explode in mid-air, randomly scattering bomblets. Countries are seeking a ban due to the risk of civilians being killed or maimed by their indiscriminate, wide area effect.

They also pose a lasting threat to civilians as many bomblets fail to explode on impact.

First UN conference on tourism and culture opens in Cambodia, seeks to build partnerships

. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT .

an article by United Nations News Centre

Aimed at bringing together Ministers of Tourism and Ministers of Culture to identify key opportunities and challenges for stronger cooperation between the fields, two United Nations agencies launched the First World Conference on Tourism and Culture today [4 February] in the shadow of the legendary Angkor Wat temple, in Siem Reap, Cambodia.

cambodia
click on photo to enlarge

Statues on the Angkor Wat temple in Siem Reap Cambodia. Photo: UNESCO

The Conference, run by the UN World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) and the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) aims to address the overlap between culture and tourism, tackling the question of how to harness the power of tourism and culture to alleviate poverty, create jobs, protect natural and cultural heritage and promote international understanding.

“Today, cultural tourism – the world’s mosaic of art forms, heritage sites, festivals, traditions, and pilgrimages – is growing at an unprecedented rate,” said Taleb Rifai, UNWTO Secretary-General. “Humanity’s curiosity about cultural heritage is the element that truly differentiates one destination from another.”

Mr. Rifai described the growth of international tourism since the 1950s and the socio-economic contribution made by tourism, accounting for one out of every 11 jobs worldwide, as well as contributing nine per cent to global gross domestic product (GDP) and 30 per cent contribution to total global exports.

Irina Bokova, UNESCO Director-General, joined Mr. Rifai in looking forward to building a new, sustainable partnership that unites tourism and culture and said her goal was to create a positive mutually reinforcing dynamic between the two, working to build sustainability and to benefit local communities.

“Our starting point is to safeguard culture under all its forms, from monuments to living heritage, encompassing traditions, festivals and the performing arts,” said Ms. Bokova. We do so, because culture is who we are. It shapes our identity and is a means to foster respect and tolerance among people.”

She underlined the need to safeguard cultural heritage while moving ahead with sustainable tourism and said she believed that was the Conference’s core message, citing that vision as the route to promoting culture as a driver and enabler of sustainable development.

Cambodia’s Minister of Tourism, Thong Khon, also welcomed delegates, looking forward to the event’s contribution to sustainable conservation and development of tourism and culture.

[Thank you to the Good News Agency for bringing this article to our attention.]

Question related to this article:

How can tourism promote a culture of peace?

Comment by Liliana Mota, October 23, 2013

Why tourism?

Can tourism be seen as an instrument to achieve complicity between people’s minds?

“There is nothing better that connects two people’s mind than a good conversation” The above quote could be used to describe the effect which tourism has on people. Like a great conversation, tourism could be said to play a vital role amongst people all over the world. It fosters communication in all its senses, intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding.

In today’s world it is evident that there is a shortage of moral or ethical values amongst people across the different nations in this world, resulting in a globalised world lacking these morals and ethical values. Ignorance, the failure to consider the needs of others, and selfishness are a few of the ways which hinder us from embracing diversity and a common human perspective, which would result informal empathy, internal moral compassion, tolerance of differences, historical consciousness and interpretation. The above mentioned features are intrinsic, inherent and can be found in the practice of tourism.

Tourism has been emphasized as one of the most effective instruments which continue to tackle to tackle social and economical poverty, as well as encourage the culture of peace practice amongst people. In looking at the UN architecture, one is able to see the growing implications which the tourism sector has on the world and world policies. The touristic phenomenon has achieved a world record of 5% of world’s GDP contribution and is responsible for 235 millions jobs, according to the UNWTO’s data. Often the tourism sector counts more than 20% of the countries’ GDP.

On the negative side of this, it is evident that tourism focuses on economical matters, depriving any focus on the global implications of the constant interaction tourism encourages.

In the literal sense, tourism is nothing more or less than people meeting with the willingness to understand each other’s differences and point of view and simultaneously creating the opportunity for dialogue, mutual understanding and peace to take place.

Apart from tourism, various factors could be seen to play a role in encouraging integration and diversity amongst societies across the world. For example, the cultural segment has played an essential source of people’s integration and inclusiveness in developing countries.

Education has also played a significant role in encouraging integration, and incorporation amongst people all over the world. Education has been reconsidered and proposed to being the catalyst for exchange between countries, cultures and sectors, and most importantly for enhancing the lives of people by granting them the opportunity to leave their poverty stricken lives and societies in exchange a for better future which includes job and exchange opportunities.

In the tourism world, differences play the most essential role, differences among people represents the added-value. Being different is always a positive factor that usually motivates and encourages people to get to move and engage with each other and embrace the differences with the use of spiritual, religious and cultural meanings.

This notion of tourism needs to be addressed in multilateral governance discussions, where all the main actors, the international community, the ministerial and experts, private sector, local institutions and civil society engages are all present, and are all willing to work together in combined efforts and initiatives (from poverty alleviation to the promotion of awareness of sustainable development addressing special needs like regional development, urban planning and protection of natural and cultural landscapes). This combined approach of working at the local level within communities and at the national and international level, in order to reach and engage the poor, has been considered as potentially being the “one possible and effective answer” and effective approach towards the world’s poorest areas where it can make a difference.