Category Archives: FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Global Progressive Leaders Urge Biden to Drop US Charges Against Assange

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by Jake Johnson in Common Dreams (licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

A coalition of progressive leaders from across the globe demanded Monday (April 11) that the Biden administration immediately drop all charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is currently jailed in a high-security London prison as he fights U.S. extradition attempts.


Demonstrators rally in support of freeing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange outside of the Royal Courts of Justice in London on January 24, 2022. (Photo: Thomas Krych/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

“Freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of the press constitute an instrument that can controvert the interests of any government.”

In a letter to Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), more than 30 progressive advocates, intellectuals, and former heads of state argued that dropping the Espionage Act charges against Assange would “send a strong message to the world: that freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of the press constitute an instrument that can controvert the interests of any government, including that of the United States of America.”

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Click here for the Spanish original of this article.

Question related to this article:
 
Julian Assange, Is he a hero for the culture of peace?

Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

“The cases where there are reports of serious violations of freedom of expression would also be impacted by the dropping of the 18 charges against Assange,” the letter reads. “It would affirm the defense of this fundamental human right and would undoubtedly represent a clear and robust sign that everyone can express their opinion without fear of retaliation; that all the press outlets can give news to all the citizens of the world, with the certainty that the pluralism of thought is guaranteed.”

Signed by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Chilean intellectual Carlos Ominami, and 30 others, the letter was sent on the third anniversary of Assange’s forced removal from the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2019.

Assange has since been languishing in Belmarsh prison under conditions that human rights experts have characterized as “torture.” Last month, the U.K. Supreme Court denied Assange’s request to appeal an earlier decision allowing him to be extradited to the U.S., where he could face up to 175 years in prison.

The charges against Assange stem from his publication of classified material that exposed U.S. war crimes, including video footage of American forces gunning down civilians in Iraq.

Given that journalists frequently report on and publish classified documents, U.S. efforts to prosecute Assange have been denounced as a grave threat to press freedoms.

But despite pressure from rights groups, the Biden Justice Department has continued to pursue charges against Assange that were originally brought by the Trump administration, which reportedly considered kidnapping or assassinating the WikiLeaks founder.

In their letter on Monday, the progressive leaders wrote that the U.S. “has a long tradition of defending freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and freedom of the press.”

“It is precisely in the name of this tradition,” they wrote, “that we, progressive leaders of the world, address you to ask that, within the scope of its constitutional and legal competence, in respect of due process of law and the democratic rule of law, that your presidency exercise its prerogative of dropping all 18 charges leveled against journalist Julian Paul Assange.”

Statement of The Ukrainian Pacifist Movement Against Perpetuation of War

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A statement published in Pressenza

Ukrainian Pacifist Movement is gravely concerned about the active burning of bridges for a peaceful resolution of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on both sides and signals of intentions to continue the bloodshed indefinitely to achieve some sovereign ambitions. We condemn the Russian decision to invade Ukraine on 24 February 2022, which led to a fatal escalation and thousands of deaths, reiterating our condemnation of the reciprocal violations of the ceasefire envisaged in the Minsk agreements by Russian and Ukrainian combatants in Donbas prior to the escalation of Russian aggression.

We condemn the mutual labeling of parties to the conflict as Nazi-alike enemies and war criminals, stuffed into legislation, reinforced by the official propaganda of extreme and irreconcilable hostility. We believe that the law should build peace, not incite war; and history should give us examples of how people can return to peaceful life, not excuses for continuing the war. We insist that accountability for crimes must be established by an independent and competent judicial body in due process of law, in the result of unbiased and impartial investigation, especially in the most serious crimes, such as genocide. We emphasize that the tragic consequences of military brutality must not be used to incite hatred and justify new atrocities, on the contrary, such tragedies should cool the fighting spirit and encourage a persistent search for the most bloodless ways to end the war.

We condemn military actions on both sides, the hostilities which harm civilians. We insist that all shootings should be stopped, all sides should honor the memory of killed people and, after due grief, calmly and honestly commit to peace talks.

We condemn statements on the Russian side about the intention to achieve certain goals by military means if they cannot be achieved through negotiations.

(Continued in right column)

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

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

Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Continued from left column)

We condemn statements on the Ukrainian side that the continuation of peace talks depends on winning the best-negotiating positions on the battlefield.

We condemn the unwillingness of both sides to a ceasefire during the peace talks.

We condemn the practice of forcing civilians to conduct military service, to perform military tasks, and to support the army against the will of peaceful people in Russia and Ukraine. We insist that such practices, especially during hostilities, grossly violate the principle of distinction between militaries and civilians in international humanitarian law. Any forms of contempt for the human right to conscientious objection to military service are unacceptable.

We condemn all military support provided by Russia and NATO countries for militant radicals in Ukraine provoking further escalation of the military conflict.We call on all peace-loving people in Ukraine and around the world to remain peace-loving people in all circumstances and to help others to be peace-loving people, to collect and disseminate knowledge about a peaceful and nonviolent way of life, to tell the truth, that unites peace-loving people, to resist evil and injustice without violence and debunk myths about necessary, beneficial, inevitable, and just war. We don’t call for any particular action now to ensure that peace plans will not be targeted by hatred and attacks of militarists, but we are confident that pacifists of the world have a good imagination and experience of practical realization of their best dreams. Our actions should be guided by hope for a peaceful and happy future, and not by fears. Let our peace work bring closer the future from dreams.

War is a crime against humanity. Therefore, we are determined not to support any kind of war and to strive for the removal of all causes of war.

UPM
Fb.com/PeaceUkraine
yuriy.sheliazhenko@gmail.com
Tverskyi tupyk street, 9, app. 82
01042
Kyiv
Ukraine

Censorship in Russia: Do not use this word

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

(Editor’s note: On March 17 we wrote with regard to the war against Ukraine that “Russians are taking risks to express their opposition in the face of police action that is sometimes even ridiculous.” Here are some new examples taken from the April 11 blog of Sergey Aleksashenko .)

On March 15, the police detained Anastasia Parshkova, who had attended an anti-war picket gathering with a placard reading: “The Sixth Commandment. Thou shalt not kill.” (In the Orthodox Church, this is the Sixth, not the Fifth.)

On April 10, the police detained Konstantin Goldman, who stood at the pedestal of the Hero-city of Kyiv in the Manezh Garden near the Kremlin, holding in his hands the book War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy. 

(Continued in right column)

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

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

Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Continued from left column)

On April 9, a St. Petersburg court fined Artur Dmitriev 30,000 rubles (50% of the average Russian salary) based on the article “public actions aimed at discrediting the Russian military.” On April 7, Dmitriev had gone to an anti-war picket event holding an A4 sheet of paper with the following words: “The war brought so much grief that it is impossible to forget it. There is no forgiveness for those who once again plot aggressive plans.” The phrase for which Dmitriev was detained was said by the President of Russia on May 9, 2021, during the Victory Day parade on the Red Square.

Facing severe repression, Russians are turning to antiwar graffiti

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by Colleen Wood and Alexis Lerner in Waging Nonviolence published on March 21

As the Kremlin cracks down on antiwar protests, subversive street art critiquing the war in Ukraine is proliferating across Russia.

It is exceedingly difficult to organize peaceful protests in Russia. Since the Kremlin’s “Special Operation” began on Feb. 24, police have detained nearly 15,000 people across the country in connection with peaceful demonstrations. On March 4, the Kremlin expanded the scope of illegal activity with two laws that criminalize war reporting and antiwar protest. As of March 15, 180 charges have been lodged against protesters. Given — or despite — these restrictions, activists and artists are turning toward more subtle and subversive tools for political expression: namely, graffiti.


Spray-painted on a snowbank in the Russian city of Perm, this graffiti reads “Stop bombing Kharkov.” (Twitter/@RusMilkshake)

In the last 20 years, the Kremlin has limited free speech and citizens’ right to public assembly. While Russia has not been a democracy for many years, the Putin regime has generally avoided the Soviet approach to censorship, instead permitting some degree of political expression. In recent years, there have been calls for nuclear disarmament, environmental protection, maintaining pensions, and better treatment of LGBT communities. The precedent has been to criticize policy, not Putin.

But authorities are quick to crack down when citizens cross “red lines” of criticism on taboo topics like corruption and Chechnya, a republic in the North Caucasus where Moscow led two wars in the last 30 years. However, just because people cannot safely or legally speak out against unfavorable policies does not mean that they remain silent.

In order to circumvent this control over free speech and assembly, Russian activists and artists use spray paint to share anonymous and subversive views on a city’s walls. While this art form has existed in the region since the 1970s, it took a distinctly political turn in the early 21st century. Today, graffiti is an effective form of anonymous and accessible political critique, functioning as a “canary in the coal mine” when it comes to sharing otherwise privately-held political discontent.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, there has been a resurgence of politically subversive graffiti that the state has spent the last 10 years trying to crowd out of public spaces.

Spray-painted tags with a simple message — “No to War!” — appeared as early as Feb. 25, even before the first major antiwar demonstration in Moscow. This same message has been painted in metro stations, schoolyards and pedestrian thoroughfares in Moscow and St. Petersburg, which are Russia’s biggest cities and have traditionally been the hub of political dissent, as well as in smaller towns including Lipetsk, Irkutsk, Samara and Tomsk.

In addition to the ubiquitous, scrappy “No to War” tags, artists are painting more sophisticated pieces with targeted critiques of Putin and the regime. In Moscow, for example, an anonymous artist used a stencil to write “You’re carrying us to hell” in Russian, implying that the Kremlin is dragging the country into an undesirable conflict and, subsequently, unwanted hardship for attacked Ukrainians and sanctioned Russians. Other anonymous works stress in all-caps that “Putin is an aggressor” and “Kremlin thieves need the war, but not me or you.” The latter, in particular, implies that the Putin regime benefits from its war in Ukraine, either through the capture of warm water ports on the Black Sea, the installation of a pro-Kremlin puppet government in Kyiv or by pocketing profits from military contracts.

Authorities are struggling to paint over the proliferation of antiwar tags across the country. But street art is not always painted with a spray can. Other media include stickers, stencils, moss, snow, yarn-bombing and wheat-pasted posters.

(Continued in right column)

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

Can popular art help us in the quest for truth and justice?

(Continued from left column)

In Krasnoyarsk, Vera Kotova etched “No to War” in snow that had gathered on a statue of Vladimir Lenin. She was promptly charged under the new law criminalizing antiwar protest. She faces a fine of 30,000 rubles, about $290.

Activists also leverage visual irony to critique censorship and the political environment in Russia. One placard on the back of a bus stop in St. Petersburg graphs “fear” against “hope” in Russia since 1983, with hope surging in 1991 as the Soviet Union collapsed and again in 2012 following massive protests. While the piece — installed by the Yav crew, whose name comes from the Russian word for “reality” — does not specifically mention the war, it is heavily implied.

In Nizhny Novgorod, police dragged a woman holding a blank placard in the city’s central square. One video, viewed 1.1 million times on Twitter, shows people in the crowd asking the police to justify the detention.

In addition to capturing moments of state violence or mass mobilization, activists are also taking advantage of digital communications to criticize the war and mobilize nonviolent demonstrations.

Post Tribe Inspiration created a virtual gallery on Red Square, home of the famous St. Basil’s Cathedral, as part of their ART NOT WAR campaign. Users can visit the Metaverse through the Spatial app to view a virtual antiwar art exhibit, filled with doves and peace signs drawn in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine’s flag. Users are invited to add their own pieces to the online gallery.

Other works integrate virtual and real-life spaces through weblinks and QR codes that can direct a viewer to a particular website with their cell phone camera. In St. Petersburg, an anonymous “lost dog” sign appeared in the metro, describing a search for a pet named Peace. The sign reads, “On February 24, an unpleasant man with hints of Botox stole our Peace!” The sign has a QR code that links passengers to resources to “help return peace,” which actually directs to a petition on Change.org demanding an end to the war in Ukraine.

Before it was banned on March 14 in Russia, activists leveraged Instagram’s emphasis on images to spread information about protest logistics. One Instagram post informed Muscovites of a protest on Feb. 24 without specifying any details in text. The caption insists, “This is just a pretty picture,” and the image features a sketch of famous poet Aleksandr Pushkin and the number seven surrounded by an emoji of a walking man. Politically motivated followers had to solve the rebus to figure out where and when the demonstration was happening. The walking emoji nods to the coded language of “taking a walk” to protest, the portrait of Pushkin leads people to Pushkin Square, an open pedestrian space in central Moscow, and the number seven is a sign to show up at 7 p.m.

Social media also enables activists to mobilize sympathetic minds and atomize dissent. The hashtag #тихийпикет — “quiet picket” in Russian — has more than 1,600 posts on Instagram, including posts that instruct social media users how to participate in single-person antiwar demonstrations. Photos with the hashtag show subtle symbols of dissent, including masks and tote bags with the “No to War” slogan painted on and green ribbons.

These kinds of subversive and coded emblems of dissent mirror past tactics. In 2012, passersby might have been informed of a St. Petersburg protest through stickers on lampposts, such as the one showing then-St. Petersburg Mayor Valentina Matvienko being trampled by Peter the Great on horseback next to the time and location of the meeting.

These more subtle tactics were more commonplace in the years when Russia’s activist circles and political opposition lacked centralized leadership. Alexei Navalny emerged as a central figure in late 2011, and over the last decade, his team has played a crucial role in organizing large gatherings against corruption, pension reform and environmental degradation. But Navalny was poisoned and imprisoned last year, and on March 15 a court extended his sentence by 13 years. This dismantling of organized opposition makes it even more difficult to organize mass demonstrations in the streets.

The arrest of 15,000 protesters, independent journalists, opposition politicians and graffiti artists has significantly raised the stakes for dissent. Some graffiti artists have responded to this by going into the shadows, painting critical works in abandoned buildings and on the outskirts of town to avoid detection. Others have chosen to leave Russia altogether.

Despite the repression and hollowing out of Russia’s graffiti and activist communities, artists continue to innovate to publicize their critical views on the Kremlin, its violation of individual rights and its war in Ukraine. This is key in demonstrating to others around the country — and around the world — that dissent of Putin’s leadership is still alive.

Appeal of the Clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church Calling for Reconciliation and an End to the War

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

A report from Virtue Online – the Voice for Global Orthodox Anglicanism

Russian Priests for Peace News March 1, 2022

(Click here for the original Russian version published in Google docs.)

We, the priests and deacons of the Russian Orthodox Church, each on our own behalf, appeal to everyone on whom the cessation of the fratricidal war in Ukraine depends, with a call for reconciliation and an immediate ceasefire.


We are sending this appeal after the Sunday of the Last Judgment and on the eve of Forgiveness Sunday.

The Last Judgment awaits every person. No earthly authority, no doctors, no guards will protect you from this trial. Caring for the salvation of every person who considers himself a child of the Russian Orthodox Church, we do not want him to appear at this court bearing the heavy burden of maternal curses. We remind you that the Blood of Christ shed by the Savior for the life of the world will be accepted in the sacrament of Communion by those people who give murderous orders, not into life, but into eternal torment.

We mourn the ordeal to which our brothers and sisters in Ukraine were unfairly subjected.

We remind you that the life of every person is a priceless and unique gift of God, and therefore we wish all the soldiers – both Russian and Ukrainian – to return to their homes and families unharmed.
We are bitterly thinking about the abyss that our children and grandchildren in Russia and Ukraine will have to overcome in order to start being friends with each other again, respect and love each other.
We respect God-given human freedom, and we believe that the people of Ukraine should make their choice independently, not at gunpoint, without pressure from the West or the East.

In anticipation of the Forgiven Sunday, we remind you that the gates of paradise are opened to anyone, even a person who has sinned heavily, if he asks for forgiveness from those whom he humiliated, insulted, despised, or from those who were killed by his hands or by his order. There is no other way but forgiveness and mutual reconciliation.

“The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to me from the earth; and now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand,” God said to Cain, who envied his younger brother. Woe to every person who realizes that these words are addressed to him personally.

No nonviolent call for peace and an end to war should be forcibly suppressed and regarded as a violation of the law, for this is the divine commandment: “Blessed are the peacemakers.”

We call on all the warring parties to engage in dialogue, because there is no other alternative to violence. Only the ability to hear another person can give hope for a way out of the abyss into which our countries were thrown in just a few days.

Let yourself and all of us enter Lent in the spirit of faith, hope and love.

Stop the war.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

Abbot Arseniy (Sokolov), representative of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia to the Patriarch of Antioch and the Whole East

Abbot Nektary (Morozov)

Priest Alexy Antonovsky

Abbot Nikodim (Balyasnikov)

Priest Hildo Bos

Priest Vasily Bush

Archpriest Stefan Vaneyan

Hieromonk Jacob (Vorontsov)

Priest Alexander Vostrodymov.

Priest Dionysius Gabbasov

Priest Andrey German

Archpriest Evgeny Goryachev (veteran of the Afghan War)

Hieromonk John (Guaita)

Priest Alexy Dikarev

Priest Alexander Zanemonets

Archpriest Vladimir Zelinsky

Archpriest Peter Ivanov

Archpriest George Ioffe

Deacon Ilya Kolin

Archpriest Andrew Kordochkin

priest Lazarus of Lenzi

Archpriest Andrei Lorgus

Abbot Peter (meshaninov)

Archpriest Constantine Momotov

priest Eugene frost

hieromonk Dimitry (Pershin)

father Alexander Piskunov

Archpriest Stephen Platt

Archpriest Dionisy Pozdnyaev

Archpriest George Roy

priest Nikolay Savchenko

hieromonk IBAS, instead (of Senchukov)

Archpriest Joseph Skinner

Archpriest Dimitry Sobolewski

deacon Pimen Trofimov

Archpriest Alexander Shabanov

hieromonk Cyprian (Countrymen)

priest John Leontiev

Archpriest Vitaly Shkarupin

Archpriest Sergiy Dmitriev

Archpriest Vladimir Korolev

Archpriest Sergey Titkov

Priest Artemiy Morozov

Priest Alexy Zorin

Archpriest Andrey Lvov

Archpriest Sergiy Storozhev

Priest Ilia Gavryshkiv

Archpriest Vitaly Fonkin

Priest Artemiy Kolyagin

Hierodeacon Elisha (Romantsov).

Priest Gleb Krivoshein

Deacon John Myzdrikov

Deacon Valerian Dunin-Barkovsky

Priest Vladislav Bogomolnikov

Archpriest Vladimir Drobyshevsky

Priest Vadim Karpenko

Archpriest Gleb Vechelkovsky

prot. Theodore van der Voort

Priest Fyodor Kosolapov

Priest Anthony Lynov

Priest Anthony Kovalenko

Archpriest Dionysius Kuznetsov

Priest Dmitry Lukyanov

Priest Pavel Kasperovich

Archpriest Valentin Bonilla

Hieromonk Onesimus

the priest Alexei Pichugin

Archpriest Oleg Shulgin

Archpriest Dionisy the wards

Archpriest Victor Teplitsky

Archpriest Anatoly Bark

priest Alexey Cosoleto

deacon Alexander Pushkarev

hieromonk Hilarion

Archpriest Alexander Dubovoy

Archpriest Pavel Serdyuk

priest John Burdin

father Alexander Kuchta

deacon Dmitry Korostelev

Archpriest Georgy Zavershinsky

Archpriest Andrey Kuzma

priest Paul Countrymen

father Dimitry Vinitsky

the priest George Khristich

priest Anthony Serafimovich

monk Laurel (Solomon)

Deacon Alexey Perunovsky

Archpriest Vasily Petrov

Deacon Stefan Kuzmin

Priest Dmitry Ushakov

Priest Yakov Korobkov

Priest Alexander Nasibulin

Archpriest Mikhail Ilyin

Priest Konstantin Lebedev

Hieromonk Peter (Belov)

Hieromonk Seraphim (Standhardt)

Deacon Andrey Georgievich Morozov

Deacon Alexy Khilko

Archpriest Mikhail Fast

Protodeacon Igor Panachev

Archpriest Mikhail Evgenievich Klochkov

Priest Alexander Lebedich

Deacon Vladimir Olshevsky-Davydov

Priest Vasily Maksimishinets

Archpriest Peter Korotaev

Archpriest Igor Precup

Archpriest John Gate

Archpriest Sergiy Markevich

Priest Oleg Usenkov

Priest Alexander Novikov

Priest Sergiy Voinkov

Priest Anthony Kopaev

Deacon Oleg Karlashchuk

priest Dimitri Savin

Archpriest Pavel Kivovich

Priest Mikhail Bakker

Archpriest Igor Tarasov

Priest Sergiy Dudin

Archpriest Andrey Lobashinsky

Archpriest Mikhail Nemnonov

Priest Roman Savchuk

Priest John Terauds

Abbot Varlaam (Borin) Abbot Anthony (Loginov)

Deacon Oleg Ageenko

Archpriest Alexy Shishkov

Hierodeacon Kliment (Volyansky)

Priest Vyacheslav Shafarenko

Priest Sergiy Dyrman

Priests and deacons of the Russian Orthodox Church who wish to subscribe to the letter can write to russianpriestsforpeace@gmail.com”

More examples available of Russian opposition to the war against Ukraine

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

A compilation by CPNN

Recent additions to the google list “Russians are against the war in Ukraine”
Sources marked with an asterisk are no longer available


Frame from Video by Hero of Russia Alexander Garnayev with his grand-daughters

Political movements and civil activists

International appeal of famous writers to Russian speakers regarding the war in Ukraine — 17 Russian-speaking writers, including Belarussian writer, Nobel Prize winner in Literature Svetlana Alexievich

Meduza, Mar 5

Appeals of professional communities

Open appeal by alumni, students, graduate students, and staff of St. Petersburg State University against Russia’s military actions in Ukraine — more than 2,500 people 

Military aggression contradicts the culture and the values of Russian citizens, who have learned from the bitter experience of the Great Patriotic War [World War II], and the legacy of Russian artistic culture, which is anti-war in its very nature

Google docs

Declaration of Orthodox hierarchs and scholars of Orthodoxy condemning the concept of ‘Russian peace’ and its use to justify the war in Ukraine — more than 500 people, including several Russians, including Archimandrite Kirill and former editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate Sergey Chapnin

…we reject the heresy of the ‘Russian world’ and the shameful actions of the Russian government, which has unleashed a war against Ukraine. This war relies on a vile and indefensible doctrine condoned by the Russian Orthodox Church. We reject it as profoundly un-Orthodox, un-Christian, and hostile to humanity <...>. Just as Russia has invaded Ukraine, so the Moscow Patriarchate of Patriarch Kirill has invaded the Orthodox Church (as, for example, has happened in Africa), causing division and strife that not only results in uncountable deaths, but also endangers the souls of people, the salvation of the faithful

publicorthodoxy.org

Open letter from children’s writers, poets and other book industry workers of Russia — more than 40 people

writer Alexey Oleynikov’s Facebook, Feb 26*

(available from Echo of Moscow in the wayback machine)

Statements of celebrities and organizations

Businesspeople:

the board of directors of Lukoil, Russia’s largest private oil company 

Kommersant, Mar 3

Scientists:

biologist Evgeny Levitin, who has published an anonymous appeal on behalf of Russian biologists, condemning false reports about the development of biological weapons in Ukraine, published by the pro-government Russian media

The Insider, Mar 11

Musicians and music industry workers:

Miron Fedorov (Oxxxymiron), who has organized a charity concert in Istanbul and raised over $30,000 for the Ukrainian refugees

The Flow, Mar 16

Manizha Sangin, the bands Little Big and Bi-2, Danil Prytkov (Niletto), Darya Shikhanova (Dora)

Dozhd, Feb 25*

Ivan Dryomin (Face), who has left Russia and declared that he would no longer tour in his homeland

The Flow, Mar 12

Maksim Pokrovsky, frontman of the band Nogu Svelo

Telegram channel February Morning, Mar 16

Alexei Kortnev (band Neschastniy Sluchay)

Dialog UA, Mar 8

Television celebrities, hosts, and showpeople:

Alexander Gudkov, Anastasiya Ivleyeva, Ksenia Sobchak

I’m ashamed I was born on this day — Alexander Gudkov, showman

Dozhd, Feb 24*

(available on Ukranews)

editor of Channel One Marina Ovsyannikova, who spoke out against the war in a live broadcast on Vremya on March 14, appearing behind the host with an anti-war banner, and was soon detained

No war [in English]. Stop the war. Don’t believe the propaganda. They are lying to you [in Russian]. Russians against war [in English again] (Ovsyannikova’s banner)

Meduza, Mar 14

former chief artist of Channel One Dmitriy Likin, who had resigned from his post after the beginning of the war

Meduza, Mar 19

Continued in right column)

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

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

(Continued from left column)


Other culture workers and celebrities:

former Bolshoi theater prima ballerina Olga Smirnova, who had to leave the theater because of her anti-war statements

Meduza, Mar 17

Journalists:

former editor-in-chief of a pro-Kremlin media Russia Today Maria Baronova, who has resigned in protest of the war

New York Post, Mar 9

director of the Dozhd channel Natalia Sindeyeva, who has published an appeal to pro-government journalists Margarita Simonyan and Tina Kandelaki and Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova and asked them to speak out against the war

Novaya Gazeta, Mar 20

Military:

Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, Chairman of the ‘Assembly of the Russian Officers,’ who on January 28th had published an appeal to the President and the citizens of Russia entitled ‘The Eve of War,’ in which he condemned the possible recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics and the escalation of the conflict in Ukraine

Echo of Moscow, Feb 6*

(available in the wayback machine

honored military pilot of the Russian Federation, Hero of Russia Gennady Shtern

Air Force Command of UA Armed Forces in Facebook, Mar 13

pilot, Hero of Russia Alexander Garnayev 

Novy Prospekt, Mar 12

cosmonaut, world record holder for the longest stay in space Gennadiy Padalka

Novaya Gazeta, Mar 16

Media

Former Russian Deputy Prime Minister (2012-2018), head of FIDE Arkady Dvorkovich has publicly condemned the war with Ukraine 

MotherJones, Mar 14

Several employees of the state-controlled TV channels, which daily provide the official Kremlin view on the events in Ukraine, have resigned after the beginning of the war without making any statements. This includes NTV anchors Liliya Gildeyeva and Vadim Glusker, Channel One special correspondent Zhanna Agalakova, and many other unnamed employees of Channel One, NTV, and VGTRK

Meduza, Mar 15

Statements of some government officials

Another Duma deputy from the party New People, Sangadzhi Tarbayev, has also spoken out against the war

Kommersant, Mar 13

The Commission on Political Rights of the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights has issued a statement condemning military actions in Ukraine and military censorship in Russia. It was signed by more than 12 members of the Council 

Yekaterina Schulmann’s Telegram channel 

Wayback Machine, Mar 6

____________________

Listing on Russian website Meduza February 26 under the title “In Russia itself and around the world, tens of thousands of people opposed the war.”

The following sources are in addition to the google list “Russians are against the war in Ukraine” mentioned above.

Staff and students of the Moscow Gorky Literary Institute

Google docs

Graduates, students, graduate students and employees of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University – 187 signatures listed as of March 22

Google docs

Belarusian Film Community Against War – over 500 signatures listed

Google docs

Guides-interpreters, tour guides, representatives of the tourism industry

More than 600 guide-interpreters and travel agency employees from different regions of Russia (Kaliningrad, Yaroslavl, St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, Moscow, Vladivostok, Kamchatka, Yekaterinburg, Saratov, Nizhny Novgorod and other regions), as well as Russian-speaking guides from different countries (Great Britain, the Netherlands , Belarus, Egypt, Spain, Italy and others) sign an appeal against military methods of resolving political conflicts.

Telegram March 1

Community of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov against the war

We, students, graduate students, teachers, staff and graduates of the oldest university in Russia, Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, we categorically condemn the war that our country unleashed in Ukraine.. . . The appeal was signed (at 00:10, March 5, 2022) by more than 7,500 graduates, staff and students of Moscow State University.

MSU Alumni Against War.notion.site

March 17: The struggle for free flow of information about the Russian war against Ukraine

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article by CPNN

Information sources about the Russian war against Ukraine are being blocked by both Russia and the West which makes the situation quite complicated. This is illustrated by many events today (March 17).


Photo of girl arrested for demonstrating in Russia against the war. Copyright Valya Egorshin/NurPhoto/picture alliance as published by Deutsche Welle

As of today, many of the sources are no longer available about opposition to the war in Russia as listed in the Google Doc of March 13. We may assume they have been blocked or withdrawn under threats by Russian authorities. We have been able to find alternative sources for 13 of them, including backup copies of sources that were blocked after March 13. The Statement of Russian peace supporters and the open letter of Russian cultural figures continue to be republished by CPNN but are no longer available from the source, Echo of Moscow, because the website has been blocked by the Russian authorities. Open letters from Russian scientists and from Russian mathematicians are republished in CPNN but no longer available from the source, TRV-Science, presumably withdrawn because of legal pressure.

Russian authorities have not (yet) blocked the opposition comments republished in CPNN from Lukoil, the largest private company in Russia, or from the leading Russian chess players republished in CPNN from championat, the Russian chess website.

An article published recently by CPNN describes how Russians are getting around censorship by using social networks, encrypted messaging and VPN servers.  For those of us not yet familiar with VPN, it stands for Virtual Private Networks. As described on the website of cybernews, while there are many ways that authorities can block VPNs, there are even more ways to bypass their blocking.

(Continued in right column)

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

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

Free flow of information, How is it important for a culture of peace?

(Continued from left column)

An article yesterday in Deutsche Welle describes how Russians are taking risks to express their opposition in the face of police action that is sometimes even ridiculous. A video went viral on social media last week, showing a woman being arrested by the Russian police for holding up a small piece of paper that reads “two words.” The phrase “two words” (“два слова” in Russian) seems to hint at the forbidden slogan “no to war” (or “нет войне” in Russian). And Russian police have arrested demonstrators who protest with blank signs. A video that receive millions of views on social media, showed a woman holding a blank sign among a group of people before police officers approached her and escorted her away from the crowd. In another case, the pilot on an internal Russian flight made the following announcement: “Ladies and gentlemen, here is your captain speaking. Welcome to Antalya. Thank you for flying with “Pobeda”. Also, from me personally: the war with Ukraine is a crime…”.

Two women in Canada have launched a initiative for people to telephone friends in Russia to tell them the news that is being blocked from their television reports. They are even furnished telephone numbers if someone can speak Russian and wants to call Russians whose telephone numbers have been randomly selected.

An event that reminds one of the Black Panthers who said they fought on the wrong side in Vietnam, CNN has published information from videos of interviews with Russian soldiers captured (or perhaps in some cases deserted?) in Ukraine and who go so far as to say they will return to Russia and struggle against Putin.

Finally, with regard to Russia, we recommend a very valuable analysis from the Financial Times that describes the small circle of Putin’s advisors that influence his information and decisions.

While the above information is concentrated on Russian censureship, we should not forget, as described in CPNN on January 18, that the details of Putin’s proposals for peace treaties with the West that could have prevented the war were suppressed by the Western media and only available after diligent research.

What we are seeing is really a case of cyber-warfare, as it may be said that the control of information becomes more and more an arm of the culture of war.

Can Putin control Russian information?

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An editorial by CPNN

As documented extensively by Google Docs, a huge number of Russian citizens are against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Many express their position through open letters and appeals or simply publications on social media.

However, as described by Reporters Without Borders and reprinted in CPNN, the Putin administration has banned the words “war,” “attack” and “invasion” from the media. Only information from “official Russian sources” – the defence ministry – is now permitted. Information about military losses or troop moral had already been classified  since October. Any attempt to provide such coverage is liable to result in prosecution or inclusion on the “foreign agents” list.


Marina Ovsyannikova interrupts a live news bulletin on Russian state TV Channel One holding a sign reading ‘NO WAR. Stop the war’ in this still image obtained from the video uploaded on March 14

According to public opinion polls as cited by the blogger Sergey Aleksashenko, between 58% and 65% of Russians continue to support the war as of March 6. Aleksashenko cites three explanations: 1) Putin is on the television everyday with his version of events; 2) most Russians get their news from television; and 3) independent media have been severely censured or closed.
(Continued in right column)

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

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

(Continued from left column)

Two questions arise : Can Putin continue to control Russian television? Will Russians continue to get their news from Russian television?

First question : Can Putin continue to control Russian television?

Not completely. After all, television is controlled by people, not just machines, and people cannot always be controlled.

For example, as shown in the photo on the left, on March 14, an employee of Russian television Channel One named Marina Ovsyannikova interrupted the news broadcast by holding up a sign saying “NO WAR. Stop the war” and “Don’t believe the propaganda”.

It is estimated that at least a million television listeners saw the sign. Also, the video was recorded and put on line by Kira Yarmysh, spokeswoman for jailed opposition leader Alexey Navalny, and it quickly notched up more than 2.6 million views. Tass news agency said Ovsyannikova may face charges under a law against discrediting the armed forces, citing a law enforcement source.

The event was heavily covered in the Western media, for example by Al Jazeera, the Guardian, the New York Times, le Monde and the Intercept.

Second question: Will Russians continue to get their news from Russian television?

If history repeats itself, Russians will increasingly turn to Western sources of information even though Putin’s administration tries to block access to them. At the end of the Cold War, when Russian media was heavily censored, Radio Free Europe became the main source of information for millions of Russians. The more the goverrnment tried to block Radio Free Europe, the more it became a game for Russians to get its information.

In the end, people are curious and the game will probably win out.

Abolition 2000 Member organizations oppose Russian invasion of Ukraine

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from Abolition 2000

Many Abolition 2000 Member organizations and networks have released statements opposing the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Included below are links to some of these. A number of the statements have highlighted that the invasion is not only an act of aggression that violates the rights of Ukraine and is inflicting suffering on its people, but also that it threatens to expand to regional war, increases nuclear tensions and raises the risk of nuclear war by accident, crisis escalation or miscalculation.


Photo: Volodymyr Melnyk – Ukraine 123RF

There were also many statements released by Abolition 2000 members prior to the invasion (not included here) calling for diplomacy to resolve the conflict and prevent an outbreak of war. And there are many statements opposing the war by Russian civil society organizations, as well as from the main opposition party in Russia Yabloko party), municipal legislators, musicians, internationally recognized filmmakers, TV hosts, actors, sportspeople, and businesspeople. Click here to see a collection of these in Russian and English.

And there is an international appeal which everyone is invited to endorse Do NOT use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine conflict ; which was launched by Tadatoshi Akiba, former Mayor of Hiroshima and fromer President of Mayors for Peace, an affiliated network of Abolition 2000.

International organizations/networks

Youth Fusion (Youth Network of Abolition 2000): Youth Fusion’s statement on the current situation in Ukraine.
Condemns Russia’s military attack, notes increased nuclear tensions from Putin’s nuclear-capable missile test, and reminds the P5 of their statement that ‘a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.’

IALANA: Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: An Illegal War of Aggression
Highlights that Russia’s invasion is an illegal act of aggression, that leaders of an aggressor state may be individually responsible for the crime of aggression which is one of the core crimes set out in the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court, and that Putin’s thinly veiled references to resort to nuclear weapons should other states intervene militarily are unlawful threats of force under the UN Charter and according to the 1996 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on nuclear weapons.

World Future Council. World Future Council condemns acts of aggression and calls for restoration of peace and international law

Condemns Russian invasion as illegal, highlights that President Putin has committed a Crime Against Peace for which he is personally accountable as Head of State, calls for non-military means to reverse the aggression as outlined in Articles 33-41 of the UN Charter, warns of the risk of regional war and nuclear war, and supports Russians, Ukrainians and others opposing the war and calling for peace.

World Federalist Movement: Statement on Ukraine.
Calls for adherence to international law as underscored in Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter and to ensure the safety and protection of all civilians.

United Religions Initiative. A Reflection on Ukraine from United Religions Initiative

Expresses concern for the he Ukrainian people, the Russian people – their families, their children, and their communities, noting that war hurts all people, and has destructive ramifications on nature and our environment.

International Peace Bureau. IPB Statement on Ukraine
Calls for a comprehensive ceasefire, the withdrawal of all troops and a return to the negotiating table. Notes that there is no military solution, only a political solution based on the principles of common security.

Parliamentarians for Global Action: PGA firmly condemns the aggressive war launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine

Calls the invasion an illegal war of agression by the Russian Federation which involves individual criminal responsibility of the Russian leaders, and notes that this responsibility also extends the the eladers of Belarus who are complicit in the invasion. Notes that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is applicable in the context of the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, which is a continuum from the situation of unlawful occupation of Donbass and of the illegal Russian annexation of Crimea regarding which Ukraine has accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC.Calls for a range of measures whihc could be taken to address the situation.

National/regional organizations and affiliated networks

Peace Action USA. Peace Action Condemns Russia’s Invasion Into Ukraine
Calls for an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire, the withdrawal of all troops, and a return as soon as possible to diplomatic negotiations. Calls on the US government to contribute generously to humanitarian aid programs to support displaced persons and other victims of this war.

Mayors for Peace European Section. Statement on the War in Ukraine
Urges the Russian government and perpetrators of the current escalation and territorial agression in Ukraine to put an end to hostilities, respect international law and commit to reinvigorated diplomatic efforts. Expresses solidarity with all Mayors, local governments and residents who have been suffering and will now suffer more from this war. Recalls the risk of a nuclear escalation inherent in the conflict, which would result in catastrophic humanitarian consequences not only for our shared continent but the whole world.

Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, Japan Section. Statement at Russia’s Aggression against Ukraine.

Condemns Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, Putin’s threats to possibly use nuclear weapons and his actions of putting the Russian nuclear forces on high alert. The statement laments the Russian violation of the Budapest memorandum which will have serious implications for nuclear non-proliferation.

PNND Japan Statement (English, Japanese).

(Continued in right column)

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

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

(Continued from left column)

People for Nuclear Disarmament (Australia). Time for de-escalation not escalation as Putin puts nuclear forces on highest alert.

Notes the move by President Putin to put Russian nuclear forces on highest alert. Outlines how this might lead to nuclear war by miscalculation, malfunction, malware or further escalation. Calls on all nuclear weapon states to reduce risks of nuclear war by announcing no-first-use policies.

Gensuikyo (Japan). Letter of Protest to President Putin

Opposes the invasion as a criminal offence and against the UN Charter. Expresses concern at Russian threats to use nuclear weapons and recalls the P5 statement that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.

Peoples Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and 400 other South Korean NGOs (Republic of Korea). Stop the War in Ukraine! Give Peace a Chance!
Calls on Russia to stop the war and withdraw its troops. Calls on the international community to provide humanitarian support for Ukraine. Notes that all countries, including Russia and Ukraine, have interests related to security assurance, but that these interests should be achieved only by peaceful means and through diplomacy.

Project Ploughshares (Canada). Statement on Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
Calls for an immediate cease to Russian military operations in Ukraine, the unequivocally rejection by all nuclear-armed states of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, pursuit of diplomatic solutions, and the provision of humanitarian assistance by the international community.

Pax Christi USA. Statement on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
States that the invasion of Ukraine is a direct violation of international law, and that war is always a defeat for humanity. Expresses concern about the implied threat of the use of nuclear weapons in the conflict. Calls on the U.S. Catholic community to refuse to beat the drums of war and to not support efforts to justify U.S. or NATO military action nor increase the flow of arms into the conflict. Announces Day of Prayer and Fasting for Peace in the Ukraine on March 2.

DFG-VK (German Peace Society). DFG-VK Press release Feb 24, 2022
Calls on all countries to reject Russia’s breach of international law, and the outlawing and prohibition of wars of aggression worldwide and legal consequences for those responsible. Expresses concerns at Putin’s threats to those trying to stop him that he could respond with « the likes of which have never been seen in history »;.

United Nations Association of New Zealand. UNANZ condemns Russian acts of aggression and calls for restoration of peace and international law.
Supports UN Secretary-General’s assessment that the Russian invasion “…is wrong. It is against the Charter. It is unacceptable. But it is not irreversible.” Calls on the United Nations and the international community to use all non-military means possible, particularly those outlined in Articles 33 – 41 of the UN Charter, to contain and reverse the invasion of Ukraine, and to hold President Putin criminally responsible for the act of aggression (Crime Against Peace), along with other Russian officials who are complicit.

Peace Pledge Union (UK). Peace Pledge Union condemns Russian invasion of Ukraine
Expresses solidarity with peace activists in Russiawho are challenging the actions of the Russian government and armed forces, and concern that many of them have arrested as a result. Applauds any Russian soldiers who refuse to obey orders. Affirms that militarism and war cannot be defeated with more militarism and war.

Western States Legal Foundation (USA). The Peace Movement and the Ukraine War: Where to Now?
Analyzes Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an illegal war of aggression. Calls for immediate and unconditional negotiations to end hostilities. Discusses what the war has revealed about the realities of nuclear arsenals and their uses. To address the deeper issues, calls for a global peace movement aligned with no states. Emphasizes the need to develop a better understanding of the root causes of resurgent authoritarian nationalisms, arms racing, and war.

European No to War – No to NATO network. No to nuclear war
Condemns the Russian military aggression against Ukraine, calls for the bombing to stop immediately, the withdrawal of all troops and a return to the negotiating table. Promotes common security based on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act, and an end to NATO enlargement.

Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace (India). Statement on Ukraine
Calls for an immediate end to the invasion and for wide-ranging peace talks covering all the relevant issues—including security guarantees for the Russian Federation, the freedom and rights of the people of Ukraine which includes the legitimate concerns of the Russian-speaking regions in Ukraine. Expresses concerns about the threats of nuclear weapons use, and about radiation from Chernobyl and possible military damage to other nuclear reactors in Ukraine.

Canadian Voice of Women for Peace. VOW Statement on Ukraine
VOW condemns all acts of war and military aggression in Ukraine and denounces any threats to use nuclear weapons. VOW urgently calls for a comprehensive ceasefire in the region, for the Government of the Russian Federation, Ukraine, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to immediately demilitarize and de-escalate the conflict, and to resume multilateral diplomatic negotiations based on the United Nations Charter in order to ensure lasting peace and security in Ukraine, Russia, and Eastern Europe

Quaker Peace and Service (UK). Quakers in Britain condemn attack and call for end to fighting
Condemns the Russian invasion and calls for a cessation of fighting and for all parties to observe international law, including international humanitarian law. Calls for humanitarian corridors allowing civilians to flee the fighting, and for efforts to engage in dialogue and preparing the ground for the return of people to their homes.

Mouvement de la Paix (France). Le Mouvement de la Paix condamne fermement les actes de guerre de la Russie
Condemns Russia’s acts of war and calls for action to say no to war. Calls for non-violent, political, diplomatic and negotiated solutions in the spirit of the United Nations Charter. Urges reduction in arms spending and elimination of weapons of mass destruction. Promotes common security framework in Europe as envisaged by the OSCE.

Canadian Pugwash Group (Canada). Canadian Pugwash Group Condemns the Russian Attack on Ukraine
Calls on the Russian Federation to cease all hostilities and to withdraw all its forces from the territory of Ukraine. Encourages all European countries through the OSCE to further refine a European security architecture based on the renunciation of force and resolution of disputes exclusively through peaceful means. Expresses deep concern about the indirect threat of the use of nuclear weapons invoked by the Russian President and strongly affirms that nuclear weapons should have no place in international security.

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation (USA). On the Invasion of Ukraine
Condemns the invasion of Ukraine. Holds hope that Russia will not succeed and that the wishes of Ukrainian people for peace and freedom will prevail. Includes information on ways people can give humanitatian support as well as solidarity and political support to Ukrainians in their opposition to the war.

China: Academic dissent emerges on war in Ukraine but is censored

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from University World News (reprinted as non-commercial use with information conveyed to publisher)

As China steers an ambiguous path on Ukraine – refusing to condemn Russian aggression yet supporting Ukraine’s right to exist – Chinese academic dissent is emerging against the official government line, albeit quickly censored.


Image: iStock

At the same time academics in China are scrambling to understand the fast-changing international landscape, with restrictions on international academic contacts still in place.

With an urgent need to understand significant policy changes in Europe in recent weeks, a proposal was presented to the joint sessions of China’s National People’s Congress and its advisory body the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) for strict controls on contacts by academics – including contact via video link – with overseas academics and universities to be lifted.

Chinese professors have been restricted from airing their views and are reluctant to contradict the official Communist Party line on international relations and political events. However, a group of five prominent history professors from top Chinese universities were willing to go against the official narrative in a rare joint letter condemning the invasion of Ukraine.

The letter, signed by Nanjing University’s Sun Jiang, Peking University’s Wang Lixin, Hong Kong University’s Xu Guoqi, Tsinghua University’s Zhong Weimin, and Fudan University’s Chen Yan, described the Russian invasion as a “war that began in the dark”, and for an immediate end to the fighting.

“We emphatically call on the Russian government and President [Vladimir] Putin to stop the war and resolve any dispute through negotiations,” it said, despite Beijing’s ban on airing views on Russia in Ukraine, outlined in instructions from the government in late February.

The letter was immediately removed by censors when it appeared on 26 February on the Chinese social media platform WeChat but not before it had been viewed and commented upon – including attacking the professors on China’s social media with some calling them spies or traitors.

Chinese social media has been dominated by nationalistic voices in the days since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. They follow the official line blaming the United States and its Western allies for the crisis.

“Over the past few days we have been closely following the development of the situation,” the professors said in their letter. “In the midst of all the noise, we felt the need to make our voices heard.”

“We empathise with the suffering of the Ukrainian people,” they said.

“We are concerned that Russian military action will lead to turmoil in Europe and the entire world, and trigger wider humanitarian disaster.”

Avoid narrow nationalism

Xu, professor of history at the University of Hong Kong and one of the signatories, said in an interview with the BBC’s Chinese service that he initially hoped that the open letter would attract other scholars to sign up and did not expect it to be blocked so soon.

“Our starting point at the time was that in the midst of all the noise, we historians should have a little independent thinking of our own.”“We hoped to appeal to rationality, to conscience, and appeal to everyone to get out of the trap of narrow nationalism.”

He noted that the two World Wars were caused by such nationalism. “Narrow and blind nationalism is not only a risk to China but to all countries,” he said.

Andreas Fulda, political scientist and China scholar at the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, described the professors as “pretty daring” for coming out with their letter.

The letter “goes against the entire grain of the propaganda of [Chinese President] Xi Jinping, and whilst the [Chinese] government is trying to play a neutral role, it is fairly evident from state media but also social media that there’s a pro-Russia campaign under way”.

“We also know this from the censorship instructions that are instructed to scrub off any reference to Ukraine or pro-Ukraine sentiment or critique of the Chinese government position or any understanding they may have towards the position of NATO [in the crisis],” Fulda said. “So if you issue a statement that is clearly pro-peace and sympathetic towards Ukraine, then you are taking considerable risks in China right now.”

Sigrun Abels, head of the China Centre at the Technical University of Berlin in Germany, described the academics as courageous but noted that barring their views “goes beyond the normal censorship because China is struggling to find its position in this political crisis now”.

Experts have been observing China’s balancing act, “to somehow find a position and not being too concrete – not condemning Russia, for example, for the invasion into Ukraine – and knowing that the whole world is waiting for Xi Jinping to intervene if he could,” Abels told University World News.

In this situation, “it is difficult for the Chinese Communist Party to accept people who position themselves on the academic stage.”

(Continued in right column)

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

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

(Continued from left column)

Abels noted that the Chinese leadership would see it as dangerous for others to set the tone. “If somebody else is leading the political line, even though the political lines are not really fixed at this moment, it’s easier to handle it with their normal censorship instruments, and this is what is happening.”

On Monday 7 March, a petition condemning the invasion of Ukraine signed by 121 alumni from several of China’s top universities was circulating in and outside China. The petition called on the Chinese government to honour commitments made to Ukraine under UN Security Council Resolution 984, which provides security assurances to countries without nuclear weapons.

“We resolutely support the righteous fight of the Ukrainian people against Russian aggression. We demand that the international community maintain and respect the territorial integrity, the national dignity, and the sovereignty of Ukraine,” the statement said.

Restrictions on professors

Professors have been punished in the past for comments against government policies in China, and there are also incidents of students reporting professors and teachers to the authorities for politically “inappropriate” remarks in class.

Last month Peking University’s Institute of International and Strategic Studies published a report which concluded that China would suffer more than the US in ‘decoupling’ technology – the report was removed from the web shortly after publication.

Academics need permission to attend even virtual international conferences. Chinese universities hosting virtual conferences organised abroad are required to submit the agendas for advance approval together with details of all foreign participants.

Chinese scholars, and those in the field of international relations, face some of the toughest restrictions, hampering communication with the outside world.

“Definitely people in universities are more cautious about talking openly about certain issues if they affect the Chinese government,” said Dominic Sachsenmaier, professor of modern China at the University of Göttingen, Germany.

Contacts are being limited, according to Fulda. “Chinese academics were always keen to have face-to-face exchanges but now China is cut off from the global community. Social media isn’t the solution because everything that you say on Weixin [social media] is monitored, so the idea that academics can have a protected space where you can communicate has subsided.”

Last year, Jia Qingguo, a Peking University professor of international relations who is a CPPCC delegate, said in a formal statement that such restrictions could harm China’s foreign policy.

“Excessive management will affect experts’ analysis of international issues and the quality of their advice,” Jia said in a proposal to the CPPCC National Committee to lift the restrictions, saying approvals for academics engaging with overseas think tanks and universities were unnecessary.

Renewed proposal to lift restrictions

As international events have moved at breakneck speed after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there are indications that Chinese academics and think tanks are struggling to make sense of the changes.

Some Western academics, particularly in Germany, noted that some Chinese academics had reached out unofficially to them in recent weeks to understand major changes under way in German foreign policy since the invasion of Ukraine.

“There is a lot of confusion in Chinese academic circles in the political science and international relations fields; they are struggling to understand these historic changes in Europe,” said an academic in Hong Kong who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“They have only the official version, but they fear it may be ill-informed without input from experts in the West who really understand their own countries’ policies. Like all academics, they want to refer to a variety of sources.”

Abels said universities and academics in Germany were used to having discussions with Chinese partners and trying to explain what is going on in Europe, but contacts are limited and it has been difficult to have proper discussions online.

“Normally we have frequent contact with the [Chinese] embassy to keep in touch, but this is not the case at the moment; there is no active discussion going on.”

“I’m sure they have their official channels and I think they are translating every article that academics are writing in German,” she added.

Jia repeated his call this year in a renewed proposal to the National Committee of the CPPCC which started its annual session on 5 March.

His proposal included giving universities and think tanks more autonomy to decide who could attend international conferences rather than seeking advance approval from the central authorities.

China should “take effective measures to encourage experts and scholars to conduct foreign exchanges, including policy support for experts and scholars to organise international conferences, facilitate foreign exchanges by experts and scholars, and provide the necessary financial support for experts and scholars to conduct foreign exchanges when particularly needed, so that the voice of the Chinese people can be more easily and effectively disseminated abroad”, Jia said.

Jia said last year some institutions demand approval from two persons for any meeting with foreigners, and the Chinese expert has to submit a detailed meeting report afterwards. They also cannot meet the same foreigners more than twice in a year.

“It is only through keeping in touch with others, and exchanges, that experts can get an up-to-date and objective understanding of what’s happening outside, and provide reasonable policy suggestions to the government,” Jia said in his 2021 communication to the CPPCC National Committee.