Category Archives: global

International Cities of Peace and Rotary Peace Clubs

.. DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION ..

Excerpts from an address by Fred Arment, Executive Diector of Inernational Cities of Peace to the Rotary E Club for World Peace, published November 18, 2018

In the International Cities of Peace we have had extraordinary growth in terms of being able to help and mentor and challenge people within communities to build city of peace efforts. . .

We started with the idea of the city of peace which is an idea that is not only hundreds of years old, but thousands. Jerusalem, for example, means city of peace in Hebrew and Arabic. The concept of a city of peace is really inspirational.

We define peace in a way that is a consensus value. So we define it as three freedoms:

– Safety: Freedom from risk of injury, danger or loss

– Prosperity: Freedom to achieve a good standard of living

– Quality of Life: Freedom to enjoy health and happiness

These cannot be taken for granted. I get emails every day from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, from Palestine, from Colombia. These people have a vision and a hope for their lives and for their children to create a peacebuilding operation in their city that will achieve safety, prosperity and quality of life. . .

This is about Rotary because Rotary has such intense potential to create peace in the world. . . Every Rotary Club has this need and desire to create a better community . . . Rotary Peace Clubs are a huge benefit not only through the United States but throughout the world . . . International Cities of Peace fits in as a pathway to build stronger Rotary Clubs. . . . It’s a platform for inspiring community action, for creating larger peace within the community . . . and it’s a way for Rotary Clubs to connect to the global family where there are people in great need . . .

As of this morning we now have over 224 cities of peace in 50 countries on 6 continents. The last one this morning was Hyderabad in Pakistan which we just learned about over the past couple of months.

It takes several months for people to create a city of peace initiative. It’s not just a signature on a piece of paper. . . It’s rigourous and that is why it is making a difference. There are five steps to establishing a community as an International City of Peace:

1. Get signatures on a Letter of Intent. . . It must be community-wide. The signature has to do with the culture of peace as defined by UNESCO and signing up for that.

2. Write a vision, mission, and goals statement for their unique community. We help them through that, engagig about 500 different people working with International Cities of Peace who serve as mentors for people around the world.

(Continued in right column)

Questions for this article:

How can culture of peace be developed at the municipal level?

(Continued from left column)

3. Send photos and captions of local peace events and we create a free web page for each of our cities with contact information.

4. Submit a photo and bio for the leader of the group

5. Write a statement about the peace legacy of the community. Every community has a peace legacy, whether it’s teachers or artists. Our children need to know about the peace work that has been done in their community.

It’s a rigorous process that people go through. The key word is “transformative.” The people who develop city of peace initiatives transform themselves personally. It’s a different way of thinking about the world. How can we create a culture of peace? . . .

Here is the UNESCO definition of the culture of peace to which they adhere in their Letter of Intent:

– Education

– Sustainable economic development

– Human rights

– Equality of women and men

– Democratic participation

– Understanding and tolerance

– Free flow of information

– International peace and security

It’s amazing how, around the world, some of these items are very controversial, for example, equality of women and men, democratic participation. They are literally at risk when they sign the Letter of Intent to create what UNESCO has said is a culture of peace. And, there’s Hindus and Muslims and Buddhists and Christians and Jews and all of the different religions. The UNESCO resolution did not address directly the cultures of faith, so what we added, when someone creates a city of peace they sign a document that says they are going to be inclusive and we use the Golden Rule as the moral ethic for creating a city of peace. It’s very inclusive of all creeds and religions and races and cultures. . .

I want to tell a few amazing stories about International Cities of Peace and reflect on their connection to Rotary [for details, see minutes 19-23 in the YouTube broadcast]. . . .

In conclusion, our goal is to establish 1000 Cities of Peace around the world by year 2025. Imagine the difference that could make in the lives of our 7 billion companions on Earth. By creating the global infrastructure of peace, the great challenges and issues of our time could be addressed locally through democratic and reasoned debate and action. The dynamic of top-down prescriptions for how to create peace has not worked so well. It is only through bottom-up, “in situ” peace building by citizens who know the needs of their communities that will foster the kind of commitment and compassion that will change the world… and change the world, we will.

For more information on how to establish your community as an International City of Peace, send an email to info@internationalcitiesofpeace.org, or go to www.internationalcitiesofpeace.org for an easy-to-use web resource.

Madrid: Women close the Anti-Violence Forum with a message of peace

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from Ultima Hora (Note: Also available from Europapress)

Ten women leaders of politics and society closed today [Nov 8] the II World Forum on Urban Violence and Education for Coexistence and Peace in Madrid with a message of peace.

“Women do not shy away from conflict. When there is injustice, it must be revealed, “said the mayor of the Spanish capital, Manuela Carmena. “But the big difference is that we do not use violence to resolve conflicts. Women are agents of peace.”

For two hours before an audience that interrupted the interventions with applause, the participants discussed from a feminist perspective a large part of the topics of the forum organized by the city council of Madrid in the Matadero cultural venue, which included dozens of papers, workshops and events.

Mayor Carmena had the last word, sending a message of hope and asking for a cultural change. “Why have we chosen this extraordinary panel to finish? It has an explanation: we have defined 2018 as the violet year. Millions of women went out to the streets to remember that the prominence of women is still pending. We must be protagonists in the 21st century and in the following centuries,” she said.

“Violence is still linked to the culture of machismo and that erroneous concept of masculinity. Earlier we heard that in Latin America there are 400 homicides a day. But that statistic does not say that most are committed by men. Just 1 percent are committed by women,” she added.

“We have to say it. Women do not have their hands stained with blood, “said Carmena, who nevertheless pointed out that the culture of peace has been moving forward in the 20th century despite the atrocities of world wars.

As noted, interpersonal violence has been reduced by 16 percent. “And that’s partly due to the triumph of women’s values,” she said. “You just have to read the women of the past. The war correspondents all spoke against the war, but they were not listened to. Now we are here their daughters and granddaughters so that it is known that the voice of women is the voice of peace “.

(Continued in right column)

(Click here for a version in Spanish)

Questions for this article:

How can culture of peace be developed at the municipal level?

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

(Continued from left column)

Sitting next to Carmena, the Ibero-American General Secretary, Rebeca Grynspan, drew a somewhat more pessimistic picture of Latin America, which she described as “one of the most violent regions in the world.”

To the data of 400 daily homicides, she added that more than half of citizens say they live with fear. In addition, she stated that many countries in the region are among the worst in feminicide statistics.

“We must change the conception of masculinities and we must ensure that women have more autonomy,” said the Costa Rican official, who also pointed out some immediate measures that can be taken to reduce violence in the cities.

“We know that where public areas are set up for sport, culture or art, violence is reduced. We know that where there is less overcrowding violence is reduced. We know that putting more light on the city reduces violence. But we also need a longer-term vision,” she said.

The Latin American region was also represented by the president of the Association of Municipalities of Bolivia, Rocío Alejandra Molina, and by the mayor of Rosario, Mónica Fein.

Molina said that her country is in a “process of change” and stressed that more than 50 percent of Bolivian parliamentarians are women, but that there is still much to be done to eradicate “structural violence.” For her part, Fein recalled the strength of the feminist movement in Argentina and the struggle to pass a law in favor of the voluntary interruption of pregnancy. “We have won many battles, but there are still many battles to be fought,” she warned.

Other participants in the panel included: Liv Torres, executive director of the Nobel Peace Center; Concepción Gamarra, mayor of Logroño and first vice president of the FEMP; Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons; Emilia Saiz, General Secretary of UCLG; Elena Biurrun, Mayor of Torrelodones, and Tunisian Ouided Bouchmaoui, Nobel Peace Prize 2015.

In her brief closing speech, Carmena thanked Pope Francis for the message of support he sent to the forum and that was read during the women’s talk, as well as insisting on what he said on Monday at the inauguration, citing the legendary former South African president Nelson Mandela: “Violence is not intrinsic in the human being.”

Dublin: Global Campaign Against US/NATO Military Bases

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Excerpts from the website of No US/NATO Bases

Conference Program and Schedule

November 16-18, 2018 — Liberty Hall, Dublin, Ireland

Friday, November 16

1:00 – 3:00 PM — Registration and Check-in


3:00 – 5:00 PM — Rally Against US/NATO Military Bases at the Dublin General Post Office, Site of the Irish Rising of 1916

5:00 – 7:00 PM — Dinner (on your own)

7:00 – 10:00 PM — International Night

Chair: Ed Horgan, International Secretary, Peace and Neutrality Alliance, Ireland

• Welcoming Remarks

— Roger Cole, Chair, Peace and Neutrality Alliance, Ireland
— Bahman Azad, Coordinator, Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases, US

• Keynote Speakers:

— Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD, Dail Eireann, Ireland
— Clare Daly TD, Dail Eireann, Ireland

• International Speakers:

— Socorro Gomes, President, World Peace Council
— Thanassis Pafilis, Member of Greek Parliament; General Secretary of WPC
— Alfred L. Marder, President, U.S. Peace Council
— Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate
— Ann Wright, Veterans For Peace, CodePink
— John Lannon, Member of the Executive, PANA; Founding Member, Shannonwatch, Ireland
— MK Aida Touma-Sliman, President, Peace and Solidarity Committee, Israel
— Dave Webb, Chair, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), UK
— Moara Crivelente, Member of the Executive, CEBRAPAZ, Brazil
— Chris Nineham, Chair, Stop the War Coalition, UK
— Paola Renada Gallo Peláez, President, MOPASSOL, Argentina
— Dr. Zuhal Okuyan, Chairwoman, Peace Committee of Turkey
— Joe Lombardo, Co-Coordinator, United National Antiwar Coalition, US
— Kristine Karch, Stop Air Base Ramstein, Germany

• Musical Performance

Saturday, November 17

8:00 – 9:00 AM — Registration and Check-in

9:00 – 9:45 AM — Opening Session

Chair: Gerry Condon, President, Veterans For Peace, US

• Keynote Speaker:

— Dr. Aleida Guevara, Member of Cuban National Assembly, Cuba

10:00 – 11:15 AM — Plenary 1: Militarism, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Bases

Chair: Margaret Flowers, Popular Resistance, US

— Iraklis Tsavaridis, Executive Secretary, World Peace Council, Greece
— Dave Webb, Chair, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), UK
— Gerry Condon, President, Veterans For Peace, US

Q & A / Discussion

(Article continued in the column on the right)

Questions related to this article:

Where in the world can we find good leadership today?

(Article continued from the column on the left)

11:30 AM – 12:45 AM — Plenary 2: Environmental and Health Impact of Military Bases

Chair: Senator Grace O’Sullivan, Green Party, Ireland

— Hideki Yoshikawa Director, Okinawa Environmental Justice Project, Okinawa
— Milan Krajca, Chairman, Czech Peace Movement, Czech Republic
— Dr. Zuhal Okuyan, Chairwoman, Peace Committee of Turkey

Q & A / Discussion

12:45 – 1:45 PM — Lunch (served)

1:45 – 3:00 PM — Plenary 3: Central and South America / Guantanamo

Chair: James Patrick Jordan, Alliance for Global Justice, US

— Silvio Platero, President, MOVPAZ, Cuba
— Myriam Parada Avila, Executive Director, School of Peace Foundation, Colombia
— Paola Renada Gallo Peláez, President, MOPASSOL, Argentina

Q & A / Discussion

3:15 – 4:30 PM — Plenary 4: Asia Pacific / Pivot to Asia / Okinawa

Chair: Anette Brownlie, Chairperson, IPAN, Australia

— Hiroji Yamashiro, Director, Okinawa Peace Action Center, Okinawa, Japan
— Teddy Casiño, Former Member of Congress, Philippines
— Tarak Kauf, Formre Member of National Board, Veterans For Peace, US

Q & A / Discussion

4:45 – 6:00 PM — Plenary 5: The Middle East: US/NATO Plan

Chair: MK Aida Touma-Sliman, Peace and Solidarity Committee, Israel

— Dr. Issam Makhoul, Chair, Emil Touma Institute, Israel
— Medea Benjamin, Founder, CODEPINK, US
— Dr. Akel Taqaz, Coordinator, Palestinian Committee for Peace and Solidarity, Palestine

Q & A / Discussion

6:00 – 7:30 PM — Dinner (on your own)

7:30 – 9:00 PM — Cultural Event

Sunday, November 18

9:00 – 10:15 AM — Plenary 6: Europe / NATO Expansion

Chair: David Swanson, World BEYOND War, US

— Chris Nineham, Chair, Stop the War Coalition, UK
— Ilda Figueiredo, Chair, Conselho Português para a Paz e Cooperação, Portugal
— Frank Keoghan, Chair, People’s Movement, Ireland

Q & A / Discussion

10:30– 11:45 AM — Plenary 7: Africa / Africom

Chair: Margaret Kimberley, UNAC; Black Agenda Report, US

— Ajamu Baraka, Black Alliance for Peace, US
— Anne Atambo, President, WILPF Kenya
— Chris Matlhako, South African Peace Initiative, South Africa

Q & A / Discussion

11:45 – 12:45 PM — Lunch (served)

12:45–2:15 PM — Regional Organizing Breakout Meetings

— Discussing Regional Plans of Action
— Regional Report Back to the Final Plenary

12:45–2:30 PM — Final Plenary: Global Campaign’s Future Plan of Action

Chairs: Roger Cole, PANA, Ireland; Bahman Azad, Coalition Against US Foreign Military Bases, US

— Identifying Major Campaign Areas
— Planning Other Actions for the Coming Year
— Confirmation of the Coordinating Committee for the Global Campaign

2:30 – 3:00 PM — Closing Remarks

A divided UN General Assembly votes on nuclear disarmament resolutions

.DISARMAMENT & SECURITY.

Article by Unfold Zero sent to their email mailing list

Last week (Oct 24-30) was UN Disarmament Week, when member states vote on a range of disarmament decisions and resolutions. Decisions are binding on the United Nations. Resolutions are indications of governments’ positions and intent – they are not binding but can be very authoritative and influential if supported by key countries.

The deliberations and votes took place in an environment of increasing tensions between nuclear armed States, and also an increasing divide between non-nuclear countries and those countries which rely on nuclear weapons for their security.


Here is a short summary:

Nuclear risk-reduction:

A resolution Reducing nuclear danger submitted by India received 127 votes in favour (mostly non-aligned countries). It failed to get support of nuclear-armed or European countries, primarily because it only calls for nuclear risk reduction measures by China, France, Russia, UK and USA – leaving out the other nuclear armed States – India, Pakistan, DPRK and Israel.

A resolution Decreasing the operational readiness of nuclear weapons systems submitted by a group of non-nuclear countries, was much more successful receiving 173 votes in favour, including from most of the NATO countries and from four nuclear armed States (China, DPRK, India, Pakistan).

Nuclear prohibition:

A resolution on the Treaty on the Prohibition Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) was supported by 122 countries. This is more than the number who have signed the Treaty (which is 50). The vote indicates that more signatures are likely. However, the resolution was not supported by any of the nuclear-armed countries, nor any of the countries under nuclear deterrence relationships, i.e. NATO, Australia, Japan, South Korea. The opposition of nuclear-armed and allied States to the resolution is another indication that they do not intend to join the new treaty nor be bound by it.

A resolution on the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons submitted by India received 120 votes in favour, including from themselves and another three nuclear-armed States (China, DPK and Pakistan). Oddly enough, opposition to this resolution came not only from the other nuclear-armed States (who wish to maintain the option of using nuclear weapons), but also from some of the States supporting the TPNW. Why would these non-nuclear countries not want the nuclear-armed States to prohibit the use of nuclear weapons? UNFOLD ZERO will explore this question in a future update.

(Continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Can we abolish all nuclear weapons?

(Continued from left column)

UN Conferences:

A resolution affirming a previous decision to hold a UN High-Level Conference (Summit) on Nuclear Disarmament was supported by 143 countries. The resolution, entitled Follow-up to the 2013 high-level meeting of the General Assembly on nuclear disarmament, also promotes negotiations on a Nuclear Weapons Convention – a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons that includes nuclear-armed States (unlike the TPNW which does not include them). Despite getting a strong vote in favour, including from some nuclear armed states, the proposed conference does not yet appear to have enough political traction to be held. The resolution did not set a date for the conference.

The UNGA adopted a Decision to convene a conference no later than 2019 on the establishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Despite the objective of a Middle East Zone being supported by most UN members in a separate resolution (supported by 174 countries), the decision to convene a conference in 2019 to ‘elaborate a legally binding treaty’ was supported by only 103 countries. The hesitation by many countries to support the resolution was due to the fact that they believed that concrete preparations and negotiations for a Middle East Zone Treaty would require the participation of all countries in the region, and currently there is at least one country (Israel) that is not ready to work on such a regional treaty.

Humanitarian consequences and the law

A resolution on the Humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, was supported by 143 countries, including one nuclear armed State (India) and one of the nuclear allied States (Japan). Most other nuclear-armed and allied States abstained or opposed because the resolution states that ‘awareness of the catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons must underpin all approaches and efforts towards nuclear disarmament.’ The nuclear armed and allied States accept that humanitarian impact shoud be considered, but they argue that security reasons for nuclear deterrence must also be addressed in order to relinquish nuclear weapons and achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world.

A resolution on the legal requirement to achieve nuclear disarmament through multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations was supported by 131 countries. In previous years the resolution, which draws upon the 1996 International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion, found greater support (137 countries in favour), including from some of the nuclear armed States. Previously, the primary call of the resolution had been for negotiations leading to a nuclear weapons convention which would include the nuclear armed and allied States. However, the resolution has been amended to call instead for nuclear disarmament through the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which none of the nuclear-armed or allied countries support. This has led to a drop in support for the resolution.

Other discussions and resolutions

There were other disarmament discussions at the UN General Assembly last week – included a heated discussion between Russia and the United States over the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Both US and Russia claim that the other party is in violation of the treaty, and last week President Trump announced that the US was initiating procedures to withdraw from the treaty.

In addition there were a number of other disarmament resolutions that were introduced, some of which were adopted and some of which will be actioned this coming week.

For more information see UNGA First Committee

Press releases: Nov 1 and Nov 2.

Reaching Critical Will UN First Committee

Nonviolence Charter: Progress Report 13 (October 2018)

EDUCATION FOR PEACE .

An article by Robert J. Burrowes, Anita McKone & Anahata Giri for Transcend Media Service (abbreviated)

At the time of today’s report, we have signatories in 105 countries with our first signatory, Peter C.S. Kim, in South Korea since the last report. We also have 114 organizations/networks from 36 countries. If you wish, you can see the list of organizational endorsements  on the Charter website.


If you wish to see individual signatories, click on the ‘View signatures’ item in the sidebar. You can use the search facility if you want to look for a specific name.

The latest progress report article ‘Gandhi’s Despair and the Struggle for Truth and Love’ was recently distributed to many progressive news websites: it was published by a number of outlets in 14 countries, thanks to very supportive editors (several of whom are Charter signatories: special thanks to Antonio C. S. Rosa, Gifty Ayim-Korankye, Korsi Senyo and Pía Figueroa ). If you like, you can read the article in English here – ‘Gandhi’s Despair and the Struggle for Truth and Love’ – and, thanks to its translation into French by Charter signatory Edith Rubinstein in Belgium, here: ‘Le désespoir de Gandhi et la lutte pour la vérité et l’amour’. . . .

Anyway, here is another (inadequate) sample of reports of the activities of individuals and organizations who are your fellow Charter signatories.

Given that dysfunctional parenting is ultimately responsible for the behaviour of those individuals – including political, corporate, military and religious leaders – who generate and perpetuate violence, a number of Charter signatories are now making ‘My Promise to Children’ so that we start to produce a higher proportion of functional individuals who know how to powerfully resolve conflicts in their lives without resort to violence. Still other signatories are now prioritizing their own recovery from childhood violence by ‘Putting Feelings First’.

Some signatories are developing more sophisticated nonviolent strategies to deal with peace, environment and social justice issues more effectively, or so they can be more strategic in their liberation struggle. If you are interested in nonviolent strategy for your campaign or liberation struggle, these websites (which include photos of several Charter signatories) will be helpful:

Nonviolent Campaign Strategy

Nonviolent Defense/Liberation Strategy . . . .

Since the last report in April, we finally made time to accede to various requests over the years to revise the Charter by adding to it certain issues that some signatories believed to be important. So, the revised (and updated) Charter is now posted here  with the Spanish translation, again kindly done by Antonio Gutiérrez Rodero in Venezuela, here.

Hopefully, you will find nothing objectionable about the update but please advise us if you do.

So to the report . . . .

Further to the report last time of their original three ‘lists of 100’, recognizing some of the many fine peace and justice leaders around the world, Charter signatory Professor Kathleen Malley-Morrison and her colleague Professor Anthony J. Marsella researched the efforts of many other fine activist leaders to compile a fourth list which has now been published. You can see the names of the people they decided to recognize, including many Charter signatories, in these four lists here:

1. ’In Pursuit of Peace and Justice: 100 Peace & Justice Leaders and Models‘.

2. ’In Pursuit of Peace and Justice: 100 Peace & Justice Leaders and Models (List #2)’.

3. ’100 Living Peace and Justice Leaders and Models (List #3)’.

4. ’100 Living Peace and Justice Leaders and Models (List #4)’, 6 Aug 2018.

Once again, thank you for all your work compiling these lists and recognizing some fine activist leaders Kathie and Tony.

In addition to this work, however, Kathie maintains her own website ‘Engaging Peace’ on which her own thoughtful articles appear, as well as her commentary and/or questions designed to encourage reflection, on articles by guest authors published on her site. . . .

In Afghanistan, the Afghan Peace Volunteers, mentored by Dr Teck Young Wee (Dr Hakim) continue their inspirational work in extraordinarily difficult circumstances to bring sustainable peace to Afghanistan and the world. Two of Hakim’s recent articles will give you a clear sense of their exceptional work and vision: ‘In Afghanistan, our need to rethink the institution of war’ and ‘Loving Rashid so he won’t become a “terrorist”‘.

On the International Day of Peace (21 September), the Afghan Peace Volunteers organized a youth conference ‘Love in Action Brings Down Borders and Restores the Environment’ in Kabul. As part of their vision to build #GEN – a Green, Equal and Nonviolent world – representatives from all of Afghanistan’s provinces were invited with the intention to create an atmosphere of friendship and trust. ‘Holding this conference requires great courage in this time of almost daily bombings and attacks. The APVs show real leadership in nonviolence, including environmental restoration, and improving food security, despite the increasing violence.’ For a report on this conference, see ‘Afghan youth change their minds about peace’.

While being hosted by the Afghan Peace Volunteers in Kabul, Kathy Kelly wrote two delightful accounts of the Pashto men in Afghanistan who walked 400 miles from Helmand to Kabul while calling on warring parties in Afghanistan to end the war. Didn’t catch this in the corporate media? Surprising! So how did the Afghan peace walkers go? Find out in Kathy’s articles ‘Digging Deeper’and ‘A Mile in Their Shoes’.

As always, of course, Kathy continues her nonviolent activism to end war, resulting in her arrest and imprisonment fairly routinely. Fortunately, she evocatively documents her efforts on behalf of those on the receiving end of western military violence, however and wherever it manifests. For articles and actions focusing on Yemen in which Kathy and Voices for Creative Nonviolence were involved, you will find these items sobering: ‘U.S. Is Complicit in Child Slaughter in Yemen’ and ’34 Backpacks – an ongoing commemoration of Yemeni children killed on August 9 ′.

Kathy was also among those arrested, along with fellow Charter signatories – Joy First, Malachy Kilbride and Phil Runkel – at a nonviolent action, organized by the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance, to draw attention to the plight of the people of Yemen under bombardment by US weapons supplied to Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners. You can read a little about their action and Kathy’s court statement here: ‘A Courtroom Appeal for Yemen’.

Another of those arrested, Phil Runkel, works at Marquette University where he has served since 1977 as archivist for the papers of sainthood candidate Dorothy Day. There is an account of an earlier action taken in 2016 by Phil, written by Joy, here: ‘Phil Runkel, Dorothy Day Archivist and Activist, Found Guilty of Trespassing in Wisconsin’.

Professor Chandra Muzaffar is President of JUST International – the International Movement for a JUST World – based in Malaysia. Chandra routinely writes insightful commentary on Malaysian and world affairs. A recent notable article, titled ‘Syria: A False Flag Operation Thwarted? ’, described revelations by the Syrian and Russian governments that ‘may have thwarted a British-backed plan to stage a “false flag” chemical weapons attack in Idlib province that would have forced the US to launch a missile and air assault on Syria’. Given that previous false flag events in Syria have been used to justify military attacks on the country, exposure of this plan prevented another such assault. . . . .

Zakia Haddouch in Morocco continues to report the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of people in that country as she and other activists continue their various struggles to bring some semblance of justice to Moroccan affairs. One prominent issue is the ongoing debate in relation to ‘the forced military service (for both young female and male subjects and I don’t say citizens). It was lately decreed by the king. So, some say it’s good because the military service will “educate” young people. Some think it’s just the regime’s manoeuvre to enroll young contestants and activists, especially from regions like Rif.’ In Zakia’s view, the whole thing is wrong ‘starting from the way it was enacted (without going through the Parliament) and the timing (during the holidays) and finally the intention (despotic and war-oriented)…’.

Another struggle is taking place in the wake of the death of Mohcine Fikri on 28 October 2016, who was crushed to death in a rubbish truck trying to recover merchandise confiscated by a policeman. Following this event, Hirak (literally ‘The Movement’) was born and it quickly mobilized widespread support for its vigorous protests. While most of Hirak’s concerns are about local issues, it draws upon a national repertory of nonviolent actions fueled by the experiences of activists around the country. Between October 2016 and May 2017, and faced with social unrest of an unprecedented vitality which increasingly challenged him personally, Mohamed VI remained silent. However, when Hirak leader Nasser Zefzazi – who has never failed to stress nonviolence and advocate self-restraint – interrupted a sermon on 26 May 2017 in which an imam claimed the social movement was tantamount to a ‘fratricidal struggle or even civil war within Islam’, the government took this pretext to clamp down on Hirak.

(continued in right column)

Question for this article:

Can peace be guaranteed through nonviolent means?

(continued from left column)

Many activists were jailed – over 200 so far – and demonstrations are now systematically broken up. Zefzazi was among those arrested (on 29 May 2017) and, along with other members of Hirak, subsequently jailed for 20 years. The repression has nipped in the bud any hopes for resolving the crisis. For good accounts of the above, Zakia suggests these two articles: ‘Rif Crisis Reveals Failure of Development in Morocco’ and ‘Moroccan Protest Leader Is Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison’.

In relation to her own ongoing case, outlined in the previous report (see link above), Zakia notes that she hasn’t received notification of the appeal verdict against her so she cannot go to the supreme court yet. She is still waiting ‘with high spirit because I believe in my just cause and I’m determined to go to the end’. In sincere appreciation Zakia!

Ella Polyakova and her colleagues at the Soldiers’ Mothers of Saint-Petersburg  in Russia continue their fine work to defend the rights of servicemen and conscripts by making sure that individuals are equipped with knowledge of their rights, the law and all relevant circumstances to be able to take responsibility for defending themselves from abuse. . . .

And just to show that activism is sometimes a family affair and perhaps even a multi-generational family affair, how about this action? Martha Hennessy, whose grandmother was Dorothy Day, wrote an evocative ‘Earth Day Reflection from a Georgia Jail’ where she was imprisoned with fellow nonviolent activist and Charter signatory Elizabeth McAlister (whose husband was the late Phil Berrigan). Martha and Liz, together with five other activists, had taken part in the Kings Bay Plowshares action for the reasons outlined in the article ‘Trident: Illegal and Immoral: “The ultimate logic of Trident is omnicide”’. In deep appreciation of your inspirational commitment Martha and Liz. . . . .

David Polden continues to publish his fine ‘Non-Violent Resistance Newsletter’ every couple of months, with news on nonviolent resistance both in the UK but also around the world, particularly Europe and Palestine. Unfortunately, despite our entreaties, David’s Newsletter is not online but you are welcome to contact him at if you wish to be added to his email list. Well worth it, in our view. . . . .

For yet another visionary initiative, David Steinman is the Project Director of World Liberation Radio  which has begun a crowd funding campaign for a demonstration project ‘proving nonviolence can be taught to oppressed populations around the world by radio’. You can find out more about David’s fine initiative on the website above and please consider supporting his crowdfunding campaign too. Great idea David!

Many of you no doubt followed the progress of the recent international Freedom Flotilla Coalition boats attempting to sail into Gaza in Israeli-occupied Palestine. Whether or not you did, however, Elizabeth Murray was on the refurbished Norwegian fishing vessel and international solidarity boat ‘Al-Awda’ so you will find out a little about the flotilla and what it was intent on doing from her account of ‘The Next Boat to Gaza’. Good on you Elizabeth for so courageously supporting our Palestinian friends. . . .

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space held their annual conference at Oxford in the UK in June 2018. You can see some photos of fellow activists you might know and read Bruce Gagnon’s brief ‘Report on GN confab in Oxford, England – next 2019 meeting in Russia’ here.
In August the Global Network also produced a short video ‘Just Say NO To Space Force’. . . .

Pía Figueroa in Chile is Co-Director of ‘Pressenza International Press Agency’, which ‘feeds media every day for free with news, opinions, interviews and contributions regarding peace, nonviolence, disarmament, human rights, nondiscrimination and humanism in eight different languages, thanks to the volunteer work of more than 100 people based in 25 different countries.’ . . . .

‘Next November Pressenza celebrates 10 years, a milestone that we will celebrate decentrally in more than 40 places in the world, especially in Asia where we are trying to organize new editorial offices. Personally, I will be visiting China for the first time in order to participate in October in the Media Forum organized by CCTV+ in the city of Chongqing.

‘Social organizations that want us to publish their Press Releases and columnists that contribute with their nonviolent analysis are very much welcome.’ Contact Pía Figueroa Thanks a lot Pía for your unfailing support. . . .

West Papuan solidarity activist Dr Jason MacLeod continues his work in support of the nonviolent struggle to liberate West Papua from Indonesian occupation. Jason’s 2015 book Merdeka and the Morning Star: civil resistance in West Papua  carefully describes the evolution of the West Papuan resistance to three successive occupying countries over more than a century.

Jason continues to work with Pasifika, a small organisation involved in strengthening the capacity of nonviolent resistance movements through the provision of training and education, action research and small-scale support of local nonviolent initiatives. . . .

Our friends at CND Cymru  continue their campaign with like-minded souls both in Wales and around the world ‘for peace, environmental and social justice and to rid Britain and the world of all weapons of mass destruction’. In the latest edition of their magazine ‘Heddwch’, which is full of news of their activities, Jill Gough’s article ‘Army crashes fifth drone’ reports that yet another military drone recently crashed in a civilian area where, apparently, the primary military threat to the UK that afternoon was the local school sports. I guess we should be glad it was only a drone, which in this case didn’t kill anyone or cause significant damage, rather than a nuclear weapon! . . . .

Korsi Senyo is the Executive Director of the Africa Centre for Peace Building in Ghana and a prominent peace and civil rights advocate in Africa. At the invitation of H.E Benjamin Mkapa, former President of Tanzania, Korsi was in Tanzania to speak at the 2018 Africa Leadership Forum on ‘Africa in the Global Peace and Security Architecture – Overcoming gridlocks to peace’. . . . Korsi presented a strong case on how regional blocs across Africa must support research initiatives that will help to better understand the major causes of conflict on the continent and devise practical solutions to these challenges. You can read more about Korsi and his fine team on the AFCOPB website.

Dr John Tierney in the USA offers a range of resources designed to teach children ‘how to act peacefully’ while inspiring and enabling teachers to teach peacemaking skills but also encourage all of us ‘to see and celebrate the role that young peacemakers can have in changing their own lives, their schools, communities, and the world at large. . . . You can read more about John’s approach and access the resources he makes available on his website The Peaceful Educator.

Sami Awad, who is Director of the Holy Land Trust  . . . . . and other friends at the Holy Land Trust continue their exceptional work to create a just and peaceful Middle East. For example, their Peace Research & Learning Center ‘fosters analysis of fundamental issues and structural problems in Palestine and Israel. Researchers utilize various methodologies in the field of social sciences to focus on themes of nonviolence, non-linear thinking, trauma healing, and to propose solutions to such issues. The Center attract researchers in multidisciplinary fields, and promote trans-disciplinary international joint research in Palestine. Research results derived from the Center are not only to be announced in the research community, but also to be announced as proposals to the society and the government’ . . . .

Graham Peebles, whose longstanding interest in the Horn of Africa has given him much opportunity to study the region, recently reported what is happening in Ethiopia. ‘As a result of the peaceful protest campaign that started in 2015, political change is at last underway in Ethiopia, and a feeling of optimism is beginning to pervade the country. The new Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, deserves much credit, but it was the actions of thousands of people who took to the streets calling for change that has forced the government to act. All those who marched in defiance of the ruling party displayed great courage and relentless determination. They risked their lives and liberty in standing up to tyranny; they are the heroes of the day, and we should salute them all. . . . For the full account, see Graham’s article ‘A Time of Hope for Ethiopia’. . . . .

Dr. Ayo Ayoola-Amale in Ghana reports on the 32nd Triennial International Congress of WILPF held in that country. The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom  (WILPF) is an international NGO established in 1915 with National Sections covering every continent. The recent conference was held on 20-22 August 2018 at the Legon Centre for International Affairs and Diplomacy on the vast campus of the University of Ghana in Ghana’s capital city of Accra. The conference brought together women from around the world.

‘On the first day of Congress, WILPF welcomed five new Sections and nine new Groups. This congress saw an African – Nigerian born Joy Ada Onyesoh – become WILPF’s first African President, along with newly elected vice-presidents and other key officers. There were several group discussions across a number of key thematic issues. The 32nd congress was held within its theme “Building a Feminist Peace Movement”. The Congress voting delegates approved the framework of the proposed International Program for 2018-2021, which includes emphases on environmental concerns and issues integral to human rights activism around the world, it calls for an end to violence in all forms as it broadly outlines the approach to be undertaken internationally and by all sections, groups, and members. WILPF advancing feminist peace requires making known and working to abolish the root causes of violence, systems of oppression and their interconnection, including militarization, patriarchy, and neoliberalism. The Feminist Peace Movement in Africa Forum was held, looking at the historic and current realities of women working for peace across Africa, especially locally within conflict-affected communities. The root causes of violence and feminist work for social transformation, economic justice and peace was explored during this special forum.’ . . . .

‘This historic congress and conference, the first WILPF international congress held in Africa after 103 years was a very successful and memorable event with great classic music from almost every country in Africa, traditional drumming and dance troupes, Poetry, Storytelling, art and craft. . . . .

From 21 August to 9 September, prisoners in 17 states of the USA went on strike to protest inhuman living and working conditions and to promote ten basic demands. Although the formal strike is over, some prisoners are being retaliated against and others are continuing to strike. In a recent podcast for ‘Clearing the FOG’, Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese spoke with Amani Sawari, a prisoners rights activist, about the strike, the demands and how we can all provide support to finally end legalized slavery in the United States. You can listen to the interview here: ‘The National Prison Strike Isn’t Over’. . . .

The Paris Peace Forum November 11-13, 2018

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

Press Kit of Paris Peace Forum

I – THE PARIS PEACE FORUM: A NEW INTERNATIONAL MEETING

International tensions are increasing at a time where solutions to global challenges are urgently needed. With these issues in mind, the Paris Peace Forum aims to bring together all actors of global governance to strengthen multilateralism and international cooperation.

The Paris Peace Forum will convene political and numerous civil society actors as well as all those involved in the research and application of these global challenges (i.e. global warming, destabilization of the internet, armed conflicts etc.).


Actors from civil society, regional and international organizations leaders, Heads of State and Government will be among the participants. The Paris Peace Forum will provide all attendees with the opportunity to have an open dialogue

Regarding the content and the format, the Paris Peace Forum is neither a summit nor a conventional international conference.

The Paris Peace Forum places at its heart innovative solutions to current governance challenges.

One hundred years after the end of the First World War, the Paris Peace Forum recalls the fact that there is an urgency to act; this will require concrete action, free speech and dialogue between all actors.

120 concrete solutions to today’s problems

The Paris Peace Forum focuses on those who seek to implement concrete actions to today’s challenges. 850 initiatives were audited by the Selection Committee; 120 projects were selected and will be presented at the Paris Peace Forum.

The presence of all traditional actors of governance

105 countries were invited. More than 60 Heads of State and Government have confirmed their participation. States are obviously a key part of the solution and their presence is necessary at such a forum. However, their attendance at a meeting with such a format will be unique in the sense that there will be direct meetings between Heads of State and project leaders.

In addition to States, representatives from various international and multilateral institutions will be present at the Paris Peace Forum; e.g. the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the IMF Director, the WTO Director, the President of the World Bank. Numerous multilateral organizations will also be present, including those based in Paris (OECD, UNESCO, OIF, IEA etc.). Their presence shows that this initiative complements existing actors and initiatives.

Cross-cutting themes

The Paris Peace Forum is organized around 5 themes: peace and security, environment, development, inclusive economy, new technologies. The challenges we face are not concerned with sectoral constraints: the Paris Peace Forum takes note of this.

An original program

Heads of State and Government will speak simultaneously during the first day in several spaces at the venue and in various configurations. One speaker may make a plea or give a masterclass, several speakers may be involved in round-tables or have discussions – an innovative format for such a high level meeting.

(continued in right column)

Click here for the version in French)

Question(s) related to this article:

Global meetings, conferences, assemblies, What is the best way for delegates to interact afterwards?

(continued from left column)

All participants will be able to take part in the controversial debates. The formats of the debates (Fishbowl, Brainstorm, Conversation, Vote) respond to a need for frankness and simplicity in the way in providing answers to the highlighted challenges.

Finally, a hackathon on financial data transparency will to mobilize collective intelligence in the fields of computer, economics or social sciences around global governance and financial data transparency issues

II – MISSION: TO CREATE THE FIRST PLATFORM FOR SOLUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL CHALLENGES

After a call for projects that was resulted in almost 900 submissions in the summer, 120 projects were selected to be presented in Paris this autumn. The project leaders of the selected solutions for governance will not present their projects in the conventional way that is observed at conferences. Instead, they will be at the center of the event, which will be conceived as a ‘global village of action’. The project inventors will represent a community of actors engaged in the search and the application for concrete solutions.

Creating international and inter-project synergies

The Space for Solutions at the Paris Peace Forum will convene all the inventors of the selected projects from 42 countries and 10 international organizations. Within this space, the inventors will be able to present their solution to the participants, and address any questions about them

A web application to create dialogue between all participants

The web application of the event will enable stakeholders to interact in order to band together and learn from each other before and during the Paris Peace Forum.

10 projects supported in thelong term

The Forum is focused on the long term. The idea is not just to highlight the initiatives, but to strengthen and support them in their growth and implementation. A monitoring committee composed of experts will follow 10 of the 120 projects presented in Paris from 11 to 13 November for the period of one year.

Listening to the needs of key actors in the field

Prior to the Forum, a study will be conducted on the expectations of the project leaders, so as to offer the best possible experience.

Examples of the governance solutions that will be presented at the Paris Peace Forum

Tax Inspectors Without Borders by OECD – Inclusive economy . . .

Climate Resilient Zero-Budget Natural Farming in Adhra Pradesh by Rythu Sadhikara Samstha – Develpment / India . . .

Antarctica 2020 by Ocean Unite – Environment / Costa Rica . . .

Paris Call for Digital Peace Principles by Microsoft – New technologies / USA . . .

Partnership for Regional Ocean Governance by IDDRI – Environment / France . . .

The World Benchmarking Alliance by Indiex Initiative – Inclusive economy / The Netherlands . . .

III – AN INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION FUNDED BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL DONORS . . .

Composition of the Executive Committee . . .

Composition of the Steering Committee . . .

The Circle of Partners . . .

IV – THE PARIS PEACE FORUM SCHEDULE . . .

Launch of the 2nd World March for Peace and Nonviolence at the 2nd World Forum of Peace Cities in Madrid

. . DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION . .

An article from Pressenza  (reprinted according to Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license)

On 7 November from 6pm to 8pm in the Auditorium of the Casa del Reloj at the Matadero Cultural Centre, the 2nd World March for Peace and Nonviolence will be launched. This action will start on October 2, 2019, International Day of Nonviolence and finish on March 8, 2020, International Women’s Day,

It will be 10 years since the 1st WM that travelled through 97 countries on 5 continents. In this new edition, Madrid will be the beginning and end point for the 159-day circumnavigation of the planet. It will depart to the south of Spain, continuing through Africa, America, Oceania, Asia and Europe, estimating to pass through more than 100 countries.

In the launch event, the invited speakers will give the basic profile of this 2nd WM on the central themes that will be developed on its journey:

– International launch of the Campaign “Cities support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons -TPNW”. Beatrice Fihn, ICAN Nobel Peace Prize 2017.

– Refoundation of the United Nations. Federico Mayor Zaragoza. Culture of Peace Foundation.

– 100 years of pacifist feminism. Carmen Magallón. President of WILPF Spain.

– The role of armies in the 21st century. Int. Conf. Costa Rica. Julio Rodríguez, ExJEMAD.

(Article continued in the right column)

(Click here for a original version of this article in Spanish or here for a version in French .

Questions related to this article:

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

How effective are mass protest marches?

(Article continued from the left column)

– International Network of Parliamentarians in Support of the TPNW. Deputy Pedro Arrojo.

– The culture of nonviolence: Alberto Amman. Actor

– Municipalism and Peace. Antonio Zurita. Global Citizenship.

– The TPNW and the World March. Carlos Umaña. Latin America Coordinator ICAN

– Mediterranean Sea of Peace. Tiziana Volta. World without Wars and Violence

– Processes of pacification. David Nassar. Colombia

– Twinning of the children. Sabina Colona-Preti and Isabel Bueno. Pequeñas Huellas and C.P: Nuñez de Arenas.

– The term “nonviolence”. Montserrat Prieto. World without Wars and Violence

– Routes and confluences 2WM. Martine Sicard. Coor. Int. World without Wars and Violence.

– Base Team 2WM. Luis Silva. Councillor.

– Marches in Central and South America. Sonia Venegas. Ecuador

– Human Symbols. Jesús Arguedas and Charo Lominchar. E.P. of Madrid 2WM

– The 2nd World March, a new attempt. Rafael de la Rubia. Coordination 2WM

The Mayors of Madrid, Manuela Carmena and Barcelona, Ada Colau, are invited to the event.

One of the objectives that is gaining more and more strength in this 2nd WM is to ensure that at its completion there are the conditions for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons to enter into force, a treaty being promoted by 122 countries in the United Nations.

In order to attend you must register on the web: http://www.ciudadesdepaz.com/

Press statement: World Without Wars and Violence, Cities of Peace Madrid

Google’s ‘#metoo’ moment: Workers walk out over women’s rights

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article by Jane Lanhee Lee and Paresh Dave in Thomson Reuters (reprinted by permission)

Thousands of Google employees around the world briefly walked off their jobs on Thursday [November 1] to protest the company’s response to sexual harassment and demand that the world’s largest search engine address rising concerns about workplace inequality.

The protests took place in waves, beginning in Asia and then streaming across Europe and North America, with the final wave occurring at Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, California.


Frame from video on article website

The protests, which drew Google contract workers as well as employees, followed a New York Times report last week that Google in 2014 gave a $90 million exit package to a senior vice president, Andy Rubin, after he was accused of sexual harassment.

“This was the $90 million straw that broke the camel’s back,” Celie O’Neil-Hart, one of the protest organizers and who works on YouTube marketing, told reporters as she joined hundreds of other employees in the courtyard of Google’s Mountain View headquarters. “But there are so many stories that we’ve heard for so long, and it’s time for action and change,” said O’Neil-Hart as she teared up.

Rubin denied the allegation in the New York Times story, which he said contained “wild exaggerations” about his compensation. Google did not dispute the report.

Organizers said about 60 percent of Google’s offices participated, including Dublin, the company’s largest site outside the United States, as well as London, Zurich, Berlin and Singapore. They shared photographs on social media of hundreds leaving offices.

Many employees at the Mountain View walkout chanted “Women’s rights are workers rights,” and some wore blue ribbons in support of sexual harassment victims.

Seven U.S. employees who organized the demonstrations called on Google parent Alphabet Inc (GOOGL.O) to make harassment investigations fairer for accusers, share pay-equity data with workers and add an employee representative to its board.

Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, speaking an hour later at a New York Times conference in New York, said he was taking note of the “concrete steps” workers presented to improve the company’s culture and human resources processes.

“I want to make sure Google sets the bar,” he said, noting that a lack of gender and racial diversity was part of the issue. “We’re grappling with it, as with many places.”

(Article continued in the right column)

Question for this article

Protecting women and girls against violence, Is progress being made?

(Article continued from the left column)

Organizers and other employees said Google executives, like leaders at the dozens of companies affected by the #metoo movement, have been slow to address numerous structural issues such as unchecked power of male executives.

They want Google to publicly report its sexual harassment statistics and end forced arbitration in harassment cases. They also have asked that the chief diversity officer be able to directly advise the board.

Rana Abdelhamid, who works in Google Cloud’s marketing division in San Francisco, told reporters that the walkout was “about safety of women in the workplace,” adding that Google’s historical support for women’s causes caused her to be shocked when she learned of the multi-million-dollar payout.

“The numbers and facts don’t match with the intentions” of Google on equality and safety for underrepresented groups, she told Reuters. “We need to reprioritize energy and really focus on these issues.”

MONTHS OF BUILDUP

Since its founding two decades ago, Google has been known for its motto “don’t be evil,” a dictum preserved in its worker code of conduct, and its transparency with employees about corporate strategy.

But employees have internally organized for months to increase diversity and improve treatment of women and minorities.

Those issues have been top of mind since the 2016 election of U.S. President Donald Trump, a Republican, stunned Silicon Valley, where liberal and libertarian policies are popular.

Tech workers have become more vocal to protest both the president’s and their companies’ stances on immigration, defense and discrimination. Workers have said that they are driven by the sense that their technology pioneer employers should also be standard bearers on socioeconomic issues.

“We all know that the status quo is unacceptable and if there is any company who can solve this, it is Google,” said Thomas Kneeland, a Google software engineer in New York.

The dissatisfaction among Alphabet’s 94,000 employees and tens of thousands contractors has not noticeably affected the company’s share price. But employees, who warned they would demonstrate again if needed, expect Alphabet to face recruiting and retention challenges if their concerns go unaddressed.

Alphabet shares closed down 0.4 percent to $1,085.98 on Thursday.

Around the world, Google workers walked out carrying signs reading “Time’s up Tech,” “Happy to quit for $90M – no sexual harassment required” and “Not OK Google,” a reference to the “OK Google” phrase used to activate Google’s voice-operated Assistant.

Cathay Bi, a Google product manager, speaking through a megaphone before hundreds gathered in a bustling pedestrian plaza in San Francisco’s financial district, talked about the engines of change.

“This is what it means to be ‘Googley,’” she urged the crowd to chant, invoking a widely used term for the company’s culture. “People don’t change because of law and policies. Laws and policies change because of people.”

Adobe boasts gender equality in terms of salary across 40 countries

. WOMEN’S EQUALITY .

An article from Development Discourse

Software giant Adobe Monday [October 22] said it has achieved pay parity between women and men globally across 40 countries.

The company defines pay parity as ensuring that employees in the same job and location are paid fairly, regardless of their gender or ethnicity.


Shantanu Narayen, photo from Money Inc.

As a core element of its gender pay parity initiative, the company analysed its employees’ pay within job family and location, and then made some adjustments to employees’ pay based on that review.
(Article continued in right column)

Question for this article

Prospects for progress in women’s equality, what are the short and long term prospects?

(Article continued from left column)

These global pay adjustments, including those previously made in the US and India, impacted less than five per cent of Adobe employees and less than 0.2 per cent of global payroll costs, a company release said.

“I am proud that we have taken this important step towards fair recognition of all our people’s contributions — achieving this milestone is fundamental to who we are,” Adobe president and CEO Shantanu Narayen said.

In December 2017, Adobe announced US gender pay parity, followed by India pay parity in January this year. In 2016, Adobe announced pay parity between white and non-white employees in the US.

Adobe is committed to maintaining pay parity through its hiring, acquisition integration and annual pay review processes, the statement added.

“We are proud to continue creating a culture that fairly rewards and recognizes the contributions of all our employees across the globe,” said Donna Morris, executive vice president of Customer & Employee Experience, Adobe.

Executive Director remarks at the UN Security Council open debate on women, peace and security

. WOMEN’S EQUALITY .

An article from UN Women

Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Director of UN Women, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka presented the Secretary-General’s report on women, peace and security to the UN Security Council on 25 October, in New York.

Date: Thursday, October 25, 2018
(As delivered)

It is an honour to address the Security Council and to present the Secretary-General’s report on women and peace and security. I thank Bolivia for all the support they have given us in preparing for this debate

This report is a loud alarm bell on systemic failures to bring women into peacemaking in a meaningful manner.

The trend is, women are being excluded from the peace processes. The ones who do not wage war seem to be disqualified from making peace, while those who may be implicated in making war, seem to find it easier to be at the peace tables. 

I together with DPKO, have just come back from a joint UN/AU mission to South Sudan. The women we met there told us how they long for peace and to resume their lives, after nearly five years of suffering from a civil war that they are not responsible for waging. They said, “we are here because we want to reconcile even though we have never quarreled.”

While they still fear for the future, they appreciated the ‘Revitalized Agreement’ on the resolution of the conflict, which offers new hope for the country and an unmissable opportunity to build peace, with a 35 per cent quota for the representation of women. 

Their fears are however bolstered by the fact that, in these early days of the revitalized agreement, in the National Pre-Transitional Committee – there is just one woman among the ten persons nominated to be members of the committee, this is not the agreed 35 per cent. 

The report today details inescapably how this is not an exception but the rule. How there is at the same time hope for progress, and how we are failing to make it a reality.

But hope is something that we cannot and must never lose.
It shows us undeniable possibilities with undeniable failures, which are costing the lives of women and girls.

They do not wage war, but they die and suffer from it.
A year ago in this chamber, I raised the alarm at the numbers shown by the indicators we track yearly on peace processes and mediation.

Today I want to raise the alarm once more with the hope to jolt us into greater action, as indicators show numbers have stagnated or dropped again. 

For that reason, we focused this year’s report on the need for women’s meaningful contribution to peace, and we call on you to take the much-needed concrete actions. 

We need you to be vigilant about ending superficial efforts to include women that do not genuinely extend the opportunity to influence outcomes. 

We wanted to show that the extreme political marginalization at peace tables is often worse in the institutions set up to implement those agreements. 

And we wanted to spotlight the many ways in which women are keep on being active and resilient. They are active in negotiating ceasefires, civilian safe zones, demobilization of fighters, or humanitarian access at the local level, or drawing up protection plans at the community level, like in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan or the Central African Republic. 

We want the UN membership to pay due attention to these dynamics, make them visible in forums like this one, and use them to support the women’s political agency, provide financial resources and enable women to do even more.

The continued tolerance for the limited recognition of women’s expertise and lived experience is a setback for all of us. Statistics on women’s involvement speak for themselves.

Between 1990 and 2017, under our watch, women constituted only two per cent of mediators, eight per cent of negotiators, and five per cent of witnesses and signatories in major peace processes. Only three out of 11 agreements signed in 2017 contained provisions on gender equality, continuing last year’s worrisome downward trend. Of 1,500 agreements signed between 2000 and 2016, only 25 raise the role of women’s engagement in the implementation phase.

In Yemen, current efforts at resuming dialogue do not include women, beyond setting up observer bodies to advise the UN Special Envoy. Even in a consultative meeting in London this summer organized by the UN, convening 22 prominent Yemeni leaders to discuss the peace talks, there were only 3 Yemeni women invited.

In Mali, women average a dismal three per cent of the membership of the multiple national committees set up to monitor and implement the peace agreement.

In the Central African Republic, mediation efforts are focused on the presidency and the 14 armed groups and exclude women altogether.

In Afghanistan, the government and its international partners invest efforts in including women in the High Peace Council and provincial peace councils, but when it comes to actual talks with the Taliban, women’s absence is noticeable.

Undeniably, there are possibilities, but also undeniably there are failures and determined women.

In 23 rounds of Afghanistan-Taliban peace talks between 2005 and 2014, women were at the table just twice. Now that there are offers to resume peace talks without pre-conditions, Afghan women peacebuilders want to be at the table and want to make a difference.

Finally, here is a number that is more positive. Security Council decisions about country-specific or regional situations that contained language on women, peace and security increased from 50 to 75 per cent. This must lead to increased action on the front lines. 

The number of women leaders and civil society representatives who briefed the Security Council also increased significantly. 

I thank Council members for these efforts and their continued participation in the Informal Experts Group on Women, Peace and Security, currently co-chaired by Sweden and Peru, in collaboration with the United Kingdom. 

But we need to use all available diplomatic channels and political influence to ensure that these decisions in New York are making a difference on the ground. This is simply not happening in the most meaningful way.

The bigger picture of gender inequality in conflict and post conflict countries is something we need to continue to watch.

Today’s report gives us a broad picture of the many remaining areas of challenge to reach equal representation of women in the vital processes of our nations.

For example, only 16 per cent of parliamentarians in conflict and post-conflict countries are women – same as last year, and the year before that. 

There is 20 per cent representation of women in countries that use quotas and just 12 per cent in countries that do not use quotas. It is for that reason that we appreciate the leading from the front demonstrated by our Secretary-General and call for special measures in the manner in which he is driving the parity process within the United Nations.

This Council just visited the Democratic Republic of Congo ahead of crucial elections. Only 12 per cent of registered candidates are women, just like in the previous elections seven years ago. And women are suffering intimidation.

Of the 17 countries that have elected a woman head of state or government, none are post-conflict countries at this point.

I ask again, as I did last year, we need to heed the call and address the patterns these numbers show us. On our part we will continue to follow up with you on to address this situation with vigilance and make a significant difference.

(continued in right column)

Question for this article

Does the UN advance equality for women?

Prospects for progress in women’s equality, what are the short and long term prospects?

(continued from left column)

It is not only women whose opportunities are being limited. In many conflict settings, girls are one and a half times more likely to be out of primary school and whole communities are set back. The numbers of children lacking education in conflict areas calls for a concrete response and solution, with schools and second chance education.

Child marriage rates are also affected by war. In Yemen, the rate of child marriage was 66 per cent in 2017. It was 52 per cent last year. And 32 per cent before the recent conflict erupted.

Unsurprisingly, but tragically, maternal mortality rates are almost twice the global ratio in conflict and post-conflict countries. Of the 830 women and adolescent girls who die every day from causes related to pregnancy and childbirth, 507 die in countries that are considered fragile because of conflict and disaster.

To address these issues and support the regeneration of families and communities, we need strong and targeted investments in women in conflict areas.

This is just not happening enough, despite undeniable goodwill towards the women peace and security agenda in countries that are affected.

The clear gender inequality in women’s access to resources is not simply caused by the presence of conflict. It is also a reflection of non-prioritization of women’s needs and the relegation of women to small-scale and local peripheral initiatives. 

In the Sahel, where we visited with Deputy Secretary-General, the African Union and Minister Wallstrom, we saw the dire poverty of women and communities in the Lake Chad basin. 

We saw households with no electricity in a part of the world which has the highest penetration of the sun on earth and is more suitable than anywhere else in the world for sustainable energy generation from solar power.

Yet clinics lack power. Women have no cold storage for their fish and the fresh produce needed for food security—which contributes in some cases even more to peace than the military.

In conflict-affected countries, only 11.5 per cent of landholders are women.

Although bilateral aid to promote gender equality in fragile country situations rose by 17 per cent compared to the previous year, it still only amounts to five per cent of total bilateral aid spent on programmes with gender equality as the primary objective.

In the DRC, for example, aid from OECD-DAC to gender equality was only 8 USD per capita last year. The same year, the UN documented a 56 per cent increase in sexual violence.

The share of the aid channeled through non-governmental women’s organizations has stagnated.

Our financial commitments do not match the extent to which we rely on these groups.

Yes, there has been undeniable progress, because the actions undertaken with civil society continue to be favoured as a way to operate. This must turn into concrete action and better investment in these groups.

Civil society and women’s organizations have been failed in the midst of record-breaking numbers of side events at intergovernmental meetings. Our plea is to refocus our energies and resources. I believe there is goodwill and we all want what is best for women and girls.

While we have disappointing indicators on women and girls, global military spending has reached 1.74 trillionUSD, a 57 per cent increase since 2000. Some countries allocate more public money to the military than to education or health.

Ninety per cent of grassroots women’s organizations working in areas directly impacted by terrorism and violent extremism state that current counterterrorism measures have an adverse impact on work for peace, women’s rights and gender equality.

We must respond to the many violations against the human rights of women and girls within these groups, and to the social stigma, economic hardship and discrimination women and girls experience when returning to their homes and communities when they have been part of violent groups.

These challenges are best addressed by actions that protect and promote the rights of victims and are fundamentally based in human rights law.

Women human rights defenders, who are on the front lines, are fighting a lonely battle. Many die a lonely death from weapons that are meant to protect them.

Let us look ahead with hope, and the knowledge of what we are capable of together.

This includes what we can do with women such as the African Women Leaders Network, which has been given a boost by the support of Germany and has focal points already in more 30 African countries.

We are already gearing up for the 20th anniversary of Security Council resolution 1325, which will be an opportunity to shape the agenda for the next decade with new commitments and priorities.

We have to start now to gear up towards better results.

We need more positive signs such as those I saw in Somalia where we need to help accelerate positive change.

There will be opportunities for everyone to weigh in, including at next year’s meeting of the Women, Peace and Security Focal Points Network in Windhoek, Namibia, which will carry a special symbolism for those that have been in this movement for a while. 

For now, I want to share three priorities for 2020.

This August, the world mourned the loss of Kofi Annan. Part of his legacy was that the UN debated and decided to stop supporting peace agreements that included blanket amnesties. I think that, two decades later, it is time for the UN to have a similar conversation about supporting, brokering and paying for peace negotiations that exclude women. This is in your hands. This was raised by women from civil society at the forum this Council was invited to earlier this week, at the initiative of Sweden.

Secondly, one of the many positive examples in the report is the UN Peacebuilding Fund’s steadily growing support to projects advancing gender equality and women’s empowerment.

Finding ways to make the 15 per cent minimum target a reality across all relevant entities and other peace and security funds is a point we can all focus on. Joint programming on rule of law in conflict and post-conflict countries, and addressing educational and Economic resilience, or multi-partner trust funds in fragile settings, should be at the start of all conversations about financing.

And finally, we need to do much more to protect women activists, peacebuilders and human rights defenders in conflict-affected countries. We applaud the historic participation of a Palestinian woman representing civil society in addressing this Security Council for the first time. 

We commend the Nobel Committee’s recognition to Denis Mukwege and Nadia Murad for their advocacy on behalf of victims of wartime sexual violence. It is an example of the importance of this issue, to which my esteemed colleague SRSG Pramila Patten devotes all her time and energy. 

I met many exceptionally courageous women in my recent travels to Somalia, South Sudan, the Sahel and the Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh.

Many of them are here today. But many could not be here. 

In 2017, half of the women honoured in the annual tribute of the Association for Women in Development were murdered in conflict affected countries. 

But the list is much longer when we include women political leaders, journalists, justice actors and security sector personnel, and those perceived to be LGBTI or who challenge traditional gender roles simply by their involvement in public life. 

It is my strong wish that we will find the political will to do much more about this epidemic of killings of women over the next decade than we have in this past one.

Change is within our hands. Let us work for positive indicators for the next report and let us make sure that next Secretary-General’s report will be able to show that we are turning the corner.

Thank you.