Category Archives: DISARMAMENT & SECURITY

Protests in France agains US attack on Venezuela

Question related to this article:
 
Can Trump force regime change in Venezuela, Cuba and Colombia?

(Continued from left column)

° ° ° ° °


– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe, Latin America,

Massive Protest in Cuba Condemns US Military Operation in Venezuela

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Photos from a Youtube video by Dawn News

Here are some frames from the Youtube video by Dawn News of the rally in Havana to protest the attack and kidnapping of President Maduro by the Trump government of the United States. The frames presented here are in the order in which they occur in the video.


° ° ° ° °

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Can Trump force regime change in Venezuela, Cuba and Colombia?

(Continued from left column)

° ° ° ° °


– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Latin America

Maduro Supporters Gather in Caracas

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Photos from a Youtube video by Reuters

Here are some frames from the nine-hour Youtube video by Reuters of the rally in Caracas to protest the attack and kidnapping of President Maduro by the Trump government of the United States. The frames presented here are in the order in which they occur in the video.


° ° ° ° °

° ° ° ° °

° ° ° ° °


(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Can Trump force regime change in Venezuela, Cuba and Colombia?

(Continued from left column)


° ° ° ° °

° ° ° ° °

° ° ° ° °


– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Latin America

Thousands Protest in Colombia

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from CCTV facebook

Thousands of protesters took to the streets of Bogota, the capital of Colombia, on Wednesday to decry threats from the United States to expand its military campaign into their territory in the name of combating drug trafficking, after last weekend’s deadly raid on Venezuela.

Wednesday’s rally took place at Bolivar Square in the heart of downtown Bogota at the call of Colombian President Gustavo Petro after U.S. President Donald Trump said a U.S. military operation against Colombia “sounds good”. Such demonstrations were also held in other cities across Colombia.

U.S. military forces carried out a series of attacks and bombings in Caracas and other parts of Venezuela in the early hours of Saturday, and forcibly seized Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, before putting them in custody in New York.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
Can Trump force regime change in Venezuela, Cuba and Colombia?

(Continued from left column)

“We are now witnessing the resurgence of American imperialism throughout Latin America and many parts of the world. The United States is not only reshaping its imperialism, but also disregarding the fundamental principles of international law,” said Cristian Zuluaga, a protester.

“They always consider us Latin American countries inhuman or more precisely, they see us as their backyard. They believe our wealth belongs to them. They believe we will always be subservient, yielding, never rebellious. But we have courageous people here,” said Claudia Bejarano, another protester.

U.S. attack on Venezuela, which Trump has admitted is to secure “total access” to Venezuela’s massive oil reserves and subsequent threats to Colombia, has sent shock waves through Latin America. Demonstrators this week hit the streets of Europe and the Middle East to condemn the U.S. aggression.

“We are not slaves to anyone, nor are we above anyone. We share the same land, the same territory. All we can do is to unite, engage in dialogue, and reach a necessary peace agreement,” said Maria Mayorga, a demonstrator.

“The whole world has responded. Protests have also taken place in Europe. Protests have also occurred in countries that were once invaded by the United States, such as Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, and Baghdad,” said Jhon Fredy Sanchez, another demonstrator.
– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Latin America

International stability, human security and the nuclear challenge: Yearbook of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Introduction to the Yearbook of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (abridged)

In 2025 the world marks the 80th anniversary of the only times that nuclear weapons have been used in war—the bombings of Hiroshima on 6 August 1945 and Nagasaki three days later. In those eight decades, a great deal of death and destruction has been meted out in war but the taboo against using nuclear weapons has survived and grown stronger. This is, as the Nobel Peace Prize Committee noted when awarding the 2024 Peace Prize to the movement of Japanese nuclear survivors (hibakusha), Nihon Hidankyo, ‘an encouraging fact’. Nonetheless, new risks mean it is worth reviewing today’s nuclear challenge.

Nuclear weapons pose existential risk for the world population, as does ecological disruption, the impact of which on peace and stability is starting to be felt in a context in which insecurity is already on the rise for other reasons. The 2020s have so far seen more numerous armed conflicts compared to the previous three decades, with higher war fatalities and increased displacement of people. Great power confrontation has returned to levels of intensity not experienced since the end of the cold war in 1989–91, including the articulation of nuclear threats.

It can therefore be no surprise that, in 2024, global security showed no overall improvement and some deterioration compared to the previous year. Several armed conflicts—not least in Ethiopia, Gaza, Myanmar and Sudan— continued to escalate. Though the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria in December 2024 offered the prospect of an end to the country’s civil wars, a sustainably peaceful outcome was far from certain. Overall, the international capacity for peaceful conflict management continued to seem not quite up to its extraordinarily challenging tasks. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine continued, confrontation over Taiwan deepened, tensions on the Korean peninsula sharpened, and global politics were marked by increasing divisiveness and polarization sown by, among other causes of disputation, Israel’s devastating offensive in Gaza. . .

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

New uncertainties originated in the November 2024 election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States. These played out in the first quarter of 2025 once he had taken office and quickly came to occupy the foreground in discussion of world affairs . . .

The president made explicit territorial claims for Greenland, for Canada (though the degree of seriousness of this was hard to gauge), for control of the Panama Canal, and for Gaza, as a US-owned holiday resort after expelling all Palestinians. He evinced apparent acceptance of Russia retaining territory it controlled due to its illegal invasion of Ukraine, while demanding access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, and refused to back two United Nations resolutions condemning Russia’s invasion. . . .

The second Trump administration rolled back US policy on climate change, encouraging the fossil fuel companies to turn away from any plan for an energy transition. Financial oversight came under attack with the firing of more than 12 inspectors-general responsible for fiscal propriety in federal government agencies and departments. This was part of a broader attack on the federal bureaucracy .

In the first quarter of 2025, therefore, both allies and adversaries of the USA and all those in between found themselves navigating uncharted geopolitical and economic waters. The policies and stances of the Trump administration in its first weeks may not all endure for its full four years. But some will likely persist and embed themselves deep enough in American policy that the next administration, even if it is not cut from Trumpian cloth, will find it hard to do away with them entirely. This is the complex background to discussing the nuclear challenge in the coming years. This chapter first looks at the current state of arms control (section II), then at the prospects of a new nuclear arms race (section III), before returning to the context of a world order in crisis (section IV), in order to discuss how the nuclear challenge might be addressed (section V).

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

The Challenge of Making a Culture of Peace an Official Heritage in Africa

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Excerpts from an announcement by Juste Joris Tindy-Poaty

ABSTRACT
This is a call for contributions to a collective work on the theme of making a culture of peace an officla heritage in Africa. Using a multidisciplinary approach, this work aims to explore and highlight the various processes by which traditional and contemporary African societies have made and continue to make peace, and therefore the culture of peace, a heritage to be preserved and transmitted.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Report

Using a multidisciplinary approach, this collaborative book project aims to explore and highlight the various processes by which traditional and contemporary African societies have made and continue to make peace, and therefore the culture of peace, a heritage to be preserved and transmitted.

The expected contributions, including theoretical reflections, field research, case studies, and examples of best practices, will be organized into two parts: (i) Sources, foundations, and endogenous resources of the culture of peace; (ii) Impacts of external influences, hybridizations and resilience of endogenous practices, challenges, and issues of the culture of peace in contemporary African societies.

I – Sources, Foundations, and Endogenous Resources of a Culture of Peace

This first part will bring together contributions that examine and highlight not only the sources and endogenous foundations of a culture of peace, but also the resources through which African societies have, throughout the centuries, been able to embody and transmit, from generation to generation, the almost innate human disposition toward mutual aid and sociability; and also the meaning of a non-violent relationship and peaceful, symbiotic coexistence between humankind and nature.

The main themes of this first part of the book are as follows:

Theme 1: Culture of Peace: Endogenous Sources and Foundations

Inspired by UNESCO, the concept of a culture of peace is defined by the United Nations as consisting of “values, attitudes and behaviors which reflect and promote conviviality and sharing based on the principles of freedom, justice and democracy, all human rights, tolerance and solidarity, which reject violence and incline towards preventing conflicts by addressing their root causes and resolving problems through dialogue and negotiation, and which guarantee to all the full enjoyment of all rights and the means to participate fully in the development process of their society” (cf. UN General Assembly Resolution 52/13 of 15 January 1998).

How can this concept, as defined, be rooted in traditional African societies? What can be understood by “culture of peace” in the specific context of traditional African societies?

Theme 2: Culture of Peace, Oral Literary Heritage, and Social Practices/Customs/Prohibitions

African oral literary heritage is diverse and rich in tales, epics, songs, rituals, and short genres or proverbs (proverbs, maxims, sayings, etc.). All these constituent elements of African literary heritage, which fall under the art of storytelling, the “oral verbal art” (Ursula Baumgardt), are vehicles of our cultures and, at the same time, of our understanding of living together and peace. What are the elements of oral literatures and what are the practices, customs, and social prohibitions that, on a daily basis, contributed and continue to contribute, in these traditional and contemporary societies, to the prevention of antisocial behavior, the transmission of a prosocial culture, and the promotion of better living together in peace?

Theme 3: Culture of Peace and Endogenous Mechanisms for Conflict Transformation

What mechanisms were conceived and implemented in our traditional societies for conflict resolution and violence prevention, and for conflict transformation? And when violence was unavoidable, how did our traditional societies work towards restoring peace? What symbolic objects, songs, dances, or rituals were used for conflict prevention, reconciliation, and peacebuilding?

Theme 4: Culture of Peace and Traditional Ecology or Ethnoecology

Given that a culture of peace includes harmonious relationships between humans and their natural environment, what knowledge and practices, falling under the umbrella of “traditional ecology” or “ethnoecology” (P. Mouguiama-Daouda and A. Moussirou Mouyama, 2020), did our traditional societies use to preserve biodiversity and protect nature? Can this knowledge and these practices still contribute to environmental preservation and the fight against climate change today?

Theme 5: Institutions and Actors Custodians of the Endogenous Resources of a Culture of Peace

Given that peace is both an intangible and tangible heritage, what institutions and actors in our traditional societies were responsible for safeguarding, preserving, and transmitting a culture of peace? What was the place and role of women, guardians of traditions, in safeguarding, preserving and transmitting the culture of peace in traditional Africa?

II – Impacts of External Influences, Hybridization and Resilience of Endogenous Practices, Challenges and Issues of a Culture of Peace in Contemporary African Societies

Considering the impact of colonization, among other things, there are no longer any strictly traditional African societies. While contemporary African societies are heirs to traditional societies, they have been and continue to be built upon numerous exogenous contributions, such as imported religions (like Islam and Christianity). Consequently, it is clear that “current African identities are now being forged at the interface of cosmopolitanism and indigeneity.”

The themes that will constitute this second part of the book are as follows:

Theme 1: Endogenous Mechanisms and Practices of Peace Culture and Exogenous Influences

How effective and legitimate are endogenous mechanisms and practices of peace culture (such as traditional dialogue, mediation by elders, reconciliation rituals, chieftaincy systems, etc.) in pre-colonial and post-colonial contexts? What is the impact of exogenous models on these endogenous mechanisms and practices? Does this impact lead to the integration of these endogenous mechanisms and practices into formal judicial systems? How do endogenous mechanisms and practices of peace culture coexist with exogenous models? Are endogenous mechanisms and practices and exogenous models complementary, or must a choice be made between them? Are we witnessing resilient mechanisms and practices, or the creation of hybrid mechanisms and practices for conflict transformation?

Theme 2: Culture of Peace and the Challenges of Transitional Justice and Reconciliation

… Under what conditions can transitional justice be an effective and legitimate mechanism for restoring social cohesion and building lasting peace? In practical terms, how has this mechanism reconciled, and how can it reconcile, the opposition between formal and restorative justice and address the challenge of impunity? What is the role of collective memory and Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in collective healing and the prevention of future conflicts and violence?

(Article continued in right column)

(Click here for the original version in French

Questions related to this article:

Can a culture of peace be achieved in Africa through local indigenous training and participation?

(Article continued from left column)

Theme 3: Culture of Peace and the Democratic Challenge

… Conceived in its essence as a means of peaceful conflict resolution, is democracy in Africa doomed to foster a culture of violence and political instability? What solutions exist in Africa for effective and legitimate electoral mechanisms and systems? How can we initiate democratization processes in Africa that truly aim to consolidate political stability and establish a lasting culture of peace? What alternative systems to pluralist democracy exist to end the culture of violence and political instability in Africa?

Theme 4: Culture of Peace, Public Policies, and Development

… To speak of good governance as “the competence […] to effectively develop policies and ensure their implementation and the delivery of services” is undoubtedly to raise the issue of public policymaking for development. What place do the various political and institutional ecosystems give to the issue of developing and evaluating public policies? Is the creation of effective public policies a priority of national development agendas and a shared culture? Do science and its practitioners benefit, in all African states, from public recognition of their legitimacy to contribute to political decision-making? What is the role of endogenous public scientific research in public policymaking? Does each African state have a “science ecosystem for informing public policy” for sustainable development and peace? Are sustainable development and peace in African states objectives based on the prior construction of a long-term vision and the implementation of coherent and harmonized public policies?

Theme 5: Culture of Peace, Status and Role of Youth and Women

With young people representing 60% of the population in 2020, Africa was already the youngest continent in the world and will remain so until at least 2070 (AFD, 2020, p. 16). This youth demographic certainly poses challenges in terms of meeting social needs, but it is also potentially a lever for transformation and development. Women in Africa are also a potential lever for transformation and development. What is the status of young people and women, and what role do they already play in Africa in promoting and building a culture of peace (in its broadest sense: conflict and violence prevention and management, combating climate change, creating businesses and jobs, etc.)? How is Africa appropriating and implementing UN resolutions 1325 on the rights of women, peace and security, and 2250 on youth, peace and security? With regard to the rights of women and girls in particular, can we truly speak of peace and development without concrete achievements, or even significant progress, in gender equality? Where do African states stand with the implementation of SDG 5 (Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls)?

Theme 6: Culture of Peace, Mental Health, and Individual Well-being

Before discussing peaceful relationships with other people or the natural environment, a culture of peace is first and foremost about inner peace. Being at peace with oneself means, in particular, being in good mental health, that is, being in “a state of well-being in which [one] can realize one’s own potential, cope with the normal stresses of life, work productively and fruitfully, and make a contribution to one’s community” (WHO, 2022, p. 2). With, according to the WHO, “about one in eight people worldwide [living] with a mental disorder” (2022), mental health is a global concern. Anxiety and depression, the most common mental health disorders, are the second leading cause of long-term disability. What is the state of mental health and well-being in Africa, within families (for children and parents), in schools and universities (for students), and in the workplace for all working individuals? What are the major challenges, consequences, and impacts of mental health in Africa for individuals and societies? What are the potential solutions for optimal mental well-being for individuals in the context of peaceful communities?

Theme 7: Culture of Peace, Education, Culture, Sport, and Media

If “peace is learned” (T. D’Ansembourg and D. Van Reybrouck, 2016), what role do the educational systems of contemporary African societies play in education for a culture of peace, considering both endogenous traditions and external influences? How is, or can, a culture of peace be taught or transmitted to younger generations, in formal and/or informal settings? Are there educational programs or community initiatives in this area? How can culture, sport and the media be involved in this requirement for education in a culture of peace in Africa?

Submission Guidelines

Proposals for contributions in French should be sent to the following addresses: jjtindypoaty@yahoo.fr; jrdoutsona@yahoo.fr; bbdndombi@gmail.com; celestineboupo2@yahoo.fr; nzamickaledamien@gmail.com before March 31, 2026.
Submitted as an abstract (in French and English) not exceeding 300 words with a maximum of 5 keywords, proposals will be reviewed by the Coordination and Editorial Committee, and responses will be sent to contributors according to the schedule below.
The final texts of the contributions will be reviewed by the Scientific and Reading Committee.
The proposal must indicate the relevant section and theme.

Contribution Submission Guidelines

Each contribution must adhere to the structure of a scientific article and be written in 12-point font, 1.5 line spacing (Times New Roman) for the main text and 10-point font (Times New Roman) for footnotes. The complete text of the contribution must not exceed 20 pages (including the bibliography).

Section headings should be numbered as follows:

1. First level, first title (Times 12 bold)
1.1. Second level (Times 12 bold italic)
1.2.1. Third level (Times 11 bold italic)
Below the title of the contribution, please include the author’s full name(s), affiliation(s), city, country, and email address.

References should be formatted according to APA style.

Each contribution must be accompanied by a bio-bibliography of no more than 200 words.

Call for contributions launched: November 10, 2025
Deadline for submitting the abstract of the proposed contribution: March 31, 2026
Deadline for notification of acceptance of the proposed contribution: May 31, 2026
Deadline for submitting the final text of the contribution: July 31, 2026
Publication date: December 2026

Coordination and Editorial Committee

General Coordinator: Dr. Juste Joris TINDY-POATY (Assistant Professor of Philosophy, École Normale Supérieure/Gabon; email address: jjtindypoaty@yahoo.fr; tel.: +241 74 24 44 80)

(Editor’s Note: For members of the Coordination Committee and the Scientific and Reading Committee, and for the bibliography, please consult the original here.)

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

Africa, DISARMAMENT & SECURITY

When Maria Corina Machado Wins the Nobel Peace Prize, “Peace” Has Lost Its Meaning

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Michelle Ellner from Codepink

When I saw the headline Maria Corina Machado wins the Peace Prize, I almost laughed at the absurdity. But I didn’t, because there’s nothing funny about rewarding someone whose politics have brought so much suffering. Anyone who knows what she stands for knows there’s nothing remotely peaceful about her politics.

If this is what counts as “peace” in 2025, then the prize itself has lost every ounce of credibility. I’m Venezuelan-American, and I know exactly what Machado represents.


If this is what counts as “peace” in 2025, then the prize itself has lost every ounce of credibility. I’m Venezuelan-American, and I know exactly what Machado represents.

She’s the smiling face of Washington’s regime-change machine, the polished spokesperson for sanctions, privatization, and foreign intervention dressed up as democracy.

Machado’s politics are steeped in violence. She has called for foreign intervention, even appealing directly to Benjamin Netanyahu, the architect of Gaza’s annihilation, to help “liberate” Venezuela with bombs under the banner of “freedom,” She has demanded sanctions, that silent form of warfare whose effects – as studies in The Lancet and other journals have shown – have killed more people than war, cutting off medicine, food, and energy to entire populations.

Machado has spent her entire political life promoting division, eroding Venezuela’s sovereignty and denying its people the right to live with dignity.

This is who Maria Corina Machado really is:

° She helped lead the 2002 coup that briefly overthrew a democratically elected president, and signed the Carmona Decree that erased the Constitution and dissolved every public institution overnight.

° She worked hand in hand with Washington to justify regime change, using her platform to demand foreign military intervention to “liberate” Venezuela through force.

° She cheered on Donald Trump’s threats of invasion and his naval deployments in the Caribbean, a show of force that risks igniting regional war under the pretext of “combating narcotrafficking.” While Trump sent warships and froze assets, Machado stood ready to serve as his local proxy, promising to deliver Venezuela’s sovereignty on a silver platter.

° She pushed for the U.S. sanctions that strangled the economy, knowing exactly who would pay the price: the poor, the sick, the working class. 

° She helped construct the so-called “interim government” a Washington backed puppet show run by a self-appointed “president” who looted Venezuela’s resources abroad while children at home went hungry.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
The Nobel Peace Prize: Does it go to the right people?

(Continued from left column)

° She vows to reopen Venezuela’s embassy in Jerusalem, aligning herself openly with the same apartheid state that bombs hospitals and calls it self-defense.

° Now she wants to hand over the country’s oil, water, and infrastructure to private corporations. This is the same recipe that made Latin America the laboratory of neoliberal misery in the 1990s.

Machado was also one of the political architects of La Salida, the 2014 opposition campaign that called for escalated protests, including guarimba tactics. Those weren’t “peaceful protests” as the foreign press claimed; they were organized barricades meant to paralyze the country and force the government’s fall. Streets were blocked with burning trash and barbed wire, buses carrying workers were torched, and people suspected of being Chavista were beaten or killed. Even ambulances and doctors were attacked. Some Cuban medical brigades were nearly burned alive. Public buildings, food trucks, and schools were destroyed. Entire neighborhoods were held hostage by fear while opposition leaders like Machado cheered from the sidelines and called it “resistance.”

She praises Trump’s “decisive action” against what she calls a “criminal enterprise,” aligning herself with the same man who cages migrant children and tears families apart under ICE’s watch, while Venezuelan mothers search for their children disappeared by U.S. migration policies.

Machado isn’t a symbol of peace or progress. She is part of a global alliance between fascism, Zionism, and neoliberalism, an axis that justifies domination in the language of democracy and peace. In Venezuela, that alliance has meant coups, sanctions, and privatization. In Gaza, it means genocide and the erasure of a people. The ideology is the same: a belief that some lives are disposable, that sovereignty is negotiable, and that violence can be sold as order.

If Henry Kissinger could win a Peace Prize, why not María Corina Machado? Maybe next year they’ll give one to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation for “compassion under occupation.”

Every time this award is handed to an architect of violence disguised as diplomacy, it spits in the face of those who actually fight for peace: the Palestinian medics digging bodies from rubble, the journalists risking their lives in Gaza to document the truth and the humanitarian workers of the Flotilla sailing to break the siege and deliver aid to starving children in Gaza, with nothing but courage and conviction.

But real peace is not negotiated in boardrooms or awarded on stages. Real peace is built by women organizing food networks during blockades, by Indigenous communities defending rivers from extraction, by workers who refuse to be starved into obedience, by Venezuelan mothers mobilizing to demand the return of children seized under U.S. ICE and migration policies and by nations that choose sovereignty over servitude. That’s the peace Venezuela, Cuba, Palestine, and every nation of the Global South deserves.

Tell the Nobel Committee: The Peace Prize belongs to Gaza’s journalists, not María Corina Machado!

And Join our Venezuela Rapid Response Team!

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, Latin America,

Hiroshima Peace Declaration on 80th anniversary of atomic bombing

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from Mainichi Japan

The following is the full text of the Peace Declaration read on Aug. 6 by Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui at a ceremony to mark 80 years since the 1945 atomic bombing of the city.


Visitors hold their hands together in prayer in front of the Cenotaph for the A-bomb Victims at Peace Memorial Park in Hiroshima’s Naka Ward on Aug. 6, 2025. (Mainichi/Kenjiro Sato)

Eighty years ago, Hiroshima was strewn with bodies too damaged to identify even their sex. One hibakusha (survivor) ignored the many glass shards piercing her body to cremate her father with her own hands. Elsewhere, a young woman begged, “I don’t care if I die. Please! Give me water!” Decades later, a woman who heard that plea still regretted not giving the young woman water. She told herself that fighting for the elimination of nuclear weapons was the best she could do for those who died. Another hibakusha spent his life alone because the parents of the woman he loved refused to let her marry anyone exposed to the bomb.

One hibakusha leader frequently reminded younger audiences, “Building a peaceful world without nuclear weapons will demand our never-give-up spirit. We have to talk and keep talking to people who hold opposing views.” Today, conveying the ardent pleas for peace derived from hibakusha experiences is more crucial than ever.

The United States and Russia still possess about 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the chaos in the Middle East are accelerating military buildups around the world. Feeling the pressure of this situation, policymakers in some countries even accept the idea that “nuclear weapons are essential for national defense.” These developments flagrantly disregard the lessons the international community should have learned from the tragedies of history. They threaten to topple the peacebuilding frameworks so many have worked so hard to construct.

Despite the current turmoil at the nation-state level, we, the people, must never give up. Instead, we must work even harder to build civil society consensus that nuclear weapons must be abolished for a genuinely peaceful world. Our youth, the leaders of future generations, must recognize that misguided policies regarding military spending, national security, and nuclear weapons could bring utterly inhumane consequences. We urge them to step forward with this understanding and lead civil society toward consensus through expanded participation at the grassroots level. In this process, we must all remember to think less about ourselves and more about each other. Thinking of others is how humanity has resolved much conflict and turmoil on our path to the present day. Clearly, nations, too, must look beyond narrow self-interest to consider the circumstances of other nations.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

In expanding grassroots initiatives, solidarity will be indispensable. Cultural arts and sports exchanges contribute enormously to the culture of peace we seek. And in fostering that culture of peace, young people can easily take the lead. All they need to do is conceive and initiate projects they can carry out in the course of daily life, such as peace-centered art and music projects or planting seeds and saplings from atomic-bombed trees. The City of Hiroshima continuously offers opportunities to experience the culture of peace built by Hiroshima’s hibakusha and other predecessors in their spirit of mutual support. The more our peace culture transcends national borders, the more it will pressure policymakers now relying on nuclear deterrence to revise their policies.

Policymakers around the world, can you not see that security policies derived from narrow self-interest are fomenting international conflict? Nations now strengthening their military forces, some including nuclear arsenals, must engage constructively in talks aimed at abandoning reliance on nuclear weapons. Please, visit Hiroshima. Witness with your own eyes what an atomic bombing does. Take to heart the peace-loving spirit of Hiroshima, then begin immediately discussing a security framework based on trust through dialogue.

Japan is the only nation that has suffered an atomic bombing in war. The Japanese government represents a people who aspire for genuine and lasting peace. Hiroshima demands that our government lead toward unification of our divided international community. As president of Mayors for Peace, already the world’s largest network of peace cities and still growing, the City of Hiroshima will collaborate with our more than 8,500 member cities worldwide to instill the culture of peace, which stands in firm opposition to military force. We will call on policymakers to revise their policies. We call on Japan, for example, to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). Doing so would manifest the spirit of Hiroshima and begin to answer the supplications of our hibakusha, represented by Nihon Hidankyo, last year’s Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is on the brink of dysfunctionality. The TPNW should serve as strong support for that treaty, helping it remain the cornerstone of the nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime. We demand that Japan at least participate as an observer during the first TPNW Review Conference next year. Furthermore, in light of the intensified global challenges of coping with radiation damage due to nuclear testing, we demand that our government strengthen measures of support for all hibakusha, including those living abroad. With their average age now exceeding 86, they still face myriad hardships caused by radiation damage to their minds and bodies.

At this Peace Memorial Ceremony marking 80 years since the atomic bombing, we offer our heartfelt condolences to the souls of the victims of the atomic bombings. We renew our determination to work together with Nagasaki and with likeminded people around the world to reach humanity’s long-sought goal — the abolition of nuclear weapons leading to lasting world peace.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, East Asia

CPNN in the Peace Wave 2025

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

Here at CPNN we have contributed to the Peace Wave 2025 with a video based on last month’s CPNN bulletin and concluding with the Peace Manifesto 2025..

Click on the following image to see our contribution:




(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

The Peace Wave: Its history and effects

(article continued from left column)

And here are the links for the full 24 hours of the Peace Wave:

Peace Wave Part 1

Peace Wave Part 2

Peace Wave Part 3

Peace Wave Part 4

Peace Wave Part 5

Peace Wave Part 6

Peace Wave Part 7

Peace Wave Part 8

Peace Wave Part 9

Peace Wave Part 10

Peace Wave Part 11

Peace Wave Part 12

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

The damage foreign military bases do in 2025

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

A report from World Beyond War

A new report by World BEYOND War finds that military bases used by foreign militaries are growing in number, as are public protests and advocacy against those bases. Of 1,247 foreign military bases in the world, 877 of them, by latest count, are U.S. bases outside of the United States. Eighteen other nations, combined, have 370 bases outside their borders.

The full report is available below or as a PDF here.

While U.S. bases are in 95 foreign countries all over the globe and virtually encircling the borders of Russia and China, the nation with the second-most foreign bases, Türkiye, has them all near Türkiye, with the exception of one base in Somalia, and the majority of them in Syria and Iraq where Türkiye has been waging wars. During U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States added, and later closed, hundreds of bases. Türkiye and the U.S. are allied members of NATO and weapons traders, and the United States maintains a military presence at nine bases within Türkiye, at one of which it keeps nuclear weapons. The only other nation on Earth with even a tenth as many foreign military bases as the United States is the United States’ very closest military ally, the United Kingdom, some of whose bases are joint U.S.-UK operations.

The combined foreign military bases of the top three nations on the list, NATO members all, total 1,127. The fourth nation on the list, NATO’s raison d’être, Russia, has 29 foreign military bases. These are all found in 10 countries, all of which are near Russia, apart from one base in Sudan.

Foreign bases are catching on in a minor way with other nations. And governments like that of Djibouti that host bases for numerous nations for a fee increase the risk of sparking conflict. But foreign bases remain primarily and uniquely a U.S. enterprise, with no other foreign basing approaching in scale that of U.S. basing in nations such as Germany, Japan, and South Korea. The biggest change in U.S. bases in the past three years is the creation of dozens of new bases in Norway, Sweden, and Finland. The U.S. has also opened new bases in Western Asia, Somalia, South Africa, Panama, Puerto Rico, and Peru, and significantly in the parts of the world southeast of China: Taiwan, the Philippines, Guam, the Northern Marianas, Papua New Guinea, and Australia.

(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Can foreign military bases be shut down?

(article continued from left column)

People have built popular movements to prevent planned bases and to close existing bases at many locations around the world, and increasingly they are in touch with each other. On February 23, 2025, and surrounding days, individuals and organizations around the world took coordinated action to call for the closure of all military bases as part of the Global Day of Action to Close Bases. In over 60 locations people protested the foreign bases of various countries, including the United States, the UK, and Russia. See https://DayToCloseBases.org

Bases are often on stolen land and often perpetuate systems of segregation and colonialism. They do incredible environmental damage, tend to increase sexual violence and drunkenness, cost a financial fortune, prop up brutal governments, and facilitate drone attacks and wars.

In some places, movements against bases have achieved official support. The Governor of Okinawa has repeatedly visited the United States to insist that military bases be closed. Almost 20 years ago, the Government of Ecuador evicted the U.S. military and banned foreign bases. More recently, the Ecuadorian government has violated its Constitution to allow foreign bases in the Galapagos Islands and proposed to do the same on the mainland, despite opposition from members of Parliament.

In some places, bases have been prevented or closed. In 2024, after years of struggle, supported by World BEYOND War and others, the Save Sinjajevina campaign met with the Prime Minister of Montenegro and gained his promise that there would be no military training ground built at Sinjajevina in Montenegro. This was to have been a massive and destructive project for the benefit of NATO and the U.S. military. In 2006, people in the Czech Republic learned of plans to create U.S. bases in their country. They organized and prevented those bases from being built. In 2007 localities in the Czech Republic held referenda that matched national opinion polls and demonstrations; their opposition moved their government to refuse to host a U.S. base. In Colombia, a popular movement has prevented construction of a base for use by the U.S. military on Providencia Island, and a new movement to prevent such a base on Gorgona Island is drawing on the lessons from that success.

As shown in the new report, complaints against foreign military bases are numerous. Bases deny sovereignty, make nations into targets, make wars more likely, support unpopular governments, do extensive environmental damage, proliferate nuclear weapons, provide criminal immunity to occupying troops, and create a segregated structure in which people do not all have the same rights.

The U.S. public, and as far as can be determined, every other public whose government has foreign bases, has never been asked to decide on creating or closing such bases, and very rarely if ever even been surveyed in an opinion poll on the matter.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to coordinator@cpnn-world.org with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, North America,