Category Archives: DISARMAMENT & SECURITY

United Nations General Assembly adopts annual culture of peace resolution

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

Information from United Nations Press Release

The Assembly concluded its consideration of its agenda item on the culture of peace . . .   acting without a vote, it adopted the resolution “Follow-up to the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace” (document A/75/L.28). 

The resolution was sponsored by Angola, Armenia, Bangladesh, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Morocco, Qatar, Russian Federation, Singapore and Viet Nam:

Here are the 19 operative sections of the resolution.

1. Reiterates that the objective of the effective implementation of the
Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace is to strengthen further the globalmovement for a culture of peace following the observance of the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World, 2001–2010, and calls upon all concerned to renew their attention to this objective;

2. Welcomes the inclusion of the promotion of a culture of peace in the 2030Agenda for Sustainable Development;

3. Invites Member States to continue to place greater emphasis on and expandtheir activities promoting a culture of peace at the national, regional and international levels and to ensure that peace and non-violence are fostered at all levels;

4. Invites the entities of the United Nations system, within their existing
mandates, to integrate, as appropriate, the eight action areas of the Programme of Action into their programmes of activities, focusing on promoting a culture of peace and non-violence at the national, regional and international levels;

5. Commends the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization for strengthening efforts to mobilize all relevant stakeholders within and outside the United Nations system in support of a culture of peace, and invites the Organization to continue to enhance communication and outreach, including through the culture of peace website;

6. Commends the practical initiatives and actions by relevant United Nationsbodies, including the United Nations Children’s Fund, the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women) and the Universityfor Peace, as well as their activities in further promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, in particular the promotion of peace education and activities related to specific areas identified in the Programme of Action, and encourages them to continue and further strengthen and expand their efforts;

7. Underlines that early childhood development contributes to the developmentof more peaceful societies through advancing equality, tolerance, human development and promoting human rights, and calls for investment in early childhood education, including through effective policies and practices, towards promoting a culture of peace;

8. Encourages Member States, United Nations entities, regional and subregionalorganizations and relevant actors to consider instituting mechanisms to involve youth in the promotion of a culture of peace, tolerance and intercultural and interreligious dialogue and develop, as appropriate, an understanding of respect for human dignity, pluralism and diversity, including, as appropriate, through education programmes, that could discourage their participation in acts of terrorism, violent extremism as and when conducive to terrorism, violence, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination;

(continued in right column)

Question for this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

9. Encourages the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations to increase its
activities that focus on peace education and global citizenship education in order to enhance an understanding among young people of values such as peace, tolerance, openness, inclusion and mutual respect, which are essential in developing a culture of peace;

10. Encourages the United Nations peacebuilding architecture to continue to
promote peacebuilding and sustaining peace activities, as outlined in its resolution 72/276, and to advance a culture of peace and non-violence in post-conflict peacebuilding efforts at the country level;

11. Urges the appropriate authorities to provide age-appropriate education inchildren’s schools that builds a culture of peace and non-violence, including lessons in mutual understanding, respect, tolerance, active and global citizenship and human rights;

12. Encourages the involvement of media, especially the mass media, in
promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, with particular regard to children and young people;

13. Commends civil society, non-governmental organizations and young
people for their activities in further promoting a culture of peace and non-violence, including through their campaign to raise awareness on a culture of peace and the peaceful settlement of disputes;

14. Encourages civil society and non-governmental organizations to further
strengthen their efforts to promote a culture of peace, inter alia, by adopting their own programme of activities to complement the initiatives of Member States, the United Nations system and other international and regional organizations, in line with the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace;

15. Invites Member States, all entities of the United Nations system and civilsociety organizations to accord increasing attention to their observance of theInternational Day of Peace on 21 September each year as a day of global ceasefireand non-violence, in accordance with its resolution 55/282 of 7 September 2001, and of the International Day of Non-Violence on 2 October, in accordance with itsresolution 61/271 of 15 June 2007;

16. Reiterates its request to the President of the General Assembly to considerconvening a high-level forum, as appropriate and within existing resources, devoted to the implementation of the Programme of Action on the occasion of the anniversary of its adoption, on or around 13 September, and requests the Secretariat to provide required logistical support for its effective organization within their respective mandates and existing resources;

17. Invites the Secretary-General, within existing resources, in consultationwith the Member States and taking into account the observations of civil societyorganizations, to explore mechanisms and strategies, in particular strategies in the sphere of information and communications technology, for the implementation of the Declaration and Programme of Action and to initiate outreach efforts to increase global awareness of the Programme of Action and its eight areas of action aimed at their implementation, including through public information activities by the Department of Global Communications of the Secretariat;

18. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its
seventy-sixth session a report, within existing resources, on actions taken by Member States, on the basis of information provided by them, and those taken system-wide by all concerned entities of the United Nations to implement the present resolution and on heightened activities by the Organization and its affiliated agencies to implement the Programme of Action and to promote a culture of peace and non-violence;

19. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its seventy-sixth sessionthe item entitled “Culture of peace”.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,

Bolivia: Choquehuanca meets with the UN to “strengthen the culture of peace”

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY .

An article from Pagina Siete (translation by CPNN)

Vice President David Choquehuanca met on Wednesday with the Under-Secretary General of the United Nations Organization for Political Affairs and Peacebuilding, Miroslav Jenča, to “strengthen” the culture of peace.


Vice President Choquehuanca in meeting with Miroslav Jenča / Photo: ABI

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

Question for this article:

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

“We had a meeting with Brother Miroslav Jenča, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs and Peacebuilding for Europe, Central Asia and the Americas. We promote the culture of peace and dialogue, that is our path, the path of unity and brotherhood “, wrote the Vice President, through his Facebook account.

At the time of assuming the Vice Presidency of the State, Choquehuanca made several reflections with a view to seeking balance and the recovery of the rule of law with impartial justice and the full exercise of democracy, reported the state ABI.

“Bolivians see each other as equals and we know that united we are worth more, we are in times of being Jiwasa again. It is not a question of me, it is a question of us. Jiwasa is the opposite of self-centeredness,” he said on November 8, upon taking office.

The UN delegation is in Bolivia to consolidate peace, in relation to the acts of violence that occurred after the resignation of Evo Morales in 2019.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Latin America

Following peace deal, talks on Libya’s political future begin

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from UN News

Talks to draw up a blueprint for a new political era in Libya began in Tunisia on Monday [November 9], following a peace deal struck by Libya’s warring sides last month [See CPNN October 17]


(Click on image to enlarge)

“You have gathered today to continue forging a new era of peace and stability for Libya. You have the opportunity to end a tragic conflict and create a future of dignity and hope”, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said in a video message to participants of the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum.

“Now it is your turn to shape the future of your country. Your commitment to this process will help restore Libyan sovereignty and the democratic legitimacy of Libyan institutions. As you engage in dialogue to resolve your differences, your determination will be tested.

Future ‘is now in your hands’

“However, compromise is the only approach that will pave the road to national unity”, he said. “The future of Libya is now in your hands.”

Tunisian President Qais Said, opening the meeting, said the talks would lead to a new legitimacy for Libya.

The country has been beset by chaos and conflict since the downfall of long-time Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, culminating in a civil war and the siege of the Libyan capital Tripoli which began in April last year.

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

What is being done for peace in Libya?

(article continued from left column)

The head of the UN mission in Libya, Stephanie Williams, told the meeting that it was a time of rare optimism, a glimmer of hope after many years of crisis.

New national vote

“The overriding aim of the National Political Programme is to renew political legitimacy by holding national elections, within an agreed timeframe”, she said.

Acting UN Special Representative Williams presided over a breakthrough peace agreement between five senior commanders from either side, at a meeting in Geneva last month. She arrived at the political talks in Tunis fresh from another successful round of military negotiations in the Libyan city of Ghadames, she said.

“Every day cooperation is increasing, and the transformation of the 5+5 into the ‘group of 10’ is more than just a slogan; it is a reality”, Ms. Williams said.

“The new government will launch national reconciliation, combat corruption, and restore public services. Its progress will be monitored; its work will be reviewed on a regular basis by mechanisms that can hold it to account.”

Executive body

In a statement released late on Sunday, Ms. Williams said that over the past two days she had been taking note of the participants’ suggestions about what the political talks should aim to achieve, including the creation of an executive authority capable of organizing elections and implementing the political, economic and military reforms necessary to bring some normalcy back to Libyans’ lives.

The participants had stressed the importance of designing a thorough roadmap for the political process and to develop a national charter based on the principles of accountability, justice and human rights and a firm commitment to a civilian state.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Mideast, United Nations,

Youth invited to sign letter to disband NATO

. .DISARMAMENT & SECURITY. .

An invitation from the International Network to Delegitimize NATO

Youth are invited here to sign the following letter addressed to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg,

We want to voice our opposition to the fact that you will host the NATO 2030 Youth Summit on November 9th.
 

As young people concerned about our future and the future of our planet, we are very concerned that the focus of the event is ‘keeping NATO strong militarily, making it stronger politically and more global’. We do not believe that strengthening NATO is the best way to secure our future. Instead we would like to see NATO disbanded.

One of the main challenges of the 21st century is to reimagine our concept of security. We are living in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, of unfolding climate change disaster and racial unrest. Addressing these challenges is the priority, by working alongside the international community and cooperation of the people, not strengthening a nuclear-armed military alliance that provokes mistrust and conflict.

NATO is committed to an interventionist military agenda and causes instability across the globe.

(continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

Can NATO be abolished?

(continued from left column)
 
We urge you to use the NATO 2030 Youth Summit to discuss how we build a more sustainable, more peaceful and fairer world, and to start the discussion about how the world that we will inherit would be better served by bringing an end to your alliance.

Best wishes,

The next generation,

Bela Irina Castro, Research Manager and Junior Researcher at the
Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Sean Conner, Staff International Peace Bureau, USA

Dr. med. Lisann Marie Drews, Physician and member of IPPNW & Stop Airbase Ramstein Campaign, Germany

Eskil Grav, Staff International Peace Bureau, Norway

Sara Medi Jones, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, UK

Ellie Kinney, Youth and Student CND convenor, UK

Vanessa Lanteigne, National Coordinator of the Canadian Voice of Women for Peace

Quique Sánchez Ochoa, Project manager at Centre Delàs of Peace Studies and GCOMS, Spain │
Lisa Silvestre, Mouvement de la Paix, France

Lucas Wirl, International Network No to War – No to NATO, Germany

Mikis Wulkow, Peace Activist, Germany

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, Europe, global,

Peter Kuznick on the Significance of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from World Beyond War

Peter Kuznick answered the following questions from Mohamed Elmaazi of Sputnik Radio and agreed to let World BEYOND War publish the text.

1) What’s the significance of Honduras being the latest country to join the UN’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons?

What a remarkable and ironic development, especially after the U.S. had been pressuring the previous 49 signers to withdraw their approvals. It is so fitting that Honduras, the original “banana republic,” pushed it over the edge–a delicious fuck you to a century of U.S. exploitation and bullying.


Peter Kuznick on Sputnik

2) Is it possibly a bit of a distraction to focus on countries that have no nuclear capability?

Not really. This treaty represents the moral voice of humanity. It may not have a universal enforcement mechanism, but it clearly states that the people of this planet abhor the power-hungry, annihilation-threatening madness of the nine nuclear powers. The symbolic significance can not be overstated.

3) There already is a Treaty on Nuclear Non-Proliferation which came into force in 1970 and which has been nearly every country on the planet is a party to. Is the NPT being lived up to?

The NPT has been lived up to to a surprising extent by the non-nuclear powers. It is amazing that more countries have not gone the nuclear path. The world is fortunate that more haven’t made that leap at a time when, according to El Baradei, at least 40 countries have the technological capability of doing so. The ones who are guilty of violating it are the five original signatories–the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, and France. They have completely ignored Article 6, which requires the nations possessing nuclear arsenals to reduce and eliminate those arsenals. The total number of nuclear weapons may have been cut from an absolutely insane 70,000 to a slightly less insane 13,500, but that is still enough to end life on the planet many times over.

4) If it isn’t, what good will yet another treaty, such as the one Honduras just joined, be in such an environment?

The NPT didn’t make possession, development, transportation, and threat to use nuclear weapons illegal. The new treaty does and explicitly so. This is a major symbolic leap. While it won’t put the leaders of the nuclear weapons states on trial by the International Criminal Court, it will put pressure on them to heed global sentiment as has been the case with chemical weapons, land mines, and other treaties. If the U.S. wasn’t concerned about the effect of this pressure, why did it make such an effort to block the treaty’s ratification? As Eisenhower and Dulles both stated during the 1950s, it was the global nuclear taboo that stopped them from using nuclear weapons on several occasions. Global moral pressure can constrain bad actors and sometimes even force them to become good actors.

In 2002 the US administration of George W Bush Jr withdrew from the ABM treaty. The Trump Administration withdrew from the INF Treaty in 2019 and there are questions as to whether the New START treaty will be renewed before it expires in 2021. Both the ABM and the INF treaties were signed between the US and Soviet Union to reduce the risk of nuclear war.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

5) Explain the consequences of the US withdrawal from key nuclear controls treaties such as the ABM and the INF treaty.

The consequences of U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty were enormous. On the one hand, it allowed the U.S. to continue with implementation of its still unproven and costly missile defense systems. On the other, it induced the Russians to begin research and development of their own countermeasures. As a result of those efforts, on March 1, 2018, in his State of the Nation address, Vladimir Putin announced that the Russians had now developed five new nuclear weapons, all of which can circumvent U.S. missile defense systems. Hence, abrogation of the ABM Treaty gave the U.S. a false sense of security and by putting Russia in a vulnerable position, it sparked Russian innovation that has put the U.S. in a weakened position. Overall, this has only made the world more dangerous. Abrogation of the INF Treaty has similarly resulted in introduction of more dangerous missiles that can potentially destabilize relations. This is what happens when shortsighted, advantage-seeking hawks make policy and not responsible statesmen.

6) Why do you think the US has been moving away from these nuclear arms control treaties that it originally signed with the Soviet Union? Have they not been serving their purpose?

The Trump administration policymakers do not want to see the U.S. constrained by international treaties. They believe the U.S. can and will win an arms race. Trump has said so repeatedly. In 2016, he declared, “Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all.” This past May, Trump’s chief arms control negotiator, Marshall Billingslea, similarly stated, “We can spend Russia and China into oblivion in order to win a new nuclear arms race.” They are both insane and should be taken away by the men in white coats. In 1986, during the previous arms race before Gorbachev, with a little late help from Reagan, injected some sanity into the world, the nuclear powers had accumulated approximately 70,000 nuclear weapons, equivalent to some 1.5 million Hiroshima bombs. Do we really want to get back to that? Sting sang a powerful song in the 1980s with the lyrics, “I hope the Russians love their children too.” We were lucky that they did. I don’t think Trump is capable of loving anyone other than himself and he has a straight line to the nuclear button with no one standing in his way.

7) What is New START Treaty and how does it fit into all of this?

The New START Treaty limits the number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons to 1,550 and also limits the number of launch vehicles. Because of technicalities, the number of weapons is actually higher. It is all that is left of the nuclear arms control architecture that has taken decades to erect. It is all that stands in the way of nuclear anarchy and the new arms race I was just talking about. It is set to expire on February 5. From Trump’s first day in office, Putin has been trying to get Trump to extend it unconditionally for five years as the treaty allows. Trump disparaged the treaty and established impossible conditions for its renewal. Now, desperate for a foreign policy victory on the eve of the election, he has tried to negotiate its extension. But Putin refuses to accept the terms that Trump and Billingslea are proposing, making one wonder just how firmly Putin really is in Trump’s corner.

8) Where would you like to see policy makers go from here, in particular among major nuclear powers?

First, they need to extend the New START Treaty for five years, as Biden has promised he will do. Second, they need to reinstitute the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) and the INF Treaty. Third, they need to take all weapons off hair-trigger alert. Fourth, they need to get rid of all ICBMs, which are the most vulnerable part of the arsenal and require immediate launch if an incoming missile is detected as has happened numerous times only to be found to be false alarms. Fifth, they need to change command and control to insure that other responsible leaders have to sign off besides just the president before nuclear weapons are ever used. Sixth, they need to reduce arsenals below the threshold for nuclear winter. Seventh, they need to join the TPNW and abolish nuclear weapons entirely. Eighth, they need to take the money they’ve been wasting on weapons of annihilation and invest them in areas that will uplift humanity and improve people’s lives. I can give them lots of suggestions of where to begin if they want to listen.
 
Peter Kuznick is Professor of History at American University, and author of Beyond the Laboratory: Scientists As Political Activists in 1930s America, co-author with Akira Kimura of  Rethinking the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Japanese and American Perspectives, co-author with Yuki Tanaka of Nuclear Power and Hiroshima: The Truth Behind the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Power, and co-editor with James Gilbert of Rethinking Cold War Culture. In 1995, he founded American University’s Nuclear Studies Institute, which he directs. In 2003, Kuznick organized a group of scholars, writers, artists, clergy, and activists to protest the Smithsonian’s celebratory display of the Enola Gay. He and filmmaker Oliver Stone co-authored the 12 part Showtime documentary film series and book both titled The Untold History of the United States.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

Red Cross : Nuclear ban: “Today is an historic day. We call on world leaders to act with courage and join the right side of history”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A press release from  The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)

October 24. Fifty States have now ratified the Treaty, meaning that it will enter into force as an instrument of international humanitarian law in 90 days. The Treaty is the first globally applicable multilateral agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons. It prohibits their use, threat of use, development, production, testing and stockpiling. It also commits States to clearing contaminated areas and helping victims. By providing pathways for the elimination of nuclear weapons, the TPNW is an indispensable building block towards a world free of nuclear weapons


Photo: ICRC

Francesco Rocca, President of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), said:

“Today is an historic day: even a few years ago, the dream of a nuclear ban recognized by the international community seemed unfathomable. This is a victory for every citizen of the world, and it demonstrates the importance of multilateralism. I would like to congratulate all 50 States that have ratified the treaty and to call on all the other world leaders to act with courage and join the right side of history.

“The simple reality is that the international community could never hope to deal with the consequences of a nuclear confrontation. No nation is prepared to deal with a nuclear confrontation. What we cannot prepare for, we must prevent”, Mr Rocca said.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

There are over 14,000 nuclear bombs in the world, thousands of which are ready to be launched in an instant. The power of many of those warheads are tens of times greater than the weapons dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Peter Maurer, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said :

“Today is a victory for humanity, and a promise of a safer future. Too many times we have seen the dangerous logic of nuclear deterrence drag the world to the brink of destruction. Too many accept nuclear weapons as an inevitable part of the international security architecture. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons allows us to imagine a world free from such inhumane weapons as an achievable goal.”

Red Cross and Red Crescent leaders have over the past years advocated with government leaders, parliamentarians, academics and with the public to reflect in depth on the humanitarian consequences of Nuclear weapons and the need to have a legally binding commitment for their prohibition and in the long term for their elimination. They also have urged the Nuclear possessing states to urgently take interim steps to reduce the immediate risks of use of nuclear weapons by intent, miscalculation or accident, and in the long term to sign and ratify the treaty.

Prohibiting and eliminating nuclear weapons is a humanitarian imperative, and a promise to future generations that they will never have to live under the threat of nuclear catastrophe as we have experienced the past 75 years.

“The use of nuclear weapons is, under any circumstances, unacceptable in humanitarian, moral and legal terms. We are ready, together with our Red Cross Red Crescent National Societies, to continue our advocacy to build a world without nuclear weapons: we need to scale-up and intensify our efforts. We must do it for future generations,” concluded Mr Rocca.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,

United States : There Are Anti-War Candidates

. .DISARMAMENT & SECURITY. .

An article from David Swanson

I don’t have any use for PEP politicians (progressive except on the Pentagon), but there are going to be serious members of the U.S. Congress next year who aren’t afraid of flags and war songs. There are going to be a lot more than (AOC+3) four of them.


CORI BUSH

One is going to be Cori Bush from St. Louis who won her primary against a long-time incumbent. She’s recently tweeted the following:

“If you’re having a bad day, just think of all the social services we’re going to fund after we defund the Pentagon.”

“Militarization makes up 64% of our federal budget. Medicare & Health are 6%. Education is 5%. Social Security, Unemployment, and Labor together are 3%. Ignorance is thinking those priorities keep our families safe.”

“220K+ people, including 1,700 healthcare workers, have died from COVID-19 due to our government’s inability to protect its citizens & pass pandemic relief. Ignorance is Trump’s Pentagon taking $1 billion in funding designated for PPE production to make jet engine parts.”

“@BernieSanders and @EdMarkey proposed a 10% cut on the Pentagon budget to use to fund health care, housing, childcare and educational opportunities for cities and towns experiencing a poverty rate of 25% or more. Ignorance is blocking this bill knowing it would save lives.”

“Ignorance is paying Lockheed Martin more than $1 trillion over the course of a 60 year contract for a dysfunctional F-35 program. Ignorance is letting their CEO take a $20 million dollar salary while military veterans go homeless.”

“The Department of Defense has never passed an independent audit, yet we continue to give them money unchecked. Ignorance is the Trump administration *INCREASING* the Pentagon budget by more than $100 billion since he was elected.”

“Ignorance is giving weapons of war to local police departments with no accountability or oversight. Ignorance is calling us radical for saying that’s wrong.”

Cori Bush may appreciate this billboard going up in St. Louis. And I’m sure she fully appreciates that she’s up against Joe Biden on all of the above just as much as Trump. But she’s not going to be alone.

JAMAAL BOWMAN

Jamaal Bowman of New York said of his now-defeated primary competition:

“My opponent, Representative Eliot Engel, and I do not share the same foreign policy vision. He voted for one of the worst policy disasters of my lifetime — an unjust and costly 2 trillion dollar war in Iraq. He voted against President Obama’s signature foreign policy achievement which put a lid on Iran’s nuclear program. He went on CNN this past year and said he didn’t want to tie Trump’s hands when it came to strikes on Iran. He was one of only 16 House Democrats in 2016 to vote against an amendment that blocked the transfer of cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia which has been relentlessly dropping them on Yemeni civilians. My opponent accepts donations from corporations and arms manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon. He supports a hawkish and costly foreign policy agenda instead of focusing on the communities in our district that have been neglected for far too long. We must dramatically reduce the Pentagon’s budget over the next ten years, end the forever wars, and rebuild a diplomacy-first approach through the State Department. We have been in Afghanistan for 19 years, in Iraq for 17 years, and in Syria for five years. Congress must reassert its authority to bring our troops home.”

Engel stood by his warmongering and sank with it. This means that a different warmonger will become the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, while Engel likely heads off to make the big bucks from a yet-to-be-named weapons dealer.

MONDAIRE JONES

Mondaire Jones of New York also won his primary. His website says:

“The United States has been at war for most of my life — wars that have led to hundreds of thousands of people being killed and millions more displaced. We were led into the disastrous war in Iraq under false pretenses. The war in Afghanistan has been raging for almost 19 years. We are contributing to the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, in Yemen, by providing weapons to the Saudi-led coalition. Extreme war powers, and a reluctance by members of Congress to exert oversight, have enabled the Trump Administration to bring us dangerously close to the brink of war with Iran. . . . Enough is enough. Our national security depends on a sane approach to American foreign policy that centers diplomacy, peace, human rights, and cooperation on the challenges facing our world. We must stop fighting endless wars. As a member of Congress, I will fight to finally repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which has given the executive branch a blank check to pursue foreign wars having nothing to do with the September 11th attacks. I will work to bring an end to existing conflicts, including the war in Afghanistan, through inclusive peace processes that center human rights, including women’s rights. I will support barring the sale of weapons to human rights violators, including Saudi Arabia, and I will support redirecting funds towards conflict prevention, including through development aid to reduce poverty and inequalities and combat climate change. . . . Our budgets reflect our values and priorities. Currently, the United States has chosen to prioritize investing in war and weapons ahead of providing for the basic needs of our people. The 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allocates a whopping $738 billion dollars for military spending. We spend more than approximately the next seven countries combined. It is estimated that we have spent almost $6 trillion dollars on the Global War on Terror alone. The United States maintains hundreds of costly military bases in dozens of countries throughout the world. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has gutted funding for the State Department and USAID, making the United States less able to lead on diplomatic and humanitarian efforts to address our world’s biggest challenges. As a member of Congress, I will push to reduce military spending and reinvest this money in the State Department, to strengthen diplomacy and peacebuilding, as well as domestically, in programs that meet the needs of our civilian population. I will fight to prioritize investment in human security approaches, which focus on meeting the human needs of people and protecting our environment.”

Those three are going to be added to Congress anew. That’s a big improvement. A couple more might get in, the first more likely than the second.

(Article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

The peace movement in the United States, What are its strengths and weaknesses?

(Article continued from left column)

MIKE SIEGEL

Mike Siegel, who won his primary in Texas, has not a word on his website but has said this:

“Let’s rebuild the State Department and our diplomatic corps. Let’s revamp our foreign aid spending to encourage the development of civil society and local economies. And instead of over-spending on war industries, let’s invest in the domestic safety net and the conditions for peace around the world.”

QASIM RASHID

Qasim Rashid, who won his primary in hyper-militarized Virginia, says on his website:

“The United States spends twice as much on national defense as China and Russia combined. We can spend this money more wisely and find ways to cut costs. US defense spending priorities must focus on foreign threats, assemble the defense infrastructure necessary to protect Americans from these threats, and support the men and women who defend our way of life, while they’re serving and after they serve.”

“[W]e should not be running our foreign policy through the Pentagon. It’s time to invest in diplomacy, and take time during the COVID-19 pandemic to think about what national security truly means in a 21st century world.”

Then there are incumbents.

PRAMILA JAYAPAL

This co-chair from Washington State of the extremely unreliable Progressive Caucus recently said:

“This will be a top priority of the progressive caucus — to really get some meaningful budget cuts in Pentagon spending this next cycle.”

She recently tweeted:

“We must retire the days of incremental change and usher in a new age of bold, progressive transformation. That means finally cutting wasteful defense spending to make long overdue investments in health care, infrastructure, and clean energy.”

MARK POCAN

Jayapal and Pocan, of Wisconsin, recently wrote:

“Every dollar wasted at the Pentagon is a dollar not being spent on test kits, personal protective equipment or contact tracing. Every handout to Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman is money that could have been spent on ending this pandemic, keeping small businesses afloat and staving off an economic meltdown. We hope our colleagues will join us in voting to cut the Pentagon budget, so we can redirect funding to where it’s needed in our communities.”

KATIE PORTER

A possibly ally is Katie Porter who recently asked a Lockheed Martin executive:

“Why should the taxpayer foot the bill to help Lockheed Martin at this time?”

Then there are the five most reliably antiwar Congress Members of recent years:

ILHAN OMAR

RO KHANNA

RASHIDA TLAIB

AYANNA PRESSLEY

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ

That makes a possible baker’s dozen out of 435 House Members, not counting 100 Senators. There are more:

BARBARA LEE

In July, Congresswoman Lee of Oakland and Congressman Pocan announced the formation of a Defense [sic] Spending Reduction Caucus. I have been unable to learn who is in it.

PETER DEFAZIO

EARL BLUMENAUER

Defazio and Blumenauer of Oregon have been relatively outspoken, even on their websites.

JIM MCGOVERN

Congressman McGovern of Massachusetts is a pretty reliable vote.

There are others.

This year 93 House Members voted to move 10% of military spending to human needs on a vote that was not even close and on which none of them were threatened or bribed by their party “leadership” to vote the wrong way, and with Trump available as the target of their rhetoric. Could boosting the number of members willing to speak out against militarism to over a dozen boost the number willing to vote against it on even the weakest measures to over 93, even if the White House changes?

There are numerous other candidates for Congress whom people have claimed should be added to “the squad” but unless they will talk about war and peace, they’re not getting a jersey on my squad and they’re not serious about what they claim to be serious about.

There may be others I don’t know about. Please add them in the comments under this article on davidswanson.org.

Not a single one of these members of Congress has ever proposed their ideal federal budget. The Progressive Caucus has a budget proposal that is much improved over past years in that it would move a teeny bit out of military spending, specifically $63 billion out of the off-the-books slush fund, $38 billion out of supplemental spending, and $62 billion out of the Pentagon’s budget. That’s $163 billion moved to useful things out of well over $1 trillion going to militarism.

Most Democrats and all Republicans in Congress are not listed above. The same goes for almost all “white” Congress Members. Also wildly under-represented here: men in Congress. Almost all Democrats running for Congress have zero foreign policy or budget positions on their website at all, other than their great love for veterans. In my view, what happens will depend very largely on public activism. Can we make opposing militarism mainstream, respectable, acceptable? Can we make warmongering marginal, shameful, despicable? We have to try.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION, DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, North America

United Nations-African Union Joint Task Force on Peace and Security Holds its Nineteenth Consultative Meeting on 16 October 2020

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A press release from the United Nations

The United Nations-African Union Joint Task Force on Peace and Security held its nineteenth consultative meeting via virtual platform on 16 October 2020. 

The meeting reviewed the status of the partnership between the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU) with an update on the implementation of the Joint UN-AU Framework for Enhanced Partnership in Peace and Security. The meeting discussed developments and cooperation in support to on-going electoral processes in Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Guinea. The meeting also exchanged views on the situations in Ethiopia, Libya, Mali, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Western Sahara. 

The AU Commission and the UN Secretariat were represented respectively by Commissioners Minata Samaté-Cessouma (Political Affairs), Smaïl Chergui (Peace and Security); and the Under-Secretaries-General Rosemary DiCarlo (Political and Peacebuilding Affairs), Jean-Pierre Lacroix (Peace Operations), Atul Khare (Operational Support), Hanna Tetteh, Special Representative of the Secretary-General to the African Union and Assistant Secretary-General Bintou Keita (Africa). The meeting was also attended by other senior officials from the two Organizations. 
 


The Joint Task Force took note of the considerable progress achieved in the UN-AU partnership including with regional economic communities and mechanisms in Africa together with international partners. These include sustained collaboration on support to African Union peace support operations, early warning and prevention initiatives, as well as coordinated support to national authorities for the conduct of timely, peaceful and inclusive elections as well as for the promotion and protection of human rights. Both organizations strengthened collaboration in mediation support and have begun to focus more on their joint initiatives on the women, peace and security, and youth for peace and security agendas.

The Joint Task Force took note of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on peace and security in Africa and welcomed the swift actions taken by the continent’s leadership to contain the spread of the pandemic. They further welcomed the collaboration between both organizations, Regional Economic Commissions and Member States in responding to the peace, security and humanitarian impact of the pandemic. 
 
The Joint Task Force exchanged views on the socio-political situations in Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Guinea, ahead of the elections scheduled in October and December in those countries. The meeting agreed to foster complementarity in electoral support to Member States and undertake joint conflict prevention initiatives aimed at mitigating election related crisis. The Joint Task Force further agreed to work together in supporting Member States efforts in strengthening their electoral institutions and processes and in enhancing their capacities to organize peaceful, credible, transparent and inclusive elections which among others provide for the participation of women, youth, persons with disabilities and other marginalized groups.

The Joint Task Force welcomed increased coordination and collaboration in supporting elections in West Africa. A joint UN-AU-ECOWAS analysis paper, joint messaging and joint solidarity missions to Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea illustrated this increased partnership. 
 


The Joint Task Force expressed concern about the tense environment ahead of the presidential election in Côte d’Ivoire. They urged all stakeholders to refrain from incendiary speech and violence, and to engage in dialogue to resolve their differences and create an environment conducive to a peaceful, inclusive and credible election. They further encouraged the authorities, including the security forces to protect and uphold human rights in the electoral process. The Joint Task Force reassured the people of Côte d’Ivoire of the continued solidarity and support of the African Union and the United Nations. 
 


The Joint Task Force called on the relevant Ghanaian stakeholders to ensure the holding of peaceful, transparent, inclusive and credible elections. It further encouraged the competing parties to call on their supporters to adhere to the agreed code of conduct, to refrain from the use of hate or inflammatory speech and any acts of violence before, during, and after the general elections. The Joint Task Force further encouraged all parties to resolve any differences that may arise in connection with the elections through dialogue and in strict respect for the rule of law. The Joint Task Force remains confident that Ghana will, as in the past, continue democratic consolidation by delivering peaceful and credible elections. 
 


The Joint Task Force called on Guinean stakeholders to ensure the holding of peaceful and credible elections. They condemned the frequent recourse to hate speech and the manipulation of ethnicity for political purposes. They urged all actors to act with responsibility, refrain from violence and resolve through dialogue and legal means any disagreements that may arise in connection with the election. They further urged the defence and security forces to exercise utmost restraint and uphold international human rights standards in their conduct during the electoral process. The Joint Task Force reiterated the commitment of the African Union and the United Nations to continue supporting the people of Guinea in the consolidation of democratic gains. 
 


Further, the Joint Task Force exchanged views on the situation in Libya and welcomed the conclusion of the Ministerial Meeting on Libya co-chaired by the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Foreign Minister of Germany, Mr. Heiko Maas, on 5 October 2020. They agreed that UN, AU, EU and LAS should continue to work towards enhanced cohesion through the Libya Quartet. 
 

 
 

(article continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Can the African Union help bring a culture of peace to Africa?

What is the United Nations doing for a culture of peace?

(article continued from left column)

On the situation in Mali and the Sahel, the Joint Task Force took note of the start of the political Transition in Mali following the establishment of an inclusive transitional government headed by a civilian Prime Minister and a civilian President. The Joint Task Force welcomed the lifting of sanctions and reiterated the African Union and United Nations’ full support to the Transition authorities and people of Mali towards peace, stability and restoration of constitutional order. It committed to deepen the AU-UN collaboration to assist the transitional authorities in the preparation of elections and launch of priority reforms, within the 18-month transition period. 
 


The Joint Task Force urged the parties to uphold their commitment under the Agreement and prioritize the key institutional reforms of the peace process. It welcomed the participation of the signatory armed groups in the Transition Government and called on all stakeholders to work in a spirit of compromise to accelerate the implementation of the Peace Agreement. The Joint Task Force urged for enhanced participation of women in the peace process. It recognized the important role MINUSMA and MISAHEL continue to play in support of the Malian parties to advance the implementation of the Peace Agreement and to address the situation in central Mali. 


The Joint Task Force expressed concern over the alarming deterioration of the situation in Mali and the Sahel region, and reaffirmed the determination of both Organizations to continue supporting national, regional and international initiatives. The United Nations reiterated its commitment to support the African Union in the strengthening of its engagement in the Sahel, including through the deployment of 3,000 troops in support to the G5 Joint Force. The Joint Task Force also called on international partners to scale up their support, and provide the resources and assistance required by the G5 Sahel Joint Force to fully play its critical role in fighting terrorism and transnational organized crime. 
 


With regards to Ethiopia, the Joint Task Force noted the UN and AU’s support to the country’s ongoing reforms, including to domestic initiatives aimed at facilitating a consensus on key political, social and economic issues. The meeting commended the efforts of the AU to facilitate a mutually beneficial trilateral agreement on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. 
 


On South Sudan, the Joint Task Force called to resolve pending issues particularly agreement on Transitional Security Arrangements (TSAs) and formation of the Transitional National Legislative Assembly (TNLA). The meeting further committed to support the participation of women in the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement for Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS), and encouraged  the appointment of the head of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC).On Sudan, the Joint Task Force highlighted the continuing critical strategic and political partnership between the United Nations and the African Union and noted that the two organisations will continue to be close partners throughout Sudan’s transitional process. The meeting commended the engagement of the African Union in the planning process for UNITAMS, which will maximise the two organisations’ comparative advantages in support of the transition. The Joint Task Force welcomed the peace agreement signed in Juba on 3 October between the Sudan Revolutionary Front, the Sudan Liberation Army-Minni Minnawi faction and the Government of Sudan and urged the non-signatories to the agreement to fully engage in the peace process. 
 


On Somalia, the Joint Task Force welcomed the resumption of political dialogue among the leaders of the Federal Government and the Federal Member States that led to the agreement on a model for elections, albeit indirect parliamentary elections for 2020/21, and stressed the importance of concerted efforts to work towards universal parliamentary elections in 2024/25. The meeting expressed hope that the upcoming electoral process would be timely, free, fair and inclusive of all sectors of Somali society including women, youth and minority groups, and guarantee at least a 30 per cent representation of women in Parliament. Recognizing that 2021 will be a transition year in Somalia toward a new political dispensation as well as towards Somalis taking the leading role on security, the Joint Task Force underscored the criticality for the dialogue among Somalia’s leaders to continue and extend to other priority areas including the constitutional review, building a federal Somali security sector and other institutions, and resolving outstanding differences between the Federal Government and Federal Member States. 


The Joint Task Force recognized AMISOM’s continued critical contribution to peace and security in Somalia and welcomed its efforts to collaborate with Somali Security Forces to consolidate and extend security gains, notwithstanding challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic The meeting took note of efforts underway to chart the way forward on the transition to Somali security responsibility, notably the Federal Government’s work to update the Transition Plan. With regards to the independent assessment, the AU highlighted that its views should be taken into account. The meeting called for continued efforts to strengthen a common approach among Somalia’s partners towards support to peacebuilding and state-building in the country. 
 


With regard to Western Sahara, the Joint Task Force looks forward to the appointment of a new Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Western Sahara and encourages the parties to refrain from rhetoric and actions that are harmful to a political solution to the conflict. The Joint Task Force discussed the resource shortfall for the humanitarian assistance for the Sahrawi refugees particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. 
 


The Joint Task Force also discussed UN-AU cooperation in counterterrorism. While commending ongoing cooperation in counterterrorism, participants underlined the need for greater coordination and consultation to ensure synergies, build on each other’s efforts and avoid duplication. The meeting agreed therefore to work towards the establishment of a joint coordination mechanism that will be responsible for providing oversight and strategic level guidance to the joint working groups to be subsequently established. 
 


The next statutory meeting of the Joint Task Force will be hosted by the African Union Commission in February 2021, on the margins of the 34th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union. 

Africa, DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, United Nations,

‘Democracy Has Won’: Year After Right-Wing Coup Against Evo Morales, Socialist Luis Arce Declares Victory in Bolivia Election

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION .

An article by Jake Johnson from Common Dreams (licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License)

A year after former Bolivian president Evo Morales was ousted in a military coup that installed a brutal far-right regime, Morales ally Luis Arce declared victory in the South American nation’s high-stakes presidential election early Monday after exit polls showed the socialist candidate with a large advantage over his two main competitors.


Bolivia’s leftist presidential candidate Luis Arce of the Movement for Socialism party celebrates with running mate David Choquehuanca early on October 19, 2020 in La Paz, Bolivia. (Photo: Ronaldo Schemidt/AFP via Getty Images)

“Democracy has won,” Arce, who served as Morales’ finance minister, said in an address to the nation after one exit poll showed him leading the race with 52.4% of the vote and former president Carlos Mesa in a distant second with 31.5%. Right-wing candidate Luis Camacho—an ally of unelected interim President Jeanine Añez—won just 14.1% of the vote, according to the survey.

The Washington Post reported that “if the exit poll numbers are confirmed by the official count, which was being tabulated slowly late Sunday, it would be more than enough to avoid a November runoff and claim outright victory.”

(article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Why was Morales ousted from Bolivia by a coup d’etat?

(article continued from left column)

Arce characterized his apparently decisive victory, which even Añez was forced to acknowledge, as a mandate to continue the policies of the Morales government, which lifted millions of Bolivians out of poverty and expanded the nation’s economy.

“I think the Bolivian people want to retake the path we were on,” Arce said Monday.

Twice postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic, Sunday’s election was a do-over of last year’s presidential contest, which was thrown into chaos after the U.S.-dominated Organization of American States (OAS) leveled baseless allegations of “fraud” by Morales, who was eventually forced to resign and flee the country under threat by Bolivia’s military.

The coup against Morales sparked a wave of Indigenous-led protests that were violently repressed by the Bolivian military and police forces, which were granted sweeping immunity from prosecution by the anti-Indigenous Añez government.

“The OAS allegations were indeed the main political foundation of the coup that followed the October 20 election three weeks later,” Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, wrote last month. “But they provided no evidence to support these allegations—because there wasn’t any. This has since been established repeatedly by a slew of expert statistical studies.”

From exile in Argentina, Morales on Monday celebrated Arce’s apparent victory as a “great triumph of the people.”

“Brothers and sisters: the will of the people has been asserted,” Morales tweeted. “This is an overwhelming victory… We are going to give dignity and liberty back to the people.”

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, Latin America

77 Heads of State and Ministers address UN High Level Meeting on Nuclear Weapons

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

A message from Unfold Zero

77 Heads of State and Ministers took the opportunity to address the United Nations High Level Meeting on the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons held yesterday (October 2) in the UN General Assembly and by virtual participation.

This is probably the highest number of Presidents, Prime Ministers, Foreign Ministers and Defence Ministers to have addressed any of the high level meetings which have taken place annually since 2013 to commemorate the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons. Such participation indicates widespread global concern, especially amongst non-nuclear governments, about the threat from nuclear weapons.


Volkan Bozkir, General Assembly President

Representatives from several regional groups and international organisations, as well as two representatives from global civil society, also addressed the meeting. The civil society representatives called on UN Member States to ‘de-escalate the nuclear arms race, redirect nuclear weapons budgets and investments to meet human security needs, and commit to the total elimination of nuclear weapons by 2045, the 100th anniversary of the UN.’

Click here for the full list of speakers for the event.

UN leadership

The event was chaired by H.E. Vlokan Bozkir, President of the UN General Assembly, who opened the event with a strong presentation reminding us that the UN was born out of the ashes of WWII and the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan, and calling on UN member states to fulfill their obligations to end the nuclear arms race and achieve the comprehensive elimination of nuclear weapons.

H.E. António Guterres, UN Secretary-General, followed with an impassioned speech warning that the world continues to live in the shadow of nuclear catastrophe. He urged nuclear armed states to take practical steps to reduce nuclear risks, and on all members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to work towards a positive outcome to the Review Conference next year that takes forward concrete nuclear disarmament steps.

(Continued in right column)

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

(Continued from left column)

Statements by governments were introduced by their UN ambassadors sitting in the UN General Assembly, but then presented by the leaders (Presidents and Ministers) by pre-recorded video statements due to pandemic constraints on UN physical meetings.

The six hours of statements included many reports on nuclear disarmament action and calls for further action. These included to:

-adopt nuclear risk reduction measures such as de-alerting and no-first-use;

– support existing nuclear-weapon-free-zones and establish additional ones especially one in the Middle East;

– cut nuclear weapons budgets/investments and redirect these to addressing the pandemic and achieving the sustainable development goals;

– support existing treaties such as the NPT, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons;

– negotiate a comprehensive nuclear weapons convention which includes the nuclear-armed countries and would prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons globally;

– commit to the total elimination of nuclear weapons by the 100th anniversary of the UN.

Click here for a short video (2mins) with selected quotes from speakers at the High Level Meeting. Click here for the video recording of Session 1 (3 hours). The videos of both sessions and all presentations will be posted online here early next week.

Civil society presentations

Two members of global civil society were invited to make presentations to the High Level event. They are Mr Saber Chowdhury MP (Bangladesh), Co-President of Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, and Ms Vanda Proskova (Czech Republic), Vice-Chair of PragueVision Institute for Sustainable Security and one of the convenors of #Wethepeoples2020.

Mr Chowdhury noted that ‘We all have a key role to play and engage with governments to ensure implementation of nuclear disarmament obligations, and in diverting resources from nuclear weapons to positive impacts for the economy, livelihoods and protection of nature.’ (Click here for his video presentation).

Ms Proskova noted that nuclear weapons ‘are dangerous whether they are used on purpose or due to a miscalculation. They are extremely harmful to the environment which we are so vehemently trying to protect. In the 21st century they are simply obsolete. And, what is more, they are phenomenally expensive.’ (Click here for her video presentation).

Both of the civil society representatives called on UN members to de-escalate the nuclear arms race, redirect nuclear weapons budgets and investments to meet human security needs, and commit to the total elimination of nuclear weapons by 2045, the 100th anniversary of the UN.

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,