Category Archives: DISARMAMENT & SECURITY

View from the UK: The international anti-war movement is growing.

. TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY .

Latest newsletter of the Stop the War Coalition,

The international anti-war movement is growing. People across the world are beginning to connect their crumbling standards of living with wars and militarism and are increasingly joining the dots between oppression at home and war overseas.

War and its domestic impact cost Trump the midterm elections. Palestine was also on the ballot, hence Trump’s announcement over military aid to Israel moments before the polls opened.

The mass protests across Europe, whether initially sparked by dilapidated schools or a housing crisis, are drawing links between rearmament and austerity. Anti-war placards and Palestine flags are everywhere. The international youth and student day of action called at the London anti-war conference in June is looking to be huge across the continent.

Question related to this article:
 
Youth initiatives for a culture of peace, How can we ensure they get the attention and funding they deserve?

International Youth Strike against War

On November 20, thousands of students across the UK and internationally will walk out of their schools, colleges and universities against the drive to war, the militarisation of education and the austerity that comes with it.

Here the education unions are supporting the student action. The UCU has called a day of action to coincide with the students and the NEU is backing the protests.

From Brighton to Edinburgh students are saying no to war and militarism. In London there will be a rally in Trafalgar Square where students from across the capital will come together at 1pm following uni and college walk-outs.

International Day of Action against War

On the following day, Saturday, November 21, there will be protests in towns and cities across the country. Similar protests are expected to take place around Europe.

Andy Burnham may have called for de-escalation in the Middle East but he is still sending fighter jets to Saudi Arabia to aid in the assault on Yemen and giving his full support to the war in Ukraine.

In London there will be a protest outside Downing Street at midday. A peace conference is being held in Preston. In Manchester, StW is supporting the Lucas Plan 50 years anniversary conference. Other protests and actions are taking place in Liverpool, Brighton, Bristol, Cardiff, Newcastle, Birmingham, Glasgow.

– – – – – –

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

Call to UN Members: Prevent nuclear war and achieve nuclear disarmament

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

Received by email from Unfold Zero

On Thursday October 15, Dr. Deepshikha Kumari Vijh, UN Representative for the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, presented the Nuclear Abolition Day Appeal to UN Member States participating in the UN First Committee (Disarmament and International Security). 

The Appeal has been endorsed by more than 800 organizations and an additional 1400 individuals including Nobel Laureates, parliamentarians, local body representatives; former high-level political and military officials; academics and educators; scientists; medical professionals; leaders from faith-based, business, and youth communities; artists; and others.

The Appeal calls on governments to affirm that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible, and announce concrete plans to:

° Reduce nuclear risks and prevent nuclear war;

° Commit to achieving the global elimination of nuclear weapons within a reasonable timeframe (no later than the 100th anniversary of the UN), and commence negotiations to achieve this objective;

° Redirect the billions spent on nuclear weapons to urgent global needs—peace, protection, and sustainable development—as envisioned in Article 26 of the UN Charter,

A world without nuclear weapons is our destination

“In 1996 the World Court unanimously concluded that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith—and bring to a conclusion—negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control… Excellencies, we humbly submit, our destination is a world without nuclear weapons. And we urge, that it does not remain a destination only in words. Every decision taken here, in this Committee, can bring us closer to it.”

Dr Deepshikha Kumari Vijh presenting the Nuclear Abolition Day Appeal to the UN First Committee on October 15, 2026. See full statement. 


(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

On September 25-26, 2026, NuclearAbolitionDay.org organised Towards a Nuclear-Weapon-Free World, a global, online, intergenerational event commemorating the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons.

The event included:

Short presentations by experts from the United Nations and around the world;

Special screenings of the documentary An Ordinary Insanity followed by discussion with the director and producer;

Discussion of the principal calls made in the Joint Appeal for Nuclear Abolition Day;

Short cultural performances for peace and nuclear abolition.

The event was held in four sessions spread across the world’s time zones. You can watch the video statements for the event and the full session recordings at the Nuclear Abolition Day 2026 YouTube playlist. Video statements include:

H.E. Izumi Nakamitsu, UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for Disarmament Affairs;

Michael Douglas, Academy Award Winning Actor and UN Messenger of Peace;

Hon. Oscar Arias, President of Costa Rica 1986 to 1990 and 2006 to 2010, Nobel Peace Laureate 1987;

Achin Vanaik, Founding member, Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace, India;

Bill Kidd, Former Member of the Scottish Parliament. Co-President, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament.

We also recommend reading the written version of the presentation by Hon Gareth Evans, former Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Co-Chair of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament and Founder of the Asia-Pacific Leadership Network.

– – – – – –

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.

The Rivas International Peace Forum Approves a Roadmap to Fight Escalating Militarism and Defend Peace, Multilateralism, and Peaceful Coexistence

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article from the International Peace Bureau

Against an international backdrop marked by growing instability and global rearmament, the International Peace Forum concluded this Friday (September 25), in Rivas-Vaciamadrid. It brought together 63 organizations from 32 countries with the aim of mapping out diplomatic alternatives to what they describe as one of the most dangerous periods since World War II.

Video of Forum on facebook

The forum’s panels centered the debate on the need to transition away from a unipolar international order—sustained by record increases in global military spending, which reached $2.718 trillion in 2024—toward a multilateral framework of peaceful coexistence.

Speakers at the forum denounced the financial priorities of global powers, noting that they continue to divert essential funds that should instead go toward healthcare, housing, and the fight against hunger. Similarly, during the working sessions and five thematic panels held at the gathering, delegations analyzed key conflict hotspots:

° Middle East and North Africa: The forum condemns the crisis in Palestine and Lebanon, as well as the recent aggression against Iran that threatens energy security in the Strait of Hormuz.

° Latin America: It demands the immediate removal of the economic blockade and energy siege imposed by the United States on Cuba, while also rejecting coercive measures and aggression against Venezuela.

° Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa: The forum urged negotiated solutions to end the war in Ukraine and the dynamics of conflict in Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Western Sahara.

The forum also made an urgent appeal for the signing of an international treaty guaranteeing the prohibition and ecologically safe dismantlement of nuclear arsenals, which currently exceed 12,000 warheads globally. Furthermore, peace was linked to climate justice following the commitments of COP30 in Belém, and special focus was placed on protecting women and migrants affected by wars and human trafficking networks.

Unlike other international gatherings, the Rivas Forum aims not to end merely with a statement of principles and intentions. To ensure the continuity of its work and follow up on agreements, the participating organizations have established a roadmap with commitments to create:

° International Coordination Mechanism: Concrete proposals to formalize a permanent communication and cooperation network will be presented before the end of 2026, operating continuously through 2027.

° New Monitoring Institutions: Approval was granted to propose an International Observatory on Conflict Resolution and Militarism to prepare periodic reports, alongside the structure of a Parliamentary Network connecting lawmakers from Latin America, the Caribbean, and Europe.

° Mobilization Calendar: Endorsing the Stop Rearm Europe campaign and actively joining the days of pacifist mobilization scheduled for November 20 and 21, 2026, was also agreed upon.

Finally, the forum proposed promoting the submission of peace resolutions to the UN, UNESCO, WHO, and IMO, as well as seeking strategic diplomatic alliances with global integration platforms such as BRICS+, CELAC, the African Union, and ASEAN.

Question related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(article continued from left column)

Political and social organizations and embassies

1- Partido Comunista de España 
2- Izquierda Unida
3- Ayuntamiento de Rivas Vaciamadrid 
4- Partido Comunista de Cuba
5- Partido Comunista de Portugal
6- Partido Comunista de Francia
7- Foro Europeo 
8- Partido Comunista de Uruguay
9- Frente Amplio de Uruguay:
10- PTB
11- Refundación Comunista 
12- Stop Rearm Europe
13- Intal Bélgica / RedFox
14- FPLP
15- Revolución Ciudadana de Ecuador
16- Unión de Juventudes Comunistas de España (UJCE) 
17- Asociación Patrice Lumumba
18- Transform Europe 
19- Foro de São Paulo
20- Celac Social 
21- Partido Comunista Colombiano y Pacto Histórico
22- International Peace Bureau (IPB)
23- Socialistas Democráticos de América (DSA) 
24- Federaciob Democrática Internacional de Mujeres 
25- Moviniento Democratico de Mujeres
26- Pax Christi 
27- Justicia y Paz España 
28- Morena
29- Partido de la Izquierda Europea (PIE) 
30- World Beyond War
31- Alianza Negra por la Paz
32- Al -Haq 
33- Partido Comunista de Chile
35- CCOO
36- UGT
37- Mundubat
38- Unadikum
39- Movimiento Pacifista de Castilla-La Mancha Mujeres de Negro
40- Bloque de Resistencia y Rebeldía Popular de El Salvador, Madrid:
41- Argentina Soberana, Madrid
42- Solidaridad con Cuba, Madrid
43- Asociación Guinea Bissau Amilcal Cabral
44- Asociación Mujeres Africanas en España
45- AKEL Chipre
46- Gabon
47- Senegal:
48- Embajada China
49- Embajada Cuba 
50- Embajada Polisario
51- Movimiento Pan-africano 
52- Embajada Palestina
53- Embajada Vietnam
54- Partido Comunista de China
55- Centro Estudios y Trabajos Nueva Ruta de la Seda
56- Fundacion Mwhana Glenn
57- Guinea Ecuatorial
58- Iniciativa por el Retorno a Palestina 
59- Asociación Violeta Parra Chile
60- Partido Comunista Peru
61- Partido Comunista Bolivia 
62- Catedra China 
63- Asociación Embajadores/as por la Paz 

– – – – – –

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.

Nobel Peace Prize 2026

. . HUMAN RIGHTS . .

A press release from the Nobel Prize

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 goes to a person who with exceptional courage and integrity has led the way towards a more comprehensive global legal order. This year’s laureate has been instrumental in ensuring that war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide are prosecuted.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 to Navanethem “Navi” Pillay for her efforts to promote peace and international law.


Ill. Niklas Elmehed © Nobel Prize Outreach

Navi Pillay’s commitment to universal legal principles and her firm moral compass are constants in a long career. Born into a family of Indian Tamil origin under apartheid in Durban, South Africa, Pillay became a lawyer and legal pioneer, confronting deep structural discrimination, segregation and exclusion. A common thread runs from her early work defending Nelson Mandela and others who stood up against apartheid to her service as a judge in some of the key international court cases of our time.

This year’s laureate has significantly enlarged the scope and impact of international law. She has served as a judge on the High Court in South Africa, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court. She was the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and, until recently, she chaired the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Today Navi Pillay is a judge on the International Court of Justice in the case where Myanmar stands accused of genocide.

In historic international court cases, she has shown that legal measures can help prevent acts of war and violence. Navi Pillay has also contributed to strengthen the institutions of international law. Her independence, expertise and steadfastness have made her one of the most respected international jurists of our time.

The first Nobel Peace Prize was awarded 125 years ago. Already then, the Norwegian Nobel Committee underscored the importance of resolving conflicts through international law – a theme that has remained prominent throughout the history of the peace prize. The reach of international law expanded after the Second World War, in particular with the creation of the UN institutions. The key insight was that lasting peace must be built on legal principles, not on the will of the strong or a fragile balance of power. Additional legal mechanisms were introduced in the post-war decades, and momentum picked up further after the end of the Cold War.

However, the rules-based international order has never been perfect. The greatest powers have often evaded responsibility. In practice, cases brought under international law have produced different results depending on who is the perpetrator and who is the victim.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

The Nobel Peace Prize: Does it go to the right people?

(Continued from left column)

Nonetheless, we have seen that more and more conflicts are being addressed through diplomacy, treaties and legal mechanisms, rather than threats, violence and warfare. Leaders and populations alike have come to the same conclusion: international law is a foundation for a more peaceful world.

At a time of existential challenges – including more wars and conflicts than the world has seen in a long time – international law is no longer just a supplement to peace and security. It is an absolute necessity.

And yet, the system of international law is under tremendous pressure, and its institutions are under attack. We see a shift towards power politics at the expense of legal frameworks and global respect for law and justice. Whenever might overtakes right, it undermines stability, trust and peaceful co-existence.

In awarding this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wants to remind the world that the rule of law – national and international – underpins the system we have set up to ensure peace and resolve conflicts non-violently. Peace requires justice.

History has shown that a world operating without the rule of law is unjust, unwise and inhumane. The judges – those who guard the thin red line between order and chaos – are therefore highly deserving of our praise. But today, as these same judges are sanctioned, and their institutions are attacked, we need people of courage, vision and determination – qualities that Navi Pillay demonstrates in her work on the bench.

Navi Pillay has held states and national leaders accountable and brought hope to victims of violence and conflict. In all the positions she has held, she has stressed the responsibility of individuals and states to comply with the rule of law. She has also helped define the relevant norms and legal principles. When the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda established that rape and sexual violence could constitute a crime against humanity – as well as genocide – her influence was a significant factor. In the same case, Ms Pillay was instrumental in a separate legal breakthrough: for the first time, a defendant faced charges of incitement to commit genocide purely on the basis of spreading propaganda.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2026 springs directly from Alfred Nobel’s will. Navi Pillay strengthens fraternity between nations and – by systematically advancing the use of tribunals for peace and justice – she provides substance, direction and motivation for peace conferences in their modern form.

Navi Pillay is one of the great defenders of international legal principles in our time. Her distinguished career reminds us of the need to support, fortify and expand the global rule of law. Navi Pillay’s commitment to justice and human dignity is a source of hope and inspiration to all who seek to bring about a more peaceful world.

(Click here for the French reaction to this announcment.)

– – – – – –

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.

The World March for Peace and Nonviolence: An Attempt to Sow and Nurture the Seeds of a Nonviolent Revolution

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article by Martin Sicard in Pressenza

When we talk about revolution, we often imagine only crowds dramatically—and sometimes violently—flooding the streets, storming symbolic buildings, and so on; but there is a quieter form of revolution that is taking root all over the world, from grassroots movements to initiatives led by certain inspired leaders—and which, of course, is not covered by the mainstream media…

To shed light on all these positive contributions emerging across the globe, in 2009, a quixotic idealist, Rafael de la Rubia, was inspired to propose this seemingly crazy idea: to circle the globe with a World March for Peace and Nonviolence; with the support of Silo and the collaboration of humanist friends from around the world, the 1MM was thus launched with a multicultural team of a dozen people who traveled across different continents, from a symbolic location in New Zealand to Punta de Vacas (Argentina), passing through India under the auspices of Gandhi.

This 93-day journey crossed 97 countries on five continents; it was not so much about physically walking as it was about highlighting, along the way, initiatives promoting peace and nonviolence, or inspiring others to take action in this direction—whether in the fields of culture, education, ecology, or politics—through marches, of course, but also concerts, theme days, and other types of events—both social and cultural.

But how was this accomplished? With what resources? It was carried out entirely independently, without financial support from any institution, without any commercial advertising from multinational corporations, but with occasional collaborations during our events and campaigns depending on the location, so as never to jeopardize our freedom of expression or compromise our positions.

Then came the 2nd and 3rd marches: since that first march had taken place without any major incidents, and with a clear desire to continue spreading these ideals of nonviolence, we considered the possibility of organizing a second one ten years later, in 2019; and so the 2nd March took place, which this time circled the entire globe: starting in Madrid, it returned there 159 days later, after passing through 51 countries and 122 cities. In the meantime, it had inspired a group of women, who took the initiative to organize regional marches in Central and Latin America; we didn’t have to wait ten years for the next one—only five. The third March therefore took place in 2024–2025, starting in Costa Rica (the country that abolished its army by proclaiming world peace) and returning there as well. All these marches followed the same criteria, while adapting part of the initial theme to the specific locations and times.



And today? Here we are!

Given the global situation marked by a proliferation of conflicts—which further complicates travel—and where the economic constraints associated with organizing an international route weighed heavily, it was decided to change the format: a march would be organized in each city, that is, between the symbolic dates of September 21, International Day of Peace, and October 2, International Day of Nonviolence—give or take a day.


To the best of our knowledge, to date, the 4th “In My City” March has taken place in more than 200 cities across various continents, which have organized activities such as marches, human symbols, and cultural events. Among the countries participating are: Nepal, Bangladesh, India, and the Philippines in Asia; Colombia, Argentina, Brazil, and Ecuador in the Americas; Italy, Spain, France, Denmark, and Greece in Europe; Senegal and Benin in Africa…

The goal is to reach 1,000 cities, continuing this effort every year until 2029 to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the first World March; that is, every year during these days, activities will take place in as many cities as possible around the world. We’ve shifted from a geographic route to organizing as many simultaneous events as possible to send a message to the whole world; we understand, of course, that for this to have an impact, communication is essential…

(article continued in right column)

(Click here for the article in French or click here for the article in Spanish.)

Question for this article:

The World March for Peace and Nonviolence: What is its history and its effects?

(article continued from left column)

What has the World March achieved and continues to facilitate?

On the one hand, opening doors at various levels to convey our approach:
To people who wield influence in their respective circles—whether cultural figures, intellectuals, or politicians—who have received the March’s delegation or participated in events and forums.

Also at the level of international institutions and organizations with which we continue to collaborate, such as Mayors for Peace, the WILPF, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates Summit, Peace Boat, the ICAN campaign for the prohibition of nuclear weapons, the “United Religions” Initiative, the Earth Federation, among others, thereby expanding our networks and opportunities…

Education: In schools, we encouraged the creation of workshops, the organization of theme days, and the formation of human symbols of peace and nonviolence; these symbols, also created on many other occasions, served as a playful way to raise awareness about the meaning of peace, on the one hand, and nonviolence, on the other. It was also proposed to embrace an ethical commitment never to use one’s acquired knowledge to harm another human being.

Universities: The experience of the March has significantly fostered encounters with and among universities from different countries and continents, gradually creating relationships and opportunities for collaboration, hence the idea of building an international network of universities for peace and active nonviolence. In the case of Italy, it is worth highlighting the collaboration with the University of Perugia, where a meeting was held bringing together more than 40 university presidents and where a memorandum of understanding is currently being drafted, as well as with the United Nations University for Peace, which was originally headquartered in Costa Rica and is now based in Rome. Universities can play a fundamental role as centers for education, research, and the production of knowledge.

Culture: Openness toward other cultures and between them through concerts and exhibitions featuring artists sharing some of their works. Also, “the simple fact of knowing that there are people elsewhere, all over the planet, who are also working for peace and nonviolence encourages us to continue acting with hope.” Indeed, highlighting actions that generally receive no support and are not covered by the media opens the minds of people who, all too often, believe that their problem with violence is unique to them—as are the possible solutions.

To deepen our understanding of what nonviolence truly means and to apply its methodology in daily life.

Not to mention that the 1st World March led to the creation of Pressenza, the international humanist news agency now active in many countries.

In conclusion, it is important to highlight a key theme, a core concept of this march. This involves encouraging the digital and geographic expansion of any initiative in support of peace and nonviolence: inviting any individual or group to replicate and amplify any action, thanks to the connections made through the march. For example: a choir from City X connects with another to create a network of 1,000 choirs for peace; to facilitate the proliferation of human symbols, a guide has been written in several languages so that it can be replicated anywhere and on any scale.

The idea is to step outside our comfort zone to broaden and amplify the impact of what we do—in terms of scale, number, and locations—by creating these networks of nonviolence. To go beyond calls for peace and pacifism, which demand an end to wars, and move toward establishing a true culture of nonviolence.

So yes, we continue to take action because we believe and feel that the effort is worth it.

https://theworldmarch.org/
.
– – – – – –

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.

The Freedom Flotilla Sails Again

. DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

An article from Freedom Flotilla

The Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) today announced that a new international mission to challenge Israel’s illegal and deadly blockade of Gaza is underway.


The violence and torture that Israel inflicted on hundreds of flotilla volunteers this past spring, including severe beatings, repeated tasering, and sexual assault, has not deterred the FFC, just as Israel’s murder of 10 flotilla activists aboard the Mavi Marmara, in 2010 did not stop the movement. If anything, action is needed now more than ever.

While much of the world has moved on from Gaza, believing a supposed “ceasefire” has ended the genocide, Israel continues to kill Palestinians in Gaza at will; use its blockade to restrict and manipulate the entry of the food, medicine, and fuel that a besieged population depends on to survive; and deny Palestinians their fundamental right to freedom.

The new mission involves a port-to-port voyage throughout Europe, bringing together human rights advocates, union activists, elected representatives, journalists, medical professionals, and other supporters of Palestinian freedom. In June and July 2026, FFC vessel, Handala II, sailed around Scandinavia, making stops at ports in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. Earlier this month, the vessel, Kate, launched from Bristol, UK and has made port calls in Ireland, Germany, and France.

Upcoming stops include ports in Spain, Portugal, and Italy, before the flotilla continues on to Gaza. At every stop, the flotilla will stand with local communities to press their own governments to end their complicity in genocide by blocking weapons and energy shipments that arm Israel’s aggression, ending diplomatic and military cooperation, and imposing real sanctions. The journey will build public support and international pressure ahead of the flotilla’s planned attempt to reach Gaza in October 2026.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:
 
How can we best express solidarity with the people of Gaza?

(continued from left column)

“The Freedom Flotilla sails again because our governments continue to fail to uphold their obligations,” said Zohar Chamberlain Regev, FFC Steering Committee member. “At every port, we will carry the demand that Palestinians be free to live with dignity. In October, we intend to carry that demand and the solidarity of people around the world to Gaza’s shores.”


Throughout the port-to-port journey, FFC and its local partners will organize public welcomes, community gatherings, media events, and opportunities for supporters to visit the vessels. Details of port calls and public events will be released as arrangements are confirmed.


Since 2010, the Freedom Flotilla Coalition has brought together civil-society organizations and grassroots campaigns from around the world to challenge the blockade by sea. Its work continues the precedent established by the Free Gaza Movement, whose vessels began sailing to Gaza in 2008.

The FFC calls on governments to:

° Demand safe, unimpeded passage of the flotilla to Gaza, including by making clear that any attack, seizure, or unlawful detention will have consequences;

° Demand immediate and unrestricted access to Gaza and an end to Israel’s obstruction of food, water, medicine, and other essential no

° Defend the freedom of navigation by declaring that any attack, boarding, seizure, diversion, or other use of force against flotilla vessels will trigger immediate diplomatic action;

° Use diplomatic, economic, legal, and other available measures to end Israel’s unlawful blockade and prevent further violations of Palestinians’ fundamental rights and international humanitarian law; and Commit publicly to holding accountable any state or actor responsible for attacking, unlawfully detaining, or otherwise endangering flotilla participants.

“We know that sailing toward Gaza carries serious risks,” said Edward Digilio, an engineer from Maryland, United States. “But silence and inaction carry a much greater cost for Palestinians and the world. This mission is an expression of shared humanity and a refusal to accept the destruction of an entire people as normal.”

– – – – – –

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.

Tabling of the Ocean of Peace Alliance and Australia-Fiji Vuvale Union

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from the Foreign Ministry of Australia

Ministerial statement 11 August 2026

At a time of great uncertainty, risk and contestation, the Albanese Government recognises that Australia cannot afford to be a passive observer of the profound changes occurring around us.

Photo from Instagram

The Ocean of Peace: Vision to Treaty  weighs the benefits and risks of turning the Ocean of Peace Declaration, endorsed by Pacific leaders in 2025, into a legally binding agreement.

The paper proposes negotiating a new regional peace and security treaty as a Protocol to the Treaty of Rarotonga.

Peace is never a given.

And we are not here to just occupy the space.

For the past four years, we have been building Australia’s future in our
region.

A future built through partnerships, not coercion.

A future built by the countries and peoples of our region.

And that is why, from the outset, the Albanese Government has listened to our region, engaged with respect and humility, and acted on our shared priorities.

We are investing in being the partner of choice for our immediate region, including the Pacific.

We are using all tools of statecraft to invest in Pacific relationships, trust and regionalism.

Embracing Pacific leadership and backing initiatives that make our region safer, more prosperous and more resilient.

And we could not have had a better partner in this than Fiji.

Under Prime Minister Rabuka, Fiji has crafted and tirelessly championed a vision of our Blue Pacific as an ‘Ocean of Peace’ that the Pacific family has embraced.

As Prime Minister Rabuka described it:

“a region in which strategic competition is managed; where stability is the touchstone of regional relationships; and where coercion is eschewed.

A region where differences are resolved peacefully’.

Fiji is a leader in our region, and one of only three Pacific island countries with a military.

Australian and Fijian service men and women have stood shoulder to shoulder in two world wars, in deployments to support our region’s security, and in peacekeeping missions across the world.

And it is in the shared pursuit of peace, stability and prosperity, that we deepen our partnership.

I know Prime Minister Albanese was deeply moved to receive Fiji’s highest honour – the Companion of the Order of Fiji – on the same day as signing these landmark treaties.

As the name of our treaty suggests, Australia and Fiji are one family, one Vuvale.

Australia was honoured to accept Prime Minister Rabuka’s proposal for the Ocean of Peace Alliance.

An Alliance is the highest act of trust between two nations.

This is Fiji’s first Alliance and only Australia’s fourth.

It will build ever deeper levels of interoperability.

We will, plan, train, exercise and deploy together, strengthening our combined capability, to enhance our respective sovereignty and to ensure our nations’ and our region’s security at a time of fracture and of disruption.

The Vuvale Union Treaty is equally important.

It will be a multi-generational endeavour to integrate our economies, our security and our peoples.

(Article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Where in the world are zones of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

It is backed by more than a billion dollars of investment over a decade, including grants and loans.

On Security: together, we will elevate our fight against the scourge of transnational crime and illicit drugs.

With an investment of $181 million, the AFP will work hand in hand with the Fiji Police Force to disrupt criminal networks and strengthen intelligence to interdict drugs before they reach Fijian or Australian shores.

We will support Australian doctors and nurses to enhance specialist training for Fiji’s health workers, boosting Fiji’s response to fastest-growing HIV outbreak in the world.

Under our economic pillar, we will finance nation-building infrastructure – ports, and major climate adaptation projects – strengthening Fiji’s role as a regional hub.

And we will back Fiji’s economic diversification agenda, supporting secure digital infrastructure, enhancing critical infrastructure investment screening, and increasing supply chain resilience.

Our final pillar is our People.

Australia and Fiji are linked by deep personal connections, including more than 100,000 people in Australia with Fijian heritage.

Our multifaith, multicultural communities and First Nations peoples share a strong bond.

For thousands of years, Australia’s First Nations peoples have maintained connections across our region.

During World War II, Fijian missionaries, skilled farmers, builders and sailors, worked alongside the Yolŋu people and elders still recall the esteem with which they were held.

The theme of this year’s Garma festival was ‘Bukmak’ – a local Yolŋu word meaning “everyone”.

The same name was gifted to the Bukmak Forum established through the Vuvale Union.

The Forum will bring together government, traditional, faith and business leaders as our two nations build a shared future.

Yolŋu elder Djapirri Mununggirritj travelled forty hours from Yirrkala to stand with our Prime Ministers at the Treaty’s signing.

And a Fijian delegation, including Fiji’s Minister for Women, Sashi Kiran, and traditional leaders, joined this year’s Garma festival.

This reflects the spirit of shared history, purpose and vision that drive the partnership between Australia and Fiji.

And the foundations upon which we have now chosen to elevate our bilateral relationship.

Colleagues, these two treaties tabled in Parliament today will transform our relationship, far beyond what was contemplated when we started this journey together.

They will form a durable structure for generations of the future.

I have just returned from Fiji where Pacific Islands Forum Foreign Ministers reaffirmed our Leaders’ call to give practical effect to the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace Declaration.

And these are the first two treaties to answer that call.

As Prime Minister Rabuka has said, these treaties reaffirm Fiji and Australia as trusted partners working together not only to benefit each other, but as contributors to a more stable, peaceful and resilient Blue Pacific continent.

We know that in these unprecedented and dangerous times, we are stronger together.

And everything we do will also be aimed at supporting our Pacific region.

Investments in Fiji will flow on to the Pacific family, which relies on Fiji as a regional hub for transport, logistics, education and healthcare.

Mr Deputy President, these two treaties send an unequivocal signal of our commitment to each other and to the Pacific family.

They will help realise the vision of an Ocean of Peace to make us all more secure, prosperous and resilient.

I commend the Ocean of Peace Alliance and Vuvale Union treaties to the Senate for consideration.

Media enquiries

Minister’s office: (02) 6277 7500
DFAT Media Liaison: (02) 6261 1555

[Editor’s note: Click here for a copy of the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace Declaration. Note that it commits to cultivating a culture of peace grounded in the Pacific Way. As described here, it is supported by Australia, Cook Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Fiji, French Polynesia, the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, New Caledonia, the Republic of Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, the Republic of Palau, the Independent State of Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, the Kingdom of Tonga, Tuvalu and the Republic of Vanuatu]

– – – – – –

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.

Interview with Combatants for Peace

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

The members of the Israeli-Palestinian movement Combatants for Peace fight for peace on behalf of the Palestinians in Israel. Here are excerpts from articles in Pressenza: part one and part two published under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 4.0)

Combatants for Peace Iris Gur (Israeli) and Mai Shahin (Palestinian) will be attending the Re-Imagine Peace event in Florence; both have been invited to the screening of the film *There is Another Way*. Daniela Bezzi of Pressenza interviewed them:

DB – Let’s start with your personal stories: how did you decide to join Combatants for Peace?

Iris Gur – Throughout my adult life, I worked in education as a teacher and as a school principal. I always saw education not just as a profession, but as the way of life I had chosen for myself. I grew up in a Jewish Israeli Zionist family. My parents arrived in Israel as refugees from Europe after the Second World War, and I grew up on stories of the Holocaust and survival. The only narrative I knew was that we, the Jewish people, had always been persecuted, and that we had no choice but to defend ourselves and our small country. The only thing I knew about Arabs was that they all wanted to destroy us.

My father was a military officer. I grew up on army bases and was very proud of the Israeli army. For most of my life, I had no opportunity to become familiar with either the Palestinian narrative or with Arab friends. I deliberately use the word “Arabs” because, in the environment where I grew up, the term “Palestinians” simply did not exist. Neither did the concept of the occupation.

Today, I can see that there were cracks in my worldview over the years, but I never allowed them to grow. The person who ultimately transformed my perspective was my daughter, Noa. 11 years ago, when she was seventeen, she decided to refuse military conscription. Through her, an entirely new world of values, ideas, and community opened up before me.

Her decision meant four months in military prison for her, and for me was the beginning of a journey of discovery – one that confronted me with the reality of the occupation, apartheid, and above all, the Palestinian people.

My decision to join Combatants for Peace came from the realization that if I truly wanted to help change the reality we are in, it could only be done in full partnership with Palestinians and through nonviolent actions.

Mai Shahin: I didn’t arrive at Combatants for Peace as a single decision. I joined through a long process of living under occupation in the West Bank, where control is not only political, but physical, emotional, and psychological. It shapes movements, breath, relationships, and the ability to imagine a future beyond survival. In that environment, resistance is not abstract. It is daily life. But over time, I began to ask a deeper question: how to resist without losing our own humanity in the process? A question that led me into trauma work, community healing, and nonviolent communication. I began to understand that occupation does not only control land – it enters the nervous system, it fragments trust, it isolates communities, and it produces cycles of grief that, if unprocessed, repeat themselves across generations.

This is where my connection with Combatants for Peace begins. It was the first space I encountered where Palestinians and Israelis were not asked to erase reality to speak. We were rather asked to stay inside reality together, while refusing violence as a response.

What makes Combatants for Peace so powerful is that it is not only a dialogue space. It is a joint movement of resistance. It insists that ending occupation, dismantling systems of domination, and protecting human dignity are not separate from relationship-building: they are part of the same struggle.

Alongside this work, and deeply connected to it, I co-founded Satyam Homeland together with Palestinians, Israelis, and international practitioners. It emerged from the same understanding: that resistance requires spaces where people can learn to remain human even inside the struggle. Satyam Homeland is a community space where Palestinians, Israelis, and internationals come together to engage in trauma and grief work, embodied healing, nonviolent resistance education, dialogue, and storytelling—and from that ground, move into action in the world. It is not separate from Combatants for Peace. It is part of a broader ecosystem of what I do: one holds the political courage of joint resistance, the other holds the communal practices that make sustained nonviolent engagement possible. They speak to each other constantly.

After October 7, this connection became even more visible. As Palestinians witnessed mass killing and destruction in Gaza, and escalating violence, settler attacks, and displacement in the West Bank, the instinct toward separation was immense. Fear and grief were not theoretical – they were lived, immediate, and heavy. And yet within Combatants for Peace, something held. We did not collapse into silence or separation. We turned toward each other – not to soften reality, but to remain capable of facing it. We cried together. We named what was happening. We disagreed. But we stayed.

And then we asked the only question that matters when everything is breaking: What do we do now? A question that we can afford thanks to the several years of building relationships that can survive rupture. This is how to be with Combatants for Peace is not only part of my work – it is the central part of what I do.

This is also why I continue this work from the West Bank, where every act of nonviolent resistance, every meeting, every step of presence carries real risk – and yet also real meaning, faith, responsibility. . . .

(Editor’s note: Two question/responses from part one are omitted here:
1. DB – This year marks the 20th anniversary of Combatants for Peace. What makes this movement so successful among the young people, in your opinion?
2. DB – It is quite extraordinary to see so many Israeli and Palestinian organizations mobilizing in coalition. What is the ingredient in your opinion for this kind of activism, based on cooperation despite the differences?
You can find the omissions here. )

DB – Both of you are often involved in actions of “Protective Presence”. Can you share some moments from your experience?

Iris – Thank you for this question, so important for me at a personal level that I feel tears in my eyes! I am part of a group called “Jordan Valley Activists.” It was established about 17 years ago by activists from Combatants for Peace and has grown into a group in its own right, thanks to the initiative of Israelis who provide accompaniment and a protective presence to Palestinian shepherds and farmers in the Jordan Valley.

We provide physical presence and assistance with food, water, legal support and any other help we can offer to the last remaining communities that are still holding on, in the face of violence by settlers and the Israeli military: demolition orders, threats of displacement, restrictions on grazing, denial of water and livelihoods and so on.

(article continued in right column)

(For a French version of this article, click here.)

Question related to this article:

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

(article continued from left column)

I joined this ‘protective presence’ activity in November 2023, when settler and military violence escalated dramatically. The violence was no longer directed only at shepherds in the fields, but also at families in their own homes. As a result, the presence of activists was expanded into 24/7 shifts.

I became closely connected with one specific community called ‘Farsiya al-Razala’, which consists of five families, including children, women, and elderly people. It is one of the last ten shepherd communities remaining in the Jordan Valley, and sadly, their time before being forcibly displaced may also be coming very soon.

Last week, I accompanied two young shepherds who were grazing their flocks in an area called Hammam al-Malih. Until a few months ago, there was a large community there: families, fields, herds, children, and even a regional elementary school. Everything was destroyed by the State of Israel. The people were violently displaced, despite the fact that the land is privately owned by a church. Across the road, alongside the community, there is a military base that has existed for many years.

In recent months, the soldiers have taken upon themselves the task of ensuring that, even after the families were expelled and the place was emptied, shepherds from nearby communities would not return to graze their flocks. In the past, there was also a spring there, that provided drinking water for both people and animals.

On the day I was there, the two young shepherds asked us not to leave them alone, because if we did, the soldiers would come and arrest them. One of them told us about his previous arrest:

“Female soldiers, 18 or 19 years old, were shouting at us and putting plastic restraints tightly around our hands. I asked them: Why? There is room for everyone here. I am only asking to live in peace.” The soldiers shouted at them: “Leave this place.”

He answered: “Where will we go? We have nowhere else to go. This is our home. We have lived here all our lives.” That day, the shepherds were able to finish grazing peacefully.

Yesterday, in the same place, two soldiers arrived and arrested one of those young men. The other managed to escape. One of the soldiers fired his M16 rifle into the air and claimed that he was not afraid of anyone. The Palestinian shepherd was taken, handcuffed, to the military base several kilometers away. A few hours later, he was released, bruised and beaten. This is only one story among hundreds of daily incidents of abuse.

Yousef, a 13-year-old boy with special needs, called me to tell me that his family had received a demolition order for their home in Farsiya. I had no words to answer him. This child and his family have no other home.

Mai – Protective Presence is where everything becomes real. It is standing with communities under immediate pressure. Farmers, shepherds, families, children who are trying to remain on their land and continue ordinary life under extraordinary conditions.

In the West Bank, especially since October 7, the level of violence, uncertainty, and instability has increased. Communities face settler attacks, military incursions, and ongoing displacement pressure every day.

In that context, presence is not symbolic. It is a form of protection, but also a form of witnessing.

It communicates something simple and essential: you are not alone.

Sometimes it prevents violence, sometimes it doesn’t. But it always interrupts isolation and isolation is one of the core tools of oppression. And this is where the connection to CFP becomes tangible, because CFP is not only dialogue, it is joint resistance in action.

And ‘Protective Presence’ is one of its clearest expressions in the field. It is also where the embodied and trauma-aware practices from Satyam Homeland become essential, because staying present in such moments requires inner grounding, not only political conviction.

Both dimensions are always present in our work.

DB –  Last but not least: what can we do in order to contribute to your endeavor?

Iris – There is a lot that can be done. Beyond providing financial support, people can also come to the region and join protective presence activities as international volunteers. This does involve risks: there is a physical risk of violence from settlers, as well as the possibility of being expelled by the Israeli authorities. At the same time, visiting both the West Bank and Israel is safe and can allow people to develop a deeper and more accurate understanding of the reality. There is nothing like seeing things with your own eyes, and there is nothing like experiencing reality directly.

History has shown us that pressure from international communities can influence leaders, change policies, and even transform the course of history. People can take action by reaching out to the media, politicians, artists, public figures; by changing the public discourse; and by demanding an immediate end to violence, abuse, occupation, apartheid, and displacement.

This includes demanding access to water and livelihoods, freedom of movement, and the release of Palestinian prisoners and detainees. It means demanding the release of all human beings from lives shaped by fear and violence. The demand must be for security, freedom, and equal rights for every person living between the river and the sea.

The conversation needs to change: from supporting one side of the conflict against the other, toward understanding that the goal must be a safe and free life for all human beings.

There are 14 million people living between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River: about 7 million Jews and 7 million Palestinians. Neither of them will go anywhere. Our future is shared, whether we like it or not. The question is not whether we will live together, but how. Our children deserve to grow up in freedom, security, and dignity.

Mai – The first responsibility is clarity. Reject antisemitism completely. Reject Islamophobia completely. Reject anti-Palestinian racism completely. Reject any framework that assigns unequal value to human life.

The second responsibility is truth. We cannot build justice based on denial. We must be able to name occupation, displacement, structural inequality, and violence without euphemism.

The third responsibility is support for movements that combine resistance and healing. Because this is what makes long-term transformation possible.

Combatants for Peace holds the political spine of nonviolent resistance and joint struggle. Satyam Homeland holds the embodied, emotional, and communal capacity that allows that resistance to continue without collapse. Together, they represent something rare: a way of staying human inside struggle.

For me, as a Palestinian woman working from the West Bank, this is not theory. It is daily life, shaped by risk, responsibility, grief, and also by deep commitment and trust in the relationships we have built across divides.

That is what keeps this work alive. Because in the end, what we are building is not only political change. It is the possibility that we can remain fully human while refusing systems that deny humanity to others.

– – – – – –

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.

India and Pakistan: A Conversation That Refused To End

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

Special to CPN from Nawal Amjad

On Thursday, 2 July 2026, people from two countries with one of the greatest global flashpoints came together — India and Pakistan. These countries fought a war last year, but here is thing about the need to pursue peace: it is not a permanent end goal but a continuous process — and every worthwhile process has to be revived like it did not exist, but also like it never stopped.

The event was hosted in collaboration by civil society organizations like, Socialist Yuvjan Sabha (India), Socialist Students’ Union (India) with Centre for Peace and Secular Studies (Pakistan), including luminaries like Dr. Sandeep Pandey, Ms. Lalita Ramdas and Ms. Diep Saeeda, who enabled the space for a discussion between people of the two countries.

The event was moderated by Rumaan Mecci (India) and Ahmad Raza (Pakistan), who navigated the event with all their light whether there was no electricity or internet (quite literally), or there were other bleak moments from some trolls in the audience that the moderators’ fellow, Rishi Anand helped keep away seamlessly.

If I have to begin with introducing this event, so it was a virtual dialogue themed on, ‘How can young people lead a new chapter of peace-building, democratic engagement and people-to-people diplomacy between Pakistan and India and create a shared future?’ Young changemakers along with individuals that have dedicated a substantial part of their lives to a Culture of Peace were there. And what is particularly special about this event is how it had enthusiastic participation from citizens from both countries, even expats who have spent years nurturing their and their polities’ identities abroad.

I was also honored to have been invited there because of my background with helping nourish a Culture of Peace in the last few years, and more recently, through my affiliation with Peace Manifesto 2025 and the Culture of Peace Corporation since last year.

When I had attended this dialogue, I did not maintain notes (something that I seldom forget when attending every webinar till date, even if I am a passive part of it), but in hindsight, I realized that perhaps making notes would have been a good way to document every noteworthy sentence that I heard in the discussion, however, some things need to be experienced — and so having chosen to be my usual geeky self would not have been this helpful.

What I in turn realized was that this event was indeed a watershed moment. Not because in the most academically fancy terms, changemakers, particularly young changemakers from two ‘archrivals’ came together one evening, but because an originally envisioned two-hour-long event went on for about almost four hours. If that surprised you, I’m not surprised, because that was the exact reaction of my mentor-boss, Professor David Adams, who has been one of the pioneers at UNESCO to have conceived the idea of a Culture of Peace for the whole world, decades ago and since then, he has not looked back from working for it despite what his friend-colleague described to him to be an increasingly apocaloptimistic world.

The need for a shared future

Monica Wahi, a prominent child film specialist from India opened the discussion by her reflections emphasizing upon the need for a ‘shared future’ — to this, I both responded and opened my address by saying that we would only need to have a shared future, if we had been divided — we were never really divided. I began by speaking about our ‘shared challenges’ as two struggling domestic polities: India, whom we clearly looked up to before the world’s greatest democracy increasingly began to deconsolidate, and our own democracy in Pakistan, having struggled to consolidate since forever.

Take the recent student protests in India for example. The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET)’s leak in India is the same as the Medical and Dental College Test (MDCAT)’s leaks in Pakistan; besides, the unfair grading replete with discrepancies that led to reconduct of the former in Pakistan only speaks volumes of how ‘we are always in this together’ is an apt phrase to describe most of what we both suffer. In fact, when I saw the police dragging protesters and even India’s seasoned politician Rahul Gandhi upon the country’s streets, I asked my own audience on my private Instagram the other day that, ‘Can I also say that our democracies are Sanjhi? Sanjhi is a Punjabi language word used commonly by people of both sides of the border which translates to as, ‘shared’.

Now back to the dialogue. I spoke of our many commonalities using very distinct set of things, but each weaving into why or how we are not that divided, if only we admit to realize. For instance, I spoke of my childhood familiarization with the word, ‘actor’ through watching Shah Rukh Khan, Indian superstar whom I referred to as, ‘Sharo Khan’ for the longest time — my first vivid TV memory of childhood.

Similarly, when women in India and Pakistan, both have to constantly register their existence through apparently needing to ‘break a glass ceiling’ rather than realizing that the latter only concretizes it, and when the news of women’s abuse of any nature circulates in the media or otherwise, the reasons and ramifications on both sides of the border are not different. In fact, even when a 150-year-old tree in Lahore is cut and so is a 100-year-old tree in Nashik, India — the hue of cry in the civilized people of both sides of the border is the same — and the vested interests of the powers that be responsible and or complicit in these cases are also the same.

During the dialogue, I also drew attention to my belief in the power of SDG 4.7: the seventh target of the fourth Sustainable Development Goal, Education, which is about working for and embodying values and practices of Global Citizenship Education and Sustainability; the non-exceptionalist nature of climate change sparing no one; my love for what all India has done and continues to do for entrepreneurship — thanks to me marveling at (Shark Tank India) as one of the many emblems of what we got to learn from them; a need for a Joint Pakistan-India Parliament where the youth could discuss the day-to-day issues of ‘shared interest’; a Public Diplomacy Centre to deepen people-to-people connectivity between both nations and some form of a Public Interest Promotion Centre/ Declaration, that enables us to teach each other best practices on governance, foreign policy, education, public health-care, technology, entrepreneurship, media and of course, art, culture and entertainment — no matter our piercing differences continue to stare into our faces.

If I begin to describe everything said by everyone, the article would never end, but I still deem it necessary to share brief takeaways from my fellow youth panelists from within my country and across the border.

Opportunities for dialogue

Tiya Mhatre, a student based in AliBaugh near Mumbai, who is about to join UWC Pearson University and is passionate about UN simulation conferences (just like I used to be) said something really helpful, Tiya pointed out that while student diasporas are one of those key scarce spaces remaining for youth of both countries to connect to each other, there are more opportunities through universities and student communities that ought to be explored; may it be collaborating through dialogues like these; joint projects; cultural exchanges on areas like, climate change, public health-care, sustainability and innovation — because in Tiya’s eyes, lasting peace begins with trust and trust begins with conversation, and while the former cannot resolve complex regional issues, it can indeed preserve something essential, the willingness to ‘keep talking’.

(Article continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

Can peace be established between India and Pakistan?

Solidarity across national borders, What are some good examples?

(Article continued from left column)

Another fellow panelist, Kabir Rao, who is a student of philosophy and Arabic at the University of St Andrews from India, and besides his interests in politics and military affairs for the Middle East, he is also attempting to learn Urdu and Farsi — yes, you heard that right. A Hindu in India studying philosophy and Arabic. Learning Urdu and Farsi. Kabir emphasized on his turn about the organic link between our shared struggles for a non-militaristic, non-violent and democratic outlook and better relations with neighbors at home. He also highlighted the similarities between India and Pakistan’s ‘connected histories’ and our present-day struggles. He further argued that the working class in both countries, especially the young people within it ought to understand these similarities and base their struggles on them.

A poem than transcends national boundaries

Kabir ended his points by reciting a verse from a poem, ‘Black Out’ by Faiz Ahmed Faiz, a poet with ‘Pakistani origins’ and whose services for the country were oxygen for the progressive and democratic lungs of the country. The verse reads as,

ایک پل ٹھہرو کہ دریا کا کہیں پاٹ لگے
اور نیا دل میرا
زہر میں دھل کے، فنا ہو کے
کسی گھاٹ لگے
پھر پئے نذر نئے دیدہ و دل لے کے چلوں
حسن کی مدح کروں شوق کا مضمون لکھوں

Which translates to English as, ‘Wait a moment, so the river may somewhere find its shore, and my tender heart, washed in poison and dissolved, may reach a landing place.
Then I shall walk on, offering the lit lamps of my heart’s anguish, singing praises to beauty, and penning the treatise of longing.’

Such is our ‘shared’, or dare I say, inseparable history and legacy of our people, that is only telling of how profoundly we need a deliberate and a very consistent cultivation of a Culture of Peace.

Science and health transcend national boundaries

Another panelist, Iqra Preet, who is a PhD Biochemistry scholar and a researcher in nanotechnology-based treatment for multiple diseases based in Lahore, Pakistan said something that every other participant from (even within the audience) kept echoing till the end: how shared scientific research and investment in public health-care does not need to see who belongs to which nation. In my understanding, how a sample on a microscope, a DNA or a virus should override our very fragile fixation with our yet-to-understand fantasies of our so-called perfected nation-states.

Culture transcends national boundaries

Then it was Ritu Das, who is a queer feminist activist from Uttar Pradesh, based in Lucknow, India and is also a poet and has been active in the movement spaces for almost a decade. She utilized her turn by recalling her stay experience in a hotel in London. Among her hotel staff were two individuals — one, a Hindu Indian from Rajasthan — the other who was a Muslim from Bangladesh. To Ritu’s surprise, the connection felt and built more deeply and meaningfully with the Muslim from Bangladesh than her own fellow citizen.

According to Ritu, it was because of the cultural and linguistic boundaries that transcended the political border separating the region. It helped Ritu reinforce an important sociological insight: it is often our shared cultural and historical inheritances that sustain solidarities. In fact, Ritu’s grandmother’s narration of the violence events during partition taught Ritu something very poignant: she recounted violence with extreme ethical sensitivity and the latter was quoted by Ritu to have told them, ‘People of every community were killed and people of every community were forced to leave their homes, foregrounding human suffering rather than communal identity.’ As a member of a marginalized community, Ritu has witnessed Bangladeshi transgender communities drawing parallels between India’s Transgender Card Framework and Bangladesh’s Hijra Identity recognition, despite different political and legal systems — proving in the words of Ritu that, ‘struggles for dignity, recognition and justice frequently transcend national borders, producing what may be understood as transnational communities of care and resistance.’

The webinar was also attended by celebrated practitioners like, Sachendra Pratap Yadav, President of the Socialist Students’ Union and a PhD scholar at the BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus, India; Sanjay Gadhalay, an engineer, entrepreneur and Climate activist from Hyderabad India; Mazher Hussain, who runs Confederation of Voluntary Agencies (COVA) from Hyderabad, India and is a long-time peace activist; Shivi Upadhyay, recent PhD scholar in social work from Delhi University and a development activist who works in Goa at present; Razi Raziuddin, who can be uniquely distinguished because he studied at both Aligarh University and Banaras Hindu University and now works as a scientist in the United States of America and runs a diaspora forum; Cedric Prakash, a Catholic priest and a prominent human rights activist from Ahmedabad, India; Father Anand, Catholic activist, priest and playwright from Varanasi, India; Sheema Kermani, prominent classical dancer, actor and social activist from Pakistan among others.

The conversation refuses to end

This convergence was not easy owing to trolls constantly trying to keep the moderators on their toes, and even us attendees wondering if it would go on smoothly? There was, of course, a shared anxiousness around letting the audiences also participate by risking giving them a mic. Some of them were trolls, but most of them were also equally or even more elated than us to have been there, and it is these same people, the common people, with whom the discussion went on for almost four hours. Some of these people contributed by narrating tales of being constantly anxiety-ridden because of growing up in a military background — and the very solid and legitimate fear of losing their loved ones. But there were also those that wanted to call a spade a spade, and hence demanded us to not pretend like everything was hunky dory, but to both acknowledge and embrace the discomfort — talk out loud about the elephant in the room, issues like cross-border terrorism and Kashmir to name a few. Others simply encouraged and looked forward to more honest and uncomfortable conversations regularly in the future.

Before the article’s title starts to influence me (and it literally never ends), I am thinking of concluding this piece just when I have heard about the education minister in India resigning — if this is true victory for people of India is premature to say because systemic changes have a long way to go before they bear fruits. Notwithstanding that the ‘cockroaches’ in India were heard, and a seed has to be planted somewhere for it to appear to be bearing fruits later — and that gives me: a cockroach in Pakistan — a glimmer of relief for the justice of the dozens of those innocent students, who lost their lives just because their system failed them. But whether it is the cockroaches in India or in Pakistan, the conversation hopefully refuses to end.

– – – – – –

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.

Pacific Islands: New paper proposes turning the Ocean of Peace Declaration into a regional treaty

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

An article from the Pacific Security College

Evolving the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace Declaration into a regional peace and security treaty could provide predictability in a period of increasing geostrategic competition, a new policy paper published by the Pacific Security College suggests.


Leaders at the Ocean of Peace Commemorative Ceremony at the 54th Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Meeting in Honiara, Solomon Islands. Photo: Pacific Security College

The Ocean of Peace: Vision to Treaty  weighs the benefits and risks of turning the Ocean of Peace Declaration, endorsed by Pacific leaders in 2025, into a legally binding agreement. The paper proposes negotiating a new regional peace and security treaty as a Protocol to the Treaty of Rarotonga.

Author Ben Burdon said that, amid growing geopolitical tensions, it was useful to reflect on how the Pacific could maximise its agency and authority in its own interests.

“The Pacific’s strategic vision is made clear in the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace Declaration,” Mr Burdon said.

[Editor’s note: Click here for a copy of the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace Declaration. Note that it commits to cultivating a culture of peace grounded in the Pacific Way.]

“Embedding the Ocean of Peace and Pacific values and norms into international law and practice, as has been done with nuclear weapons, fishing and climate change, is a potential next step.

“Negotiating a new treaty as a protocol to Rarotonga would turn a respected nuclear-free zone into a legally binding regional peace and security system – one built and owned by the Pacific.”

The protocol proposed in the paper – dubbed ‘Rarotonga II’ – includes principles such as establishing the Pacific as a Zone of Peace, recognising climate security as a peace obligation, and providing a mechanism for external partners to formally commit to Pacific peace and security law and practice.

“Rarotonga II would introduce prior consultation, transparency and collective discussion. It would reduce surprise and mistrust between Pacific countries and external powers, while strengthening regionalism,” Mr Burdon said.

In 2027, China is expected to acquire the capability to retake Taiwan militarily. While capacity does not equate intent, Mr Burdon’s paper notes that the Pacific’s strategic geography would be critical for military access and denial.

“While a regional peace and security treaty is not without risk, the strategic guardrails set out in such an agreement could help the Pacific manage the difficult geopolitical environment ahead,” Mr Burdon said.

Professor Dave Peebles, Director of the Pacific Security College, said the paper’s publication comes at a time of growing uncertainty across the region.

“The Pacific’s capacity to come together in pursuit of common goals remains one of its greatest strengths – and one that carries particular weight in an increasingly contested strategic environment,” Professor Peebles said.

(Article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Where in the world are zones of peace?

(Article continued from left column)

“The proposal will undoubtedly generate both support and critique. That’s its value, when the topic is so important and the stakes are so high.

“Policy papers published by the College are designed to prompt careful reflection and constructive debate, and to create space for diverse perspectives on the region’s most pressing issues.”

The Ocean of Peace: Vision to Treaty includes insights from four regional experts with backgrounds spanning international law, diplomacy, politics, academia and governance: Tuiloma Neroni Slade, Dr Sandra Tarte, Dr Anna Naupa and Sione Tekiteki.

Tuiloma, former Secretary General of the Pacific Islands Forum, observed that Mr Burdon’s account of the sensitivities involved in developing a new protocol to the Treaty of Rarotonga was both realistic and perceptive.

“I broadly agree with his assessment of both the possible benefits and the attendant risks, particularly the danger of destabilising existing security relationships, fragmenting Pacific unity, and inviting geopolitical backlash,” he said.

Tuiloma acknowledged the challenges of making and revising treaties and suggested that rather than reopening the Treaty of Rarotonga, it could be more practical to strengthen implementation of the existing text.

“The Pacific is strongest when it acts collectively. Whatever form the next steps for the Ocean of Peace may take, they will need to be guided by unity and deepened regionalism.”

Dr Tarte, from the University of the South Pacific, recognised the clear pathway set out by the paper for codifying key principles of the Ocean of Peace, while bolstering the key role the Treaty of Rarotonga plays in the Pacific’s security architecture.

“It significantly advances thinking around how to manage inter-state tensions and external engagement, thereby promoting greater transparency in security matters and reaffirming the rules-based order,” Dr Tarte said.

Dr Tarte acknowledged that the Ocean of Peace Declaration has provided a pivotal platform for advocating Pacific priorities on the global stage.

“It is time to take the next step and, as this discussion paper explores, to ‘turn vision into law’,” Dr Tarte said.

Dr Naupa, from the Pacific Security College, welcomed Mr Burdon’s pragmatism in leveraging the 40-year-old Treaty of Rarotonga and his consideration of what Pacific deterrence options look like in today’s world.

She emphasised the importance of inclusive consultation and grassroots-driven processes in any future regional peace and security decisions.

“State-led security strategies must be Pacific peoples-centred and address historical legacies,” Dr Naupa said.

“Designing a regional deterrence model needs to consider how these long-standing elements of Pacific regional policy would be integrated into the preventative diplomacy model proposed by Burdon.”

Mr Tekiteki, from the Auckland University of Technology Law School, said an Ocean of Peace protocol would be an attempt to institutionalise and safeguard Pacific agency.

“The idea of an Ocean of Peace treaty framed as a protocol to the Treaty of Rarotonga is compelling, particularly in its attempt to move the Pacific beyond the largely normative framing of the Blue Pacific Continent towards something more concrete and grounded in legal order,” he said.

“Deeper regional security coordination may strengthen solidarity and collectively position the region against intensifying geopolitical competition.”

The Pacific Security College’s policy paper series  aims to contribute a diversity of views and ideas to regional conversations about the journey to 2050.

– – – – – –

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.