Tag Archives: Europe

Austrian Censorship of Peace Conference Is An Outrage

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by By David Swanson, Kathy Kelly, John Reuwern and Brad Wolf from World Beyond War

Forty-eight hours before a global peace conference in Vienna, Austria, was to begin, the venue host abruptly cancelled. Peace, it seems, cannot be discussed, especially peace in Ukraine.

This news is a disturbing step in a growing trend.

Owners of the venue which was to host the Summit for Peace in Ukraine, announced on Wednesday, 7 June, 2023, their decision to cancel the agreement holding the summit on their premises. Fortunately, a new location was secured in Vienna (and anyone on Earth can sign up to take part online), but not before a smear campaign against the summit had been launched.

The venue owners reportedly explained: “We have decided to comply with the wishes of Ukraine and its embassy operating in Austria and have cancelled the rental of all rooms in the ÖGB catamaran for the event ‘International Summit for Peace in Ukraine’ next weekend.”

This was not just one venue taking this position. “On Wednesday, the Press Club Concordia also refused to make its premises in a central location in downtown Vienna available for a press conference of the ‘summit’.”

Supporters of the summit note the chilling innuendo caused by the abrupt cancellation of the summit. Speakers widely regarded for their moral and intellectual guidance have been undermined in statements intended to justify objections to the summit.

This is not an isolated incident. Western liberal ideals have long asserted that the best answer to mistaken speech was wiser speech and more of it. We now have a rapidly growing liberal consensus in favor, instead, of censoring media outlets, canceling speaking events, and forbidding people with unwanted points of view from even gathering together. Powers are being granted to governments, social media platforms, and other tech corporations that believers in democratic self-governance spent centuries claiming nobody should have.

Those who turn against free speech are often groups afraid they cannot win an honest debate. And so, they take up censorship. The movement for peace in Ukraine can take this as a compliment. Governments fear such a discussion of peace and instead smear this peace summit and the speakers.

An Austrian press report announced on Thursday that the venue (ÖGB Catamaran) had been withdrawn because the event was “under suspicion of propaganda.” What sort of propaganda? Well: “According to its own statements, the ‘International Summit for Peace in Ukraine’ wanted to show ways out of the war.” Under international law, propaganda for war is illegal and must be banned. Not a single nation on Earth complies with that requirement, raising up the value of free speech as trumping the rule of law. But speaking in favor of bringing a war to an end has now acquired the status of forbidden propaganda.

Moreover, the report explains, “some announced participants have no current fear of contact with the media of the aggressor.” In other words, if talk of negotiating peace is shut out of the media controlled by only one side of a war, speaking to media controlled by the other side — even to say exactly what one would have said to any other media outlet — is grounds for not only censorship but a ban on meeting and strategizing.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

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

How can we be sure to get news about peace demonstrations?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

The report gives some specifics: “The internationally prominent U.S. economist Jeffrey Sachs, for example, as well as Anuradha Chenoy, ex-dean of India’s Jawarharlal Nehru University and an important representative of global civil society networking, have given interviews to the TV station Russia Today (RT). The channel has been blocked across the Union for Russian war propaganda in the wake of EU sanctions. Sachs also answered questions from Russian TV host and war advocate Vladimir Solovyov in December 2022. Solovyov has often called for attacking Germany and Great Britain as well.”

The “Press Club Concordia” also explained that the problem was that Jeffrey Sachs might do an interview on Russian media.

Not only is diplomacy shunned, but speaking to members of the media with whom one disagrees is equated with advocating whatever those journalists have advocated. This can only contribute to distrust, enmity, and war without end.

Not only did the venue say it was doing the wishes of the Ukrainian embassy, but the Ukrainian ambassador to Austria tweeted that peace activists were the fifth column and henchmen of the Russian government.

And who created the idea that the whole world must obey the wishes of the government of Ukraine? The government of the United States — a country where little time passes these days without news of some event cancelled to fulfill the wishes of the government of Israel.

Further, “Noam Chomsky, who will speak at the summit via video, for example, believes that NATO has ‘marginalized’ Russia for too long.” Whether that fact is in dispute, or merely the acceptability of stating it out loud, was not explained.

“Also physically present in Vienna, according to the program, should be Clare Daly, an Irishwoman and member of the EU Parliament and the parliamentary group Die Linke. Daly also spoke repeatedly to RT about the West’s ‘complicity’ in the war in Ukraine. She believes the sanctions are wrong: they would not harm Russia and would not help Ukraine. In the EU Parliament in early 2023 voted against a resolution holding Russia legally responsible for the war. Daly said she does support those parts of the text that condemn Russia for the invasion and call on the government in Moscow to immediately cease all military action and withdraw from Ukraine. However, she said she opposes providing weapons to Ukraine and expanding NATO’s presence in the region.”

So, opposing both sides of a war is just as unacceptable as opposing one side, in the view of these censors.

This is where we have arrived. Proposing to negotiate peace — without even suggesting what those negotiations should arrive at — is so unacceptable to proponents of war, that it cannot be discussed — not in any large gathering. And yet, despite the wars being waged in the name of “democracy” it is not clear how such censorship is driven by democracy or in align with democratic values. Nor is it clear how many steps, if any, remain between the varieties of censorship we have now and hardcopy book burnings of the past.

(Editor’s note: We were informed on June 13 that “the websites for the International Peace Bureau and the Peace in Ukraine summit were hacked the day after the conference but should be up and running soon.”)

Europe, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Can Pope Francis bring peace to Ukraine?

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

An article by Thomas Reese in the National Catholic Reporter

Pope Francis has launched a peace mission aimed at finding a settlement of the Russia-Ukraine war, upsetting Ukraine’s allies with his refusal to insist that Russia leave Ukraine as a starting point for negotiations. For their part, the Russians simply ignore the pope.

Western supporters of Ukraine accuse the pope of moral equivalency, treating both sides as equal. This is nonsense.

Just four weeks into the war, the pope condemned  the “the violent aggression against Ukraine” and the “senseless massacre where every day there is a repetition of slaughter and atrocities,” in his Sunday Angelus in March 2022. “There is no justification for this!”


Photo of meeting between the Pope and Ukrainian President Zelensky on May 13 (EFE)

The Vatican has always said that it wants a “just peace.” When America Media’s Gerard O’Connell  asked Archbishop Paul Gallagher, the Vatican’s foreign minister, what a just peace meant for the Vatican, Gallagher said it meant a withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

This is not to say the pope holds the West blameless. In June of last year Francis told La Civilta Cattolica, a Jesuit publication, that a couple of months before the war an unnamed “wise” diplomat had expressed concern to him about NATO. “They are barking at the gates of Russia,” the diplomat said. “And they don’t understand that the Russians are imperial, and they will not allow any foreign power to approach them. The situation could lead to war,” concluded the diplomat.

While Francis made clear that this was the diplomat’s opinion, it is hard not to conclude that Francis agreed with him. He seems to believe, as many in the Global South do, that NATO somehow either provoked or failed to prevent the war.

Francis has also noted “the interest in testing and selling weapons” to combatants in the war. There is no question that the American military-industrial complex is profiting in Ukraine, financially as well as strategically: The Russian war machine is being severely degraded without the loss of a single American life.

(Continued in right column)

Questions related to this article:
 
Religion: a barrier or a way to peace?, What makes it one or the other?

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

(Continued from left column).

But responding to those who accuse him of being pro-Putin, Francis told La Civilta Cattolica: “No, I am not. It would be simplistic and erroneous to say such a thing. I am simply against turning a complex situation into a distinction between good guys and bad guys, without considering the roots and self-interests, which are very complex.”

The pope acknowledged “the brutality and ferocity with which this war is being carried out” by the Russian side. “While we witness the ferocity and cruelty of Russian troops,” he said in the La Civilta Cattolica interview, “we should not forget the problems, and seek to solve them.”

The pope is not cheering on either side in this war, which is an essential quality needed in a mediator. The pope has appointed Cardinal Matteo Zuppi  as a special envoy for peace in Ukraine. Both sides have used the Vatican for facilitating exchanges of prisoners, which is a good sign.

With Ukraine unwilling to give up any of its territory — including Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014 — is there something else that would appease Russia and allow Putin to save face in defeat? I think there is: nuclear weapons.

The West has always feared the Red Army sweeping into Europe — indeed, it’s the reason NATO exists. Because the U.S. and Europe were unwilling to pay for enough conventional weapons to stop what they considered a formidable force, they relied on tactical nuclear weapons as a deterrent to the Red Army’s invasion.

We now see that the Russian army is a Potemkin army, more show than substance. If Ukraine all by itself can hold off the Russians and score victories, NATO would wipe the floor with them without using tactical nuclear weapons.

This military reality calls for a rethinking of NATO’s nuclear policy. As part of settling the Ukraine-Russia war, NATO and the U.S. should do two things: First, swear off the first use of nuclear weapons in Europe. Second, negotiate the elimination or at least reduction of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.

Ukraine will have to agree to not “officially” join NATO. The war has already made Ukraine part of NATO unofficially. Ukraine would continue to receive weapons, but no NATO troops can be deployed on Ukrainian soil.

Putin, as an authoritarian autocrat, can continue this war indefinitely. We must give him something to get him to stop. He could save face by telling his people that the war succeeded in forcing NATO into this deal.

There is a temptation to let the war go on as long as Russia is stymied and suffering huge military losses in the speculative hope that it will bring down Putin. But Ukraine is also suffering both military and civilian losses.

The pope reminds us to look at “the human side of the war,” the impact on people’s lives, the deaths, the refugees, the widows and orphans. The war cannot be examined only in terms of “geopolitical calculations.” Too many people are dying. The pope is right in calling for peace. Unnecessary tactical nuclear weapons in Europe would be a cheap price to pay for it.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

Spain: The Forum for a Culture of National Security approves the proposal to create a Culture of Peace Group led by Crue

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article from Crue Universidades Españolas  (translation by CPNN)

The Forum for a Culture of National Security approved on May 30 the five proposals of the working groups of the entities, institutions and organizations that are part of this body. Among the projects submitted to consensus was the creation of the “Culture of Peace” working group, which will be led by Crue Universidades Españolas, co-led by the Ministry of Social Rights and which will have the collaboration of the Coexistence Pact, an entity which is part of Crue.

(Editor’s Note: Crue Universidades Españolas, established in 1994, is a non-profit association of 76 Spanish universities: 50 public and 26 private.)

The Crue delegate for European Affairs, José María Sanz, was in charge of presenting the general lines of a working group that seeks to promote compliance with SDG 16 (promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies) and target 7 of SDG 4 (promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and the contribution of culture to sustainable development).

(Article continued in right column)

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

Question related to this article:

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

(Article continued from left column)

Crue’s proposal contemplates two main activities: carrying out a diagnosis in universities on social sustainability and prevention and response to violence –for which a panel of social sustainability indicators will be defined that will help to carry out a diagnostic report– and the promotion among universities of the International Day of Coexistence in Peace (May 16).

The other working groups approved were:

* Human Security through non-formal education, led by the Youth Council in Spain and co-led by the Youth Institute;

* The culture of local security: Self-protection, led by the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP) and co-led by the Association of Professional Specialists in Civil Protection and Emergencies (ANEPPE);

* Culture of belonging within a more egalitarian society, led by the Spanish Confederation of Student Parents’ Associations (CEAPA) and co-led by the Spanish Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia;

* The incidence of transversal professional criteria in the field of preventive action and as a means for resolving action, led by the Professional Union and co-led by the Ministry of Labor and Social Economy.

The Forum was established on 26 November and is made up of an equal number of people representing the General State Administration and the public sector, and designated people representing civil society organizations, academia, associations and non-profit entities. The main lines of action of the Forum are, first, to promote in the educational system and in training courses the values of education and a culture for peace, democratic values, non-violence, tolerance, solidarity, equality and justice. ; and second, to articulate and transfer a message of equal treatment and opportunities, of non-discrimination, of development of a democratic, participatory culture and of rejection of any type of violent radicalism.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, Europe

A united civil society push for Spain to join the TPNW

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Forty-five civil society organisations in Spain have come together to form a coalition with a single mission: to persuade the Spanish government to adhere to the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The Alianza por el Desarme Nuclear  (Alliance for Nuclear Disarmament), which has the backing of ICAN, was launched in Madrid on 23 May. It will work to raise public awareness of the treaty’s importance and lobby decision-makers to endorse it.

Speaking at the launch event, the alliance’s coordinator, Maribel Hernández, urged the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, to “take a courageous step forward” and sign the TPNW “as a symbol of our country’s commitment to peace”. She stressed the danger of “normalising the existence of nuclear weapons” and promoting a security model based on the possession of such weapons. As a NATO member, Spain has repeatedly endorsed the notion that US nuclear weapons offer it “protection” and could, in certain circumstances, be used on its behalf.

Carlos Umaña, a co-president of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War  and member of ICAN’s international steering group, recalled that Sánchez committed in 2018 to sign the TPNW, but this promise “remains unfulfilled”. It was part of a deal  struck with the leader of the Podemos political party, Pablo Iglesias. Umaña also noted that a majority of Spaniards – 89 per cent, according to a YouGov poll  in 2020 – want the government to sign the TPNW. “We are at the most worrying moment in history in terms of the risk of a possible large-scale nuclear war from which there would be no going back,” he warned.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

A broad coalition of organisations

The Alliance for Nuclear Disarmament comprises  a diverse range of organisations and other entities working in the fields of peace and disarmament, human rights, the environment, and social justice, including Centre Delás d’Estudis per la Pau, the Spanish section of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, AIPAZ (Spanish Association for Peace Research), FundiPau, Fundación Cultura de Paz, Greenpeace, Desarma Madrid, Ecologistas en Acción, General Commission for Justice and Peace, Mayors for Peace, Gernika Gogoratuz, Women in Black Madrid, Pressenza and MOC (Movement for Conscientious Objection). Since its launch, many more groups and individuals have expressed an interest in joining the alliance.

The groups are asking local municipalities  and regional parliaments to appeal to the Spanish government to join the TPNW. Barcelona and dozens of other cities and towns have already pledged their support, as has the autonomous community of Navarre. Pending Spain’s accession to the TPNW, the alliance believes that the government should observe the official meetings of states parties to the treaty, held roughly every two years. The NATO members Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway observed the first  such meeting, held in Vienna last June. The second meeting will take place in New York this November.

Spain and the TPNW

The TPNW was negotiated at the United Nations in New York in 2017 and adopted with the support of 122 states. Spain opted not to participate in the process and has not yet taken any steps towards becoming a state party. Ahead of the treaty’s adoption, the foreign affairs committee of the Spanish congress of deputies passed a resolution  calling on the government to support the approval of the new treaty – but it was not heeded. In 2020, the same committee welcomed  the TPNW “as an effort to move towards peace, security, and disarmament”.

Three former Spanish foreign ministers – Ana Palacio, Javier Solana, and Carlos Westendorp – signed an open letter  in 2020 with dignitaries from other NATO states and Japan calling on current leaders to “show courage and boldness – and join the [TPNW]”. Solana is also a former NATO secretary-general. They noted in their letter that the TPNW does not prevent its parties from remaining in alliances with nuclear-armed states, such as NATO, “but we would be legally bound never under any circumstances to assist or encourage our allies to use, threaten to use, or possess nuclear weapons”.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

Uk: A Win for Peace: UCU Opposes the War in Ukraine

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from Stop the War Coalition

Stop the War Coalition congratulates delegates at the University and College Union who voted through a resolution at their congress this weekend calling for peace in Ukraine. The resolution condemns the Russian invasion and points out that NATO’s escalation in response has turned Ukraine into a battleground between the great powers. It is the Ukrainian people who are the main victims.

(Editor’s note: The University and College Union (UCU) is a British trade union in further and higher education representing over 120,000 academics and support staff.)

The success of the resolution has sparked a debate within the union which we welcome as there is so little discussion allowed in this country on the war in Ukraine. We condemn attacks on the union by pro-war figures and the use of UCU social media accounts to criticise the vote. The democracy of the trade union movement should be defended by all.

Trade unions have a long history of opposing government involvement in foreign wars and campaigning against militarisation and increased arms spending. This tradition is especially important in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis.

We urge trade unionists across the movement to put similar resolutions to their branches. We are happy to provide speakers for any meeting.

The resolution passed at the UCU is as follows:

Stop the War in Ukraine – Peace Now. City and Islington College Camden Road, University of Brighton, Grand Parade

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column).

Congress notes:

1. One year after the brutal invasion, Ukraine has become a battleground for Russian and US imperialism.

2. It is estimated that 150,000 Ukrainian soldiers and civilians and 200,000 Russian soldiers have died since invasion.

3. Putin has threatened the use of nuclear weapons and unleashed war crimes.

4. The 2022 NATO summit committed to a US military base in Poland, a brigade in Romania, air missile systems in Italy and Germany and two additional F-35 squadrons in Britain.

5. Volodymyr Zelensky says he wants Ukraine to become a “big Israel”—an armed, illiberal outpost of US imperialism.

Congress believes:

a. Wars are fought by the poor and unemployed of one country killing and maiming the poor and unemployed of another.

b. We should say, “Russian troops out, no to NATO escalation and expansion.”

c. We should stand in solidarity with ordinary Ukrainians and demand an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops.

d. NATO is not a progressive force: escalation risks widening war in the region.

e. Only through a peaceful resolution can lives be saved.

Resolves:

i. UCU to call upon Russian to withdraw its troops and for government to stop arming Ukraine.

ii. UCU to call for a peaceful resolution to the war.

iii. Congress resolves to support protests called by Stop The War, CND and other anti-war organisations.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

Peace by Peaceful Means: International Summit for Peace in Ukraine

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An announcement from Peace in Ukraine

We are calling for an international civil society gathering in Vienna, Austria on June 10/11*

The goal of the Peace Summit is to publish an Urgent Global Appeal, called the Vienna Declaration for Peace, calling on political leaders to act in support of a ceasefire and  negotiations in Ukraine.

Inviting Organizations: International Peace Bureau, CODEPINK, Assembly of the World  Social Forum, Transform Europe, IPPNW (D,AT,CH) (tbc), Europe4Peace, WILPF  International (tbc), International Fellowship of Reconciliation, Peace in Ukraine coalition

Local Organizers and Supporters: AbFaNG (Action Alliance for Peace, active Neutrality  and Non-violence), Institute for Intercultural Research and Cooperation (IIRC), Austrian  Center for Peace (ACP) in Stadtschlaining, Herbert C. Kelman Institute for Interactive  Conflict Transformation, ÖGB – Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund, WILPF Austria (tbc), Internationaler Versöhnungsbund – österreichischer Zweig

The summit will have different parts:

A conference to discuss the controversial questions related to the Russian-Ukrainian war, to hear the voices of civil society representatives of the various NATO countries, as well as  representatives from Russia and Ukraine who support the aims of the Peace Summit.  Participants from the Global South will share the dramatic consequences this war has had  for the people in their countries and emphasize how they can contribute to peace. The  Conference will focus not only on critics and analysis, but also on creative solutions and  ways to end the war and how to prepare negotiations. This is not only the task of states and  diplomats but nowadays more and more also of global society.

The conference will include a combination of lectures, working groups, expert groups, and  dialogues.

After the summit a march in Vienna to the various NATO-country embassies, as well as  the embassies of Russia and Ukraine and international organizations located in Vienna will  take place to meet with embassy representatives and deliver the Vienna Declaration for  Peace from people around the world;

*The 9th of June is the 180th Birthday of the Austrian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Bertha von Suttner, the first female Nobel Peace Prize laureate ever.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

The summit will also be supported by a send-off for delegations to visit the capitals of  various European countries with the purpose of meeting with government officials and  international organizations. Also further events for late 2023 will be developed.

A call for peace 

We condemn the illegal Russian invasion in Ukraine. The war has caused death and injuries  of civilians and soldiers and created untold suffering for the Ukrainian people, destroying the  country’s environment and infrastructure, causing rising food and energy prices around the  world, exacerbating poverty and hunger – especially in the global South – and threatening the  entire world with a nuclear war.

It is time for the weapons to fall silent and for diplomacy to begin to resolve the conflict. We  must counter the logic of war with the logic of peace.

Let us gather to discuss the state and the wider context of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the  positions of our various governments, the efforts, obstacles, and opportunities of the various  peace movements and most importantly, how we can work more effectively to promote a  ceasefire and negotiations, and peaceful solutions as the alternative to war.

Peace is not only the task of states and diplomats but nowadays more and more also of the  global civil society. What is urgently needed now is a global movement demanding that all  parties stop fighting and start talking. The international support garnered by the International  Peace Bureau’s Christmas ceasefire appeal, the appeals at the UN General Assembly and by  many governments, even comments from some political leaders of Russia and Ukraine show  that a window of opportunity may be opening.

Why Vienna? 

Austria is a neutral country. It is a “UN City” and the home to the Secretariat of the OSCE (the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), which had been monitoring the  situation in the Donbas since the signing of the Minsk II agreement.

Join the Peace Summit! 

It is the responsibility of peace movements all around the world and of all peace-loving  peoples to strengthen these efforts. The Vienna Summit for Peace in Ukraine can be a  powerful sign of hope and a catalyst for more and stronger peace actions globally. The future of humanity hangs in the balance; we must seize the moment before it’s too late.

Contact: International Peace Bureau, Marienstraße 19-20, 10117 Berlin,  viennaconference@ipb-office.berlin

There will be also an opportunity to join the conference virtually. RSVP for more details!

 WHEN

June 10, 2023 at 9:00am – June 11, 2023 (GMT+2)

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe

Leaks Reveal Reality behind U.S. Propaganda in Ukraine

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies in TRANSCEND Media Service

The U.S. corporate media’s first response to the leaking of secret documents about the war in Ukraine was to throw some mud in the water, declare “nothing to see here,” and cover it as a depoliticized crime story about a 21-year-old Air National Guardsman who published secret documents to impress his friends. President Biden dismissed the leaks as revealing nothing of “great consequence.”


Leaked document predicts a “protracted war beyond 2023.” Image credit: Newsweek

What these documents reveal, however, is that the war is going worse for Ukraine than our political leaders have admitted to us, while going badly for Russia too, so that neither side is likely to break the stalemate this year, and this will lead to “a protracted war beyond 2023,” as one of the documents says.

The publication of these assessments should lead to renewed calls for our government to level with the public about what it realistically hopes to achieve by prolonging the bloodshed, and why it continues to reject the resumption of the promising peace negotiations it blocked in April 2022.

We believe that blocking those talks was a dreadful mistake, in which the Biden administration capitulated to the warmongering, since-disgraced U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and that current U.S. policy is compounding that mistake at the cost of tens of thousands more Ukrainian lives and the destruction of even more of their country.

In most wars, while the warring parties strenuously suppress the reporting of civilian casualties for which they are responsible, professional militaries generally treat accurate reporting of their own military casualties as a basic responsibility. But in the virulent propaganda surrounding the war in Ukraine, all sides have treated military casualty figures as fair game, systematically exaggerating enemy casualties and understating their own.

Publicly available U.S. estimates have supported the idea that many more Russians are being killed than Ukrainians, deliberately skewing public perceptions to support the notion that Ukraine can somehow win the war, as long as we just keep sending more weapons.

The leaked documents provide internal U.S. military intelligence assessments of casualties on both sides. But different documents, and different copies of the documents circulating online, show conflicting numbers, so the propaganda war rages on despite the leak.

The most detailed assessment of attrition rates of troops says explicitly that U.S. military intelligence has “low confidence” in the attrition rates it cites. It attributes that partly to “potential bias” in Ukraine’s information sharing, and notes that casualty assessments “fluctuate according to the source.”

So, despite denials by the Pentagon, a document that shows a higher death toll on the Ukrainian side may be correct, since it has been widely reported that Russia has been firing several times the number of artillery shells as Ukraine, in a bloody war of attrition in which artillery appears to be the main instrument of death. Altogether, some of the documents estimate a total death toll on both sides approaching 100,000 and total casualties, killed and wounded, of up to 350,000.

Another document reveals that, after using up the stocks sent by NATO countries, Ukraine is running out of missiles for the S-300 and BUK systems that make up 89% of its air defenses. By May or June, Ukraine will therefore be vulnerable, for the first time, to the full strength of the Russian air force, which has until now been limited mainly to long-range missile strikes and drone attacks.

Recent Western arms shipments have been justified to the public by predictions that Ukraine will soon be able to launch new counter-offensives to take back territory from Russia. Twelve brigades, or up to 60,000 troops, were assembled to train on newly delivered Western tanks for this “spring offensive,” with three brigades in Ukraine and nine more in Poland, Romania and Slovenia.

But a leaked document from the end of February reveals that the nine brigades being equipped and trained abroad had less than half their equipment and, on average, were only 15% trained. Meanwhile, Ukraine faced a stark choice to either send reinforcements to Bakhmut or withdraw from the town entirely, and it chose to sacrifice some of its “spring offensive” forces to prevent the imminent fall of Bakhmut.

Ever since the U.S. and NATO started training Ukrainian forces to fight in Donbas in 2015, and while it has been training them in other countries since the Russian invasion, NATO has provided six-month training courses to bring Ukraine’s forces up to basic NATO standards. On this basis, it appears that many of the forces being assembled for the “spring offensive” would not be fully trained and equipped before July or August.

(Article continued in the column on the right)

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

(Article continued from the column on the left)

But another document says the offensive will begin around April 30th, meaning that many troops may be thrown into combat less than fully trained, by NATO standards, even as they have to contend with more severe shortages of ammunition and a whole new scale of Russian airstrikes. The incredibly bloody fighting that has already decimated Ukrainian forces will surely be even more brutal than before.

The leaked documents conclude that “enduring Ukrainian deficiencies in training and munitions supplies probably will strain progress and exacerbate casualties during the offensive,” and that the most likely outcome remains only modest territorial gains.

The documents also reveal serious deficiencies on the Russian side, deficiencies revealed by the failure of their winter offensive to take much ground. The fighting in Bakhmut has raged on for months, leaving thousands of fallen soldiers on both sides and a burned out city still not 100% controlled by Russia.

The inability of either side to decisively defeat the other in the ruins of Bakhmut and other front-line towns in Donbas is why one of the most important documents predicted that the war was locked in a “grinding campaign of attrition” and was “likely heading toward a stalemate.”

Adding to the concerns about where this conflict is headed is the revelation in the leaked documents about the presence of 97 special forces from NATO countries, including from the U.K. and the U.S. This is in addition to previous reports about the presence of CIA personnel, trainers and Pentagon contractors, and the unexplained deployment of 20,000 troops from the 82nd and 101st Airborne Brigades near the border between Poland and Ukraine.

Worried about the ever-increasing direct U.S. military involvement, Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz has introduced a Privileged Resolution of Inquiry to force President Biden to notify the House of the exact number of U.S. military personnel inside Ukraine and precise U.S. plans to assist Ukraine militarily.

We can’t help wondering what President Biden’s plan could be, or if he even has one. But it turns out that we’re not alone. In what amounts to a second leak that the corporate media have studiously ignored, U.S. intelligence sources have told veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh that they are asking the same questions, and they describe a “total breakdown” between the White House and the U.S. intelligence community.

Hersh’s sources describe a pattern that echoes the use of fabricated and unvetted intelligence to justify U.S. aggression against Iraq in 2003, in which Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Sullivan are by-passing regular intelligence analysis and procedures and running the Ukraine War as their own private fiefdom. They reportedly smear all criticism of President Zelenskyy as “pro-Putin,” and leave U.S. intelligence agencies out in the cold trying to understand a policy that makes no sense to them.

What U.S. intelligence officials know, but the White House is doggedly ignoring, is that, as in Afghanistan and Iraq, top Ukrainian officials running this endemically corrupt country are making fortunes skimming money from the over $100 billion in aid and weapons that America has sent them.

According to went to Kyiv to meet with him. Burns allegedly told Zelenskyy he was taking too much of the “skim money,” and handed him a list of 35 generals and senior officials the CIA knew were involved in this corrupt scheme.

Zelenskyy fired about ten of those officials, but failed to alter his own behavior. Hersh’s sources tell him that the White House’s lack of interest in doing anything about these goings-on is a major factor in the breakdown of trust between the White House and the intelligence community.

First-hand reporting from inside Ukraine by New Cold War has described the same systematic pyramid of corruption as Hersh. A member of parliament, formerly in Zelenskyy’s party, told New Cold War that Zelenskyy and other officials skimmed 170 million euros from money that was supposed to pay for Bulgarian artillery shells.

The corruption reportedly extends to bribes to avoid conscription. The Open Ukraine Telegram channel was told by a military recruitment office that it could get the son of one of its writers released from the front line in Bakhmut and sent out of the country for $32,000.

As has happened in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and all the wars the United States has been involved in for many decades, the longer the war goes on, the more the web of corruption, lies and distortions unravels.

The torpedoing of peace talks, the Nord Stream sabotage, the hiding of corruption, the politicization of casualty figures, and the suppressed history of broken promises and prescient warnings about the danger of NATO expansion are all examples of how our leaders have distorted the truth to shore up U.S. public support for perpetuating an unwinnable war that is killing a generation of young Ukrainians.

These leaks and investigative reports are not the first, nor will they be the last, to shine a light through the veil of propaganda that permits these wars to destroy young people’s lives in faraway places, so that oligarchs in Russia, Ukraine and the United States can amass wealth and power.

The only way this will stop is if more and more people get active in opposing those companies and individuals that profit from war–who Pope Francis calls the Merchants of Death–and boot out the politicians who do their bidding, before they make an even more fatal misstep and start a nuclear war.

Europe, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, North America,

Tschüss, Atomkraft: the end of nuclear power in Germany

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article by Roland Hipp from Greenpeace

April 15: After decades of protests, the era of nuclear power in Germany has ended. Roland Hipp, Managing Director of Greenpeace Germany, looks back – and with joy into the future.

Millions of people worked towards this day for years. People who protested against reprocessing plants, nuclear waste transport, unsafe nuclear waste storage facilities and the construction of new nuclear power plants. Those decades of resistance were worth it. 



The German nuclear phase-out is a victory of reason over the lust for profit; over powerful corporations and their client politicians. It is a people-powered success against all the odds. 


frame from video of Euronews: Greenpeace celebrates end of Germany’s nuclear era with T.Rex dinosaur

I thank all the brave people who took risks for their beliefs; everyone who took part in demonstrations; all the people who signed petitions and sent letters of protest. And I’m proud of the role Greenpeace has played in opposing high-risk nuclear technology.

In the current debate about the last remaining nuclear power plants in Germany, it is often forgotten how big the movement against nuclear plants was in this country, even before the catastrophic events at Chornobyl and Fukushima. 



The construction of the planned reprocessing plant in Wackersdorf was stopped in 1989 after years of widespread protest, a first major success of the anti-nuclear movement, with which Greenpeace is inextricably linked.

Greenpeace: protest and research

Greenpeace has repeatedly protested against the transport of nuclear waste from German nuclear power plants to the reprocessing plants in Sellafield (England) and La Hague (France) and was also able to prove that these plants are anything but harmless.

(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Is there a future for nuclear energy?

(article continued from left column)

Greenpeace measurements from 1998 showed that soil samples from the vicinity of the Sellafield nuclear plant were comparable to radioactively contaminated samples taken from the 30-kilometre exclusion zone around the Chornobyl reactor.

At the turn of the century, in the North Sea off La Hague  we found radiation levels well above regulatory limits, revealing routine illegal discharges of radioactive waste water.

In 2005, shipments to so-called nuclear fuel recycling plants in England and France from Germany were banned. This is also a success of Greenpeace, of protest based on facts.

The latest major milestone of the anti-nuclear movement, here in Germany, was the decision against the Gorleben repository. Once again, the nuclear industry and their political apologists were unable to oppose or overwrite the science: the dilapidated salt dome is demonstrably unsuitable for storing radioactive waste, which must be kept safe for hundreds of thousands of years. 

At the same time, the success points to the huge problem that advocates of nuclear power want to pass on to future generations: there is not one single safe repository for nuclear waste anywhere in the world. It is also good that Germany will not produce any new nuclear waste after 16 April.

Nuclear power is not only risky, but also not a solution to the energy crisis. Before the anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, Greenpeace activists are calling for the German nuclear power plants to be finally switched off.

The accidents in Chornobyl and Fukushima have shown us in the most emphatic way that this technology cannot be controlled by humans in the event of a disaster. The German Federal Government’s decision in 2011 to shut down nuclear power plants was correct at the time, and it still is. 



Nuclear energy is expensive, risky and far from independent: more than half of the uranium traded worldwide comes from Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. With resources no longer squandered on the false promise of nuclear energy, following its removal from the energy mix, the renewable energy transition can finally pick up speed. I look forward to a safe and secure future with renewable energies, without fear of the next nuclear accident and misguided investments in error-prone and outdated technology. 

Today I celebrate the nuclear phase-out and the many people who made it possible.

Europe, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Women peace-makers call for a holistic and sustainable peace

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from the World Council of Churches

Meaningful participation by women in a conflict resolution and peace-building promotes a more sustainable peace, a panel discussion with women peace-makers concluded, after the screening of a documentary on the 2015 “Women Cross the DMZ” initiative.

The European premiere of the documentary “Crossings” took place on 21 March at the Ecumenical Centre in Geneva, as part of the World Council of Churches’ support for the Korea Peace Appeal campaign and accompaniment of the advocacy efforts of Korean churches for sustainable peace in the region.


Panelists and their supporters after the screening of the documentary “Crossings” at the Ecumenical centre in Geneva on 21 March 2023. Photo: Ivars Kupcis/WCC

The film, directed by Emmy-award-winning filmmaker Deann Borshay Liem, explores enduring questions about war’s legacy on the Korean Peninsula and the significant and inspiring role women can play in resolving the world’s most intractable conflicts.

The documentary “Crossings” particularly recognizes and celebrates women’s involvement in working for peace on the Korean Peninsula. It follows 30 women peacemakers from different parts of the world on their historic journey crossing the demilitarized zone (DMZ) from North to South Korea, calling for an end to the Korean War and for peace on the Korean Peninsula.

One of the panelists and peacemakers portrayed in the documentary, Mimi Han, vice president of World YWCA, noted that “another crossing is within ourselves in South Korea – unfortunately, even in the faith community. It is sad to confess that there is a huge DMZ, or 38th parallel within ourselves.” The film demonstrates the importance of overcoming our own boundaries and barriers, highlighting the inspiring example of women from diverse backgrounds coming together and working towards a common goal, said Han.

“When I was a child, I usually heard from my parents: be a peacemaker, and practice peace in your daily life,” said Young-Mi Cho, another panelist from Korea, executive director of the Korean Women’s Movement for Peace. “Women can cross the boundaries within ourselves and make difference, achieving it in different ways. We want to end the war and make the world better, working all together.”

(Article continued in right column)

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

Questions related to this article:

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

(Article continued from left column)

Peter Prove, director of the WCC Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, noted that the film helps us to understand that the continued division of the Korean Peninsula is an artifact of the Cold War, “which was largely a conflict between white men.

“This historical reality requires us to engage in a more inclusive approach to the resolution of this matter. In addition to giving agency to women peace-makers around the world, it also means giving agency back to the Korean people, North and South,” said Prove. “Ultimately the construction of peace on the Korean Peninsula must be the joint project of Koreans – not obstructed by white men elsewhere.”

Women being involved in transforming situations of conflict is something we see a lot in the Biblical narrative, said Rev. Nicole Ashwood, WCC programme executive for Just Community of Women and Men. “What I was struck by in the film – even if there were times when women faltered and questioned how to proceed in the face of obstruction and opposition—these women understood the need to present a united front and that their strength and power came from their unity. There is a call for church to be involved in advocacy, and to join the women in Korea in their quest for peace,” stated Ashwood.

Despite the group of women in the film being very diverse, their experiences with war and peace processes are strikingly similar, noted Ewa Eriksson Fortier, one of the Women Cross the DMZ delegates and a longtime leader of humanitarian work in North Korea.

“We have the UN Security Council’s resolution to include women in peace and conflict resolution processes – the legal framework is there; many countries have made national plans of its implementation, but the implementation itself is very much resisted or put down in priorities of many countries,” said Eriksson Fortier, adding that today the situation in the world is even more serious with the war in Ukraine, and peace movements in the world will have a lot of resistance to overcome, ”but we must never give up.”

“When women call for peace, we are not just talking about peace in a sense of a national security, as absence of war, conflict and weapons,” added Mimi Han during the discussion. “We talk about common security, human security, seeing peace in a more holistic way, including socio-economic, health, environment, and climate security. Therefore we believe that meaningful participation of women, sharing power, brings peace which is more sustainable.”

The current political situation is a moment to develop the broader peace movement in Korea, as well as the Korean woman’s peace movement, noted Young-Mi Cho. “We want to reach out with our peace movement not only in Korea, but also in conflict situations in other countries as well. As the film concluded – let’s get started! We have to do it, and we have to do it together,” said the Korean peace-maker, encouraging women around the world to join the work for peace.

The panel discussion was moderated by Rev. Dr Peter Cruchley, director of the WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism. Co-sponsors of the documentary screening: Women Cross the DMZ (WCDMZ), Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), Nobel Women’s Initiative (NWI) and Korean Women’s Movement for Peace (KWMP).

As 2023 marks the 70th anniversary of the Armistice Agreement whereby the Korean War was suspended, but not ended, the World Council of Churches is urging churches worldwide to join the Korea Peace Appeal, a campaign that promotes replacing the Armistice Agreement with a permanent peace treaty for the Korean Peninsula.

East Asia, Europe, WOMEN'S EQUALITY,

Mouvement de la Paix: No to the War Economy

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A press release from the Mouvement de la Paix

No to the war economy proposed by the President of the Republic through the draft Military Programming Law (LPM 2024-2030) of 413 billion € (i.e. 40% increase compared to the previous law), which includes around 50 billion euros for nuclear weapons


In his greetings to the armed forces, pronounced at the Mont-de-Marsan air base on January 20, 2023, President Macron declared his desire “that the 2024-2030 military programming law reflect considerable efforts… which oblige us for decades …because we must never be one war behind, but we must be one war ahead”! It proposes a new LPM of 413 billion euros (+ 40% compared to the last LPM) including fifty billion for nuclear weapons. This would violate the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty signed by France) and the TIAN (Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, entered into force on January 21, 2021).

(Article continued on the right column)

(Click here for the original French version of this article.)

Question for this article:

Does military spending lead to economic decline and collapse?

(Article continued from the left column)

We refuse this crazy spending for war! Yes to an economy for peace! Let us refuse to be drawn into this logic of war, the disastrous economic, financial, social and ecological consequences of which we are already suffering, the extent of which we find difficult to imagine, including in the event of the use of nuclear weapons. Let us demand the reorientation of budgets towards social needs: salaries, pensions, health – hospitals, education and research, public services – job creation, fight to reduce climate change!

France must choose the side of PEACE and social and climate justice. France must act for a political and diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine and for all the ongoing conflicts (Palestine, Yemen, Kivu, etc.) instead of engaging our country in the infernal cycle of war maintained by the military- industrialist who alone benefits from it.

France, instead of inserting itself into the orientations of NATO, should propose and act for solutions based on the United Nations Charter (*), the SDGs (Sustainable Development Objectives), the work of the IPCC and UN Resolutions for a Culture of Peace.

War is never the solution, but always the worst for the people! The human security of peoples (physical, health, food, social, ecological) cannot develop without PEACE.

The Mouvement de la Paix calls on the population to act, in the largest popular gathering, to build our future together through a mobilization campaign which will take place from April 6 to the end of June with a highlight on May 21 with rallies on the places related to nuclear weapons (SNLE-NG base at L’île longue near Brest, Le Barp in Aquitaine (nuclear tests in the laboratory) etc: “Let’s build a future for life, peace, social and climate justice, including nuclear disarmament”.

Our objective is to convince as many parliamentarians as possible to vote against this military programming law, to say no to this war economy project and to get France to act with determination, as a signatory of the NPT ( nuclear non-proliferation treaty), in favor of nuclear disarmament by signing the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons (TPNW).

Mr. President of the Republic, ladies and gentlemen parliamentarians “NO MORE BOMBS!)

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe