Category Archives: global

U.N. Highlights Importance of Public Spaces, Safety for Women

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article by Tharanga Yakupitiyage, Inter Press Service (reprinted by permission)

Improving access to public spaces, and making them safe for women and girls, increases equity, combats discrimination and promotes inclusion, said Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon during a High-Level Discussion on “Public Spaces for All.”

safety

The meeting coincided with World Habitat Day, which is observed annually on the first Monday of October.

It brought together top UN officials, private sector representatives, academics, and civil society members to discuss the state of the world’s towns and cities, the right to adequate shelter, and the importance of public spaces.

In Ban’s address, he remarked: “High-quality public spaces encourage people to communicate and collaborate with each other, and to participate in public life.”

“Public spaces can also provide basic services, enhance connectivity, spawn economic activity and raise property values while generating municipal revenue,” he continued.

The Executive Director of the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) Joan Clos echoed the UN Chief’s comments.

“These spaces shape the cultural identity of an area, are part of its unique character and provide a sense of place for local communities,” Clos stated.

Clos also warned that when public spaces are inadequate, poorly designed or privatized, a polarized city with high social tensions, crime and violence will result.

Deputy Executive Director of UN Women Lakshmi Puri particularly pointed to violence against women and girls in public spaces as a major challenge.

“If violence in the private domain is now widely recognized as a human rights violation, violence against women and girls, especially sexual harassment and other forms of sexual violence, in public spaces remains a largely neglected issue, with few laws or policies in place to prevent and address it,” Puri said.

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

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

(Article continued from left column)

UN Women has found that women in urban areas are twice as likely as men to experience violence, especially in developing countries. Moreover, 25-100 percent of women and girls around the world have experienced some form of sexual violence in public spaces in their lifetime.

Similarly, according to Gallup data from surveys in 143 countries in 2011, men are more likely than women to say they feel safe walking alone at night in their communities.

In Australia, research conducted by the Australia Institute in 2015 found that 87% of women were verbally or physically attacked while walking down the street.

In Ecuador, a study by UN Women in 2011 found that 68% of women had experience some form of sexual harassment and sexual violence in public spaces.

Puri noted how such violence limits women and girls’ movement, participation in education, access to essential services, and negatively impacts their health and well-being.

She highlighted the role of public spaces in promoting and achieving gender equality.

“Urban spaces are the most important theaters for the working out of the gender equality and women’s empowerment project,” Puri remarked.

Ban also noted the importance of deliberate and careful collaboration with local authorities, residents, and other actors to create successful public spaces.

World leaders are set to meet and define a new housing and urban agenda under the post-2015 development framework at Third UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, or Habitat III.

The conference will address the challenges of urbanization and opportunities it offers to implement the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and its targets.

One such target is 11.7 which aims to provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, particularly for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities.

However, Puri noted that no target exists to measure safety in public spaces for women and girls in the SDGs.

(Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article.)

global, United Nations, WOMEN'S EQUALITY,

Video: Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald & David Miranda Call for Global Privacy Treaty

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

A video and transcript from Democracy Now (reprinted according to terms of Creative Commons) (abridged)

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, Brazilian privacy activist David Miranda and others have launched a new campaign to establish global privacy standards. The proposed International Treaty on the Right to Privacy, Protection Against Improper Surveillance and Protection of Whistleblowers would require states to ban mass data collection and implement public oversight of national security programs. The treaty would also require states to offer asylum to whistleblowers. It is being dubbed the “Snowden Treaty.” At a launch event last week, Edward Snowden spoke about the need for the treaty via teleconference from Russia. “This is not a problem exclusive to the United States or the National Security Agency or the FBI or the Department of Justice or any agency of government anywhere. This is a global problem that affects all of us,” Snowden said.

snowden
Video of Snowden, Greenwald and Miranda

TRANSCRIPT

EDWARD SNOWDEN: We’ve already changed culture. We can discuss things now that five years back, if you had brought them up in a serious conversation, would have gotten you sort of labelled as a conspiracy theorist or someone who really was a—was not really thinking about what governments reasonably are likely to do. Now, the danger of this is that we’re always living in a circumstance where governments go a little bit further than what any public would approve of if we knew the full details of government.

Now that we’ve established at least the bare facts of what’s going on in the arena of our basic liberties, what happens as we transit through a city, as we talk to our friends, as we we engage with family, as we browse books online, all of these things are being tracked, they’re being intercepted, they’re being recorded. They’re being indexed into a sort of surveillance time machine that allows institutions that hold great powers, whether they are public institutions, whether they’re private institutions, such as corporations—they’re empowering themselves at the expense of the public.

Now, we’re beginning to shift from that cultural, necessary change, where we brought awareness of what’s really happening, into a point where we need to think about what the actual proposals that we’re going to put forth are going to be. We need to change not just the facts that we’re aware of, but the facts of the policies that we’re going to live under. And some people would be encouraged, saying we’ve made improvements. There have been the first and most important legal reforms in the surveillance arena domestically within the United States passed in nearly 40 years. But if you ask anyone who studies the actual legislation, they’ll agree that they’re a first step. They don’t go anywhere near far enough.

And as was just mentioned, we see that in many countries around the world governments are aggressively pressing for more power, more authority, more surveillance rather than less. And this is not just in foreign states. This is not just in what we would consider traditional adversary states such as, you know, Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, whoever you’re really afraid of. It’s not just people who are different from us. This has happened in Australia, where they now have mandatory retention of everyone’s data without regard to whether they’re involved in any sort of criminal activity or if they’ve even fallen under any sort of criminal suspicion. We see the same proposals put forth and adopted in Canada. We see the same thing occurring in the United Kingdom. We’ve seen the same thing pass in France.

(article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:

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

(article continued from left column)

And what’s extraordinary about this is that, in every case, these policy proposals that work against the public are being billed as public safety programs. But when we look at the facts, for example, in the United States, even if you’re not aware of or you don’t believe the reports that have been shown in the newspaper based on classified documents that show governments are engaging in the broad, massive and indiscriminate collection of data on every citizen’s lives, you can see that governments have confirmed things, they’ve declassified them through their own documents, and they’ve done investigations to discover: Are these programs, now that they’ve been declassified, now that we can discuss them, are they really valuable? Do they really keep us safe?

And despite two independent investigations appointed by the White House, that are, again, allies of these institutions and have every incentive to sort of whitewash these programs and say they’re wonderful, have in fact said that upon—upon reviewing all available evidence, even classified evidence, after interviewing the directors of the National Security Agency and so on and so forth, they’ve seen that these programs actually don’t save lives. Mass surveillance, by their own quotes, has never made a concrete difference in a single terrorism investigation in the United States.

There was one case where the mass surveillance of everyone’s phone records in the United States of America showed that there was a single cab driver in California wiring money back to his clan in Somalia that did have some ties to terrorism, but even in that case, the government said they could have achieved—and they would have achieved—the same evidentiary gain through traditional targeted means of investigation. They said they were already closing in on this individual.

And so, this raises the question: Why are programs being billed as public safety programs when they have no corresponding public safety benefit? And the unfortunate reality is that while these programs do have value—you know, the government is not doing this for absolutely no reason—the value that they have is based on intelligence collection. It’s based on adversarial competition between states that’s happening secretly. It’s happening without any form of robust oversight. It’s happening without the involvement of real open courts with an adversarial process.

And increasingly, we’re seeing that even if these programs are instituted with the best of intentions—to keep citizens safe, to assist in war zone operations, in the intervention of terrorism in certain spaces around the United States and throughout the world—inevitably they come back to impact us here at home. The same programs that the National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency collaborated on in areas like Yemen are now being used by the United States Marshals Service in the United States against common criminals, people who do not represent any real threat to public safety in a manner that would justify in any way the intrusion into and the violation of millions and millions of citizens’ rights—and noncitizens.

And unfortunately, this trend is continuing. If you open The Washington Post just today, you’ll see that the Obama administration was secretly exploring new ways to bypass the technological protections of our privacy in the devices that surround us every day. Now, this is what we confront today. This is not a problem exclusive to the United States or the National Security Agency or the FBI or the Department of Justice or any agency of government anywhere. This is a global problem that affects all of us. What’s happening here happens in France, it happens in the U.K., it happens in every country, in every place, to every person. And what we have to do is we have to have a discussion. We have to come forward with proposals, to go, “How do we assert what our rights are, traditionally and digitally, and ensure that we not just can enjoy them, but we can protect them, we can rely upon them, and we can count on our representatives of government to defend these rights rather than working against them?”

And with that, I’ll turn it over to David Miranda. Thank you very much for the invitation to speak.

For transcript of Miranda and Greenwald, click here.

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global

UN SDG’s: The ‘Meta-Goal,’ Bringing 193 Nations Together

. . SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT . .

An article in the Huffington Post by Achim Steiner, UNEP Executive Director and Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations

Having two parties agree on a common goal can be a challenge. Having 193 parties agree to 17 of them is, to understate it, uncommon. So when the Sustainable Development Goals are adopted this week by 193 UN Member States, it’s fair to say we will be witnessing something historic.

steiner

Having all nations concur on a path forward for the entire planet and its peoples is unprecedented, and indeed, an accomplishment in and of itself.

But despite the enormity of the task, setting the goals was the easy part. Achieving them is where the hard work begins in earnest. With 17 goals that integrate all aspects of our economies, societies and the environment, the challenge is formidable. That these goals apply to all nations — developed and developing — means that the challenge is a universal one.

The cross-cutting, global nature of the goals necessitates a degree of cooperation as unprecedented as the goals themselves.

Nations of the world recognized this fact as the goals were being developed. To help enable the coordination needed to achieve them, member states included what might be called a meta-goal: SDG 17. The intent of Goal 17 is to advance the notion of partnerships, from local to global, that will be fundamental to achieving the other 16 SDGs.

We have seen the power of partnerships and cooperation in the 193-nation consensus on a sustainable future. That power must now be harnessed to take us there.

Having all countries of the world on board is only the beginning. Sustainable development will need participation and cooperation between governments, the private sector and civil society.

Why is this so? Aside from the fact that the SDGs are shared goals for all humanity, it comes down to an unyielding reality: no single institution possesses the resources and competencies needed to achieve these goals alone.

Investment on a massive scale will be required in sectors such as energy, infrastructure, transport and information technology to support sustainable-development objectives.

Technology, policy coherence and governance will also need to be aligned with the goals of sustainable development.

(Article continued in right column.)

Question for this article:

Despite the vested interests of companies and governments, Can we make progress toward sustainable development?

(Article continued from the left column)

When it comes to financing, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, some $5-7 trillion will be needed annually to achieve the SDGs.

Public finance can only contribute so much.

Consider the investments required to adapt to climate change over the coming decades. Climate resilience will be a critical component of sustainable development. According to UNEP’s first Adaptation Gap Report, the global investment required for adaptation to climate change is likely to hit $300 billion per year until 2050 — possibly rising as high as $500 billion.

In 2013, the total amount of public climate finance was $137 billion.

Making up the difference seems like a daunting task.

This is where potential of global partnerships comes into play. In 2013, private climate financing totaled $193 billion.

This is still short of what is needed for climate finance, let alone the trillions more required to support sustainability across all sectors over the coming decades. But it is a point on a trend that shows an increase in sustainable investments over time from both public and private sectors.

These investments are already resulting in remarkable changes. Take renewable energy as an example, in 2014, about half of all energy-generating capacity built in the previous year was renewable. The Africa Renewable Energy Initiative is working to mobilize billions of dollars in public and private financing to achieve 10,000 MW of installed renewables capacity on the continent by 2020.

These remarkable statistics speak to two shifts that will need to continue in order to achieve the SDGs. The first is increased alignment of public-policy and private-sector initiatives. The second is the ability of public finance to catalyze private investment.

On technology, policy and governance, we have already seen the potential of partnerships to change the world.

Thirty years ago, the international community came together to tackle the challenge of the growing hole in the ozone layer. The result was the Montreal Protocol and the phasing out of ozone-destroying cholorfluorocarbons (CFCs). Now, the ozone layer is on track to heal by mid-century.

The UNEP-supported Partnership for Clean Fuel and Vehicles played an important convening role in phasing out lead in fuel, which has resulted in a dramatic reduction of lead-exposure health problems.

And currently, the 100-member Climate and Clean Air Coalition, which UNEP hosts, is actively working to reduce air pollution.

Cooperation engenders success. That’s why partnerships like these are at the core of the goals of sustainable development. No one government — and not even 193 of them — will be able to realize sustainable development without working together.

(Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article.)

global, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, United Nations,

Trying to Survey Events around the World for the International Day of Peace

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

by David Adams, CPNN Coordinator

There are several websites that invite readers to enter their events for the International Day of Peace (IDP), but it is difficult to get an overall view of what is happening.

idp survey

Let’s start with regular websites? The website http://internationaldayofpeace.org/ has a map of the world with symbols for different kinds of events. After considerable trial and error, since there is no explanation on the page, I was able to separate most of the entries for marches, music, meditation and multiple as of September 21.

Here is what I found, separated by region of the world.

Marches: North America 20; Europe 7; Latin America 4; South Asia 4; East Asia 3; Africa 2; Middle East 1

Music: North America 23; Europe 15; East Asia 4; Middle East 3; Latin America 2; Africa 2

Meditation: North America 55; Europe 53; Africa 14; East Asia 10; South Asia 4; Middle East 5

Multiple: North America 35; Europe 30; Latin America 15; East Asia 10; South Asia 3; Africa 3; Middle East 1

This adds up to 328, while website gives a figure of 1369 events.

In many cases one can obtain information about the event by clicking on the symbol.

How about Facebook? As of September 21 the Facebook page #PeaceDay has dozens of entries every day beginning on September 10, but most of the entries do not indicate the country concerned. One of the entries #iplayforchange carries a map of 295 events in 51 countries. By clicking on the map you find photos from musicians around the world, but no detailed listing of the events. Another facebook page is https://www.facebook.com/events/461780550660626/, where today (September 21) one finds entries listed from Lebanon, Brazil, Canada, Australia, Korea, Philippines, Indonesia, United Kingdom, Argentina, Turkey, Libya, Luxembourg, etc., etc.

I get the feeling from “surfing the internet” that the IDP is being celebrated around the world to a far greater extent than we can measure. Is it increasing from one year to another? Does it mark a growing anti-war consciousness? Unfortunately, I see no way to measure this from the available data.

Question for this article:
DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

Greenpeace honouring courage and compassion: Peace Day 2015

TOLERANCE AND SOLIDARITY .

An article by Dr Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director of Greenpeace International

I was 22 years old when I had to leave my homeland, South Africa. I had no choice. I was living underground for a year by then, to avoid being arrested. This was 1987, in the midst of one of the most bloody and violent periods in the history of Apartheid South Africa. The green peaceful streets of Oxford, where I was lucky enough to end up, seemed like a cartoon to me. They seemed unreal, while the violence I left behind felt very real and near. I stayed awake at night thinking of friends and relatives left behind.

greenpeace

I remember these feelings now every time I look at the heartbreaking images of people fleeing devastation – whether floods in Bangladesh or war in Syria. The images of desperate parents holding on to their children, trying to get them through barbed wired fences, or off small inflatable boats. I see them and I think about my own daughter. How would I feel if I was one of these parents? When I fled, I had only myself to care for.

‘No one leaves home’ writes Kenyan born Somali poet Warsan Shire, ‘unless home is the mouth of a shark’. ‘No one puts their children in a boat unless the water is safer than the land’.

21st September marks the International Day of Peace. And this year, again, there is not much peace around to celebrate.

In Syria alone – according to some estimates one of two Syrians has died or fled home since the war began. According to the UN 7.6 million are internally displaced. 4.1 million refugees are abroad. Most of them in countries surrounding Syria. Some are turning to Europe as a safe haven.

(article continued on the right side of the page)

Question for this article

The refugee crisis, Who is responsible?

Readers’ comments are invited on this question and article. See below for comments box.

(article continued from the left side of the page)

There are times when drawing borders between countries, people, between politics and the environment must stop. There comes a time when all that matters is humanity and solidarity. This is such a time. The acts of courage and compassion shown by so many individuals and communities across Europe I find deeply inspiring.

Many of my colleagues in Greenpeace are also trying to reach out and support refugees. In Hungary and Croatia, volunteers have joined the humanitarian effort, including practical things like setting up a solar charging station in hot spots so that people can recharge their phones and access WiFi. In Greece, our office is in close contact with international relief NGOs ​to support their efforts ​and is working with local groups to collect and send relief packages to the Islands where many refugees are stranded.

I want to personally thank all who are reaching out to help. In this moving ocean of solidarity, every drop matters. We must all join together and say loud and clear: #Refugeeswelcome!

Tomorrow I travel to New York to attend the UN Summit on Sustainable Development Goals. My trip will be an easy one, but I will remember those times when my journeys, too, were journeys of fear. I will think of those facing days, months and years of relentless, life threatening journeys, with no guaranteed safety at the end of the road.

As fellow human beings we owe it to them to raise our voices, to stand in solidarity and to address the root causes of global insecurity. We need to insist on finding real solutions – including getting off fossil fuels. Conflicts are always complex. But looking at current conflicts from Iraq, Ukraine, Sudan, the South China Sea to Nigeria it is clear that the access, the transport and thus the dependence on fossil fuels do play a role.

“Resource wars” are not new. But today we can overcome them. In New York, I will argue for a world powered by 100% renewables for all by 2050. This world is in our grasp, our latest Energy Revolution scenario shows that without doubt. It is also the world we must choose if we want peace. Wind turbines, photovoltaic systems, insulation materials or double glazed windows are the “weapons” we must deploy to help create a safer world.

I was lucky enough to see Apartheid ended by people power and international solidarity a few years after I was forced to leave South Africa. Apartheid was abolished, and I am now free to return. Will those displaced now ever have that privilege? I do not know. But we must work for the peaceful, safe world for all, that would make this possible.

global, TOLERANCE & SOLIDARITY

Ahead of International Day of Peace, UN chief appeals for cease-fire on 21 September

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY .

An article from the United Nations News Centre

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is calling for the laying down of arms and a 24-hour cease-fire on 21 September, which is observed around the world each year as the International Day of Peace.

un-idp

The United Nations General Assembly established the International Day of Peace in 1981 as an opportunity for people around the world to promote the resolution of conflict and to observe a cessation of hostilities.

“On this day, in the lead-up to the Day of Peace, I am asking all partners to lend their voices to this call for a laying down of arms, and to work non-stop in the days to come to bring about a 24-hour cease-fire on September 21st,” Mr. Ban said in a statement issued on Thursday.

“Let’s make this International Day of Peace a day without violence, and a day of forgiveness. If, for one day, we can live in a world without aggression and hostility, we can imagine how much more is possible,” he added.

The theme of this year’s commemoration is “Partnerships for Peace – Dignity for All,” which aims to highlight the importance of all segments of society to work together to strive for peace.

The work of the UN would not be possible without the thousands of partnerships each year between governments, civil society, the private sector, faith-based groups and other non-governmental organizations that are needed to support the Organization in achieving its goals.

Celebrations for the International Day of Peace will include a Peace Bell Ceremony at UN Headquarters in New York, featuring senior UN officials and Messengers of Peace, as well as a student videoconference. UN offices worldwide, including peacekeeping operations, will also be holding events with local communities.

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

Question for this article:
DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global, United Nations,

Strong outcome of 1st Review Conference of Convention on Cluster Munitions 

DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY ..

An article from Artistes pour la Paix

The 1st Review Conference of the Convention on Cluster Munitions is wrapping up in Dubrovnik, Croatia. For the most part, this meeting has been full of good news. Colombia ratified the Convention, Cuba issued a surprise announcement that it is working towards joining the treaty as well and a number of states announced that they have finished destroying their stockpiled cluster munitions. These successes show that the treaty is working and the norm against cluster munitions is growing.

minesaction

Amidst all this success, Canada joined the United Kingdom and Australia in an attempt to weaken the norm against cluster munitions by objecting to the Dubrovnik Declaration‘s condemnation of all use of cluster munitions. For these three states, the idea that they would have to condemn all use of cluster munitions was not acceptable despite being states parties to a treaty banning cluster munitions. Mines Action Canada staff and campaigners from around the world in partnership with friendly governments lobbied hard for the declaration to stay strong. In the high level discussion state after state took the floor in support of a strong declaration condemning all use of cluster munitions.

Again and again states passionately defended the Declaration as it was and to reaffirm that any use of cluster munitions by any actor was unacceptable. In the end, the Declaration was adopted without amendment. We were thrilled to see our hard work pay off. The norm against use remains strong and so does the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

We were able to prevent Canada, the UK and Australia from weakening the declaration this time but we need your support to ensure that we will be ready next time someone threatens the norm against these inhumane weapons.

Mines Action Canada [info@minesactioncanada.org] would appreciate your support

Their site contains the following crucial information:

151 financial institutions worldwide invested US$27 billion [27 milliards de $!] in companies producing cluster munitions from 2011 to 2014, according to a report launched by Dutch peace organization PAX. The report, “Worldwide Investments in Cluster Munitions: a shared responsibility,” details the scale of investment in companies producing this banned weapon by banks, pension funds and other financial institutions around the world. Two Canadian financial institutions were singled out for their investment in cluster munition production in the report’s Hall of Shame.

While Canada and the majority of states have banned cluster munitions due to the humanitarian risk to civilian populations, production of the weapon continues in a limited number of countries yet to join the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions.

(Article continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

Can cluster bombs be abolished?

(Article continued from left column)

“Cluster munitions are currently killing civilians in Syria and eastern Ukraine and they continue to claim lives in Laos fifty years after they were used. Yet financial institutions have invested US$27 billion—more than twice the GDP of Laos—in producers of this inhumane weapon. Canada has banned cluster munitions and during the lengthy discussions about the legislation government officials and parliamentarians frequently stated that investment in cluster munition producers is in fact considered aiding in their production and is illegal,” said Paul Hannon, Executive Director.

The new report from PAX shows which financial institutions have invested in cluster munition producers between June 2011 and September 2014. The report’s “Hall of Shame” shows the majority of investments come from financial institutions in states that have not yet joined the Convention on Cluster Munitions. Yet financial institutions from countries like Canada that have joined the treaty are also still involved.

Royal Bank of Canada and Sun Life Financial appear on the “Hall of Shame” list for their investments in cluster munition producers. These investments are falling foul of the treaty’s prohibition on assistance in the production of the weapon and of the recently passed legislation implementing the Convention in Canada which criminalizes aiding and abetting cluster munition production.

“Cluster munitions are banned by international law; a majority of the countries in the world has recognised that this weapon is unacceptable. And yet cluster munition producers are still able to fund their activities. Financial institutions should introduce robust policies to ensure they are not supporting companies involved in the production of this banned weapon,” said Suzanne Oosterwijk, co-author of the PAX report.

While the number of financial institutions investing in companies producing cluster munitions remains high, the report shows an increase in financial institutions with policies to prohibit this practice. Seventy-six financial institutions are listed in the 2014 report as having cluster munition policies in place.

Recent use of cluster munitions in Syria and eastern Ukraine further demonstrates the urgent need to eradicate this weapon. Last month Cluster Munition Coalition member Human Rights Watch documented widespread use of cluster munitions in eastern Ukraine, in fighting between government forces and pro-Russian rebels. In Syria, civilians account for 97% of recorded deaths where cluster munitions have been used over the past two and a half years.

This report follows a similar report released by PAX on investment in nuclear weapons. The Don’t Bank on the Bomb report found that numerous Canadian financial institutions are investing in nuclear weapons production [La Financière Sun Life en tête]. Mines Action Canada calls on all Canadian financial institutions to adopt strong policies prohibiting investment in banned and indiscriminate weapons.

(Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article)

DISARMAMENT & SECURITY, global

Third Regional Conference “Latin America on the quest for sustainable peace: tools and contributions”

.. EDUCATION  FOR PEACE ..

Convocation from Congress blogspot (translated by CPNN)

The Latin American Council for Peace Research (CLAIP), the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO), and the Association against trafficking of children and women (ECPAT / Guatemala) announce the Third Regional Conference “Latin America on the quest for sustainable peace: tools and contributions” to be held in the Academic headquarters of FLACSO in Guatemala City from 26 to 28 October 2015.

CLAIP

Objective: To reflect on building a sustainable peace in Latin America, even in contexts of conflict and generalized violence, exchange new approaches to peacebuilding and the challenges we must overcome to achieve it.

Target audience: teachers, researchers, students, professionals and scholars from multiple disciplines who are interested in research and / or work on these issues in the region.

THEMES:
1. Peace and Education
2. Peace and Environment
3. Peace instead of urban violence
4. Human and gender security, development and peace
5. Democracy, Public Policy and Citizenship Building

The themes of Dialogue, Peaceful Conflict Resolution, Gender, Equity and Intercultural issues are transverse to the preceding 5 themes.

METHODOLOGY OF THE CONFERENCE:

Keynote speakers: members of CLAIP FLACSO and ECPAT.

Thematic tables: The participants will present papers approved in the relevant thematic working groups, which will be coordinated by specialists of CLAIP-ECPAT-FLACSO.

Mail Contact: claip.congreso2015@gmail.com

NOTES:

Congress languages: Castilian and Portuguese, no translation

Lodging: each must manage and make their own reservations. FLACSO is in Zone 10 of the city and it is advisable to stay in that same area. More information.

As in previous years, we plan to publish a new book by CLAIP with selected papers at the Conference. More details will be published later.

For further information consult the Congress blog or our Facebook page.

(Click here for a Spanish version of this article)

Question related to this article:
EDUCATION FOR PEACE, global

Hundreds of women trade unionists gather for world conference in Vienna

. . WOMEN’S EQUALITY . .

An article from industri-all global union

Some 300 women trade unionists from over 60 countries are gathering in Vienna, Austria for IndustriALL Global Union’s first-ever Women World Conference.

new women

The inaugural event, hosted by Austrian trade union PRO-GE, takes place from 14 to 16 September in the capital.

Austria’s President, Dr. Heinz Fischer, will address the opening ceremony, together with the minister for health, Sabine Oberhauser, the minister for labour, Rudolf Hundstorfer and the secretary of state, Sonja Stessl.

IndustriALL Global Union, which represents 50 million workers in the metal, chemical, energy, mining, textile and related industries, is bringing together women trade unionists from across five continents to address some of the issues most affecting women in the workplace.

“Vienna has opened its arms to our trade union colleagues and we are delighted to welcome so many women to Austria for IndustriALL’s first World Women Conference. It promises to be a lively and informative conference from which we will emerge stronger and better equipped to improve the lives of women through the trade union movement,” said IndustriALL’s assistant general secretary Monika Kemperle.

A key theme of the conference will be unions’ role in preventing violence against women, with a new campaign launched on the occasion. Gender-based violence and discrimination whether at work or not, limits women’s potential at work and is therefore a trade union issue.

Women panelists from countries as diverse as Australia, Colombia, Iraq, Myanmar, the Ukraine and South Africa, will be sharing their experiences and expertise in improving health and safety, increasing maternity protection, preventing HIV/AIDS, building membership, fighting precarious work, ending gender discrimination, and achieving a work/life balance, among other topics.

An Equality Charter advocating women’s rights will be proposed for adoption at the Conference. Trade unions, especially in male-dominated sectors, have not always been inclusive of women or taken their concerns seriously.

Participants will also be examining IndustriALL’s own leadership structures with a motion to increase women’s representation from 30 to 40 per cent.

The event is due to be streamed live on www.industriall-union.org and can be followed on twitter at @IndustriALL_GU and #WWCVienna.

For more information, please contact Leonie Guguen, Communications Officer at IndustriALL Global Union. Email: lguguen@industriall-union.org. Tel: +41 (0)79 137 54 36.

(Thank you to Janet Hudgins, the CPNN reporter for this article.)

(Click here for a Spanish version of this article or here for a French version)

Question for this article:
Europe, global, WOMEN'S EQUALITY,

Peace ‘a distant dream’ without development, UN high-level forum told

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

An article from The UN News Centre

United Nations officials today [9 September] shared a common message that building a culture of peace means not just ending conflict but building inclusive societies that are able to develop and thrive in the absence of discrimination.

unforum
Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson of Iceland. UN Photo/Mark Garten

“Today’s discussion is an opportunity to focus on what we need to do on our pathway to a new and prosperous future for all,” said Ambassador Einar Gunnarsson of Iceland, speaking on behalf of the President of the General Assembly, at the High-level Forum on a Culture of Peace.

“Experience has shown us that peace is not simply the absence of conflict,” he stated. “Peace requires equitable societies, inclusive education and tangible actions on the ground.

“More importantly, peace is a distant dream without development. This is part of the core challenge in promoting a culture of peace and ensuring peaceful societies.”

Mr. Gunnarsson also spoke of the need to create a national community to promote dialogue, enhance respect for religious and cultural diversity, and eliminate all forms of discrimination and intolerance, while developing policies to promote peace, security, the rule of law and democratic decision-making.

Today’s event was designed to highlight the importance of implementation of the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace that the Assembly adopted in September 1999 and the need to further strengthen global movements to promote a culture of peace.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon shared his thoughts on how to bring about a culture of peace, highlighting humanitarian crises around the world and violations of international human rights laws.

“Today’s meeting is about the very hard truths in our world,” he said, “where people are suffering and dying from violence and atrocity crimes.”

“Syria is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis today,” he said. “I have condemned the parties – especially the Government – for reported grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law that may amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

As well as speaking about war-torn regions, Mr. Ban noted: “Even in mostly peaceful, democratic societies, minorities are attacked for their race, sexual orientation or some other difference – when they should be embraced for our common humanity.”

He also paid tribute to those countries, communities and people who had shown compassion, rather than xenophobia and discrimination.

“We cannot build a culture of peace without an active campaign against division and injustice,” said Mr. Ban. “To be more than just soothing words, the culture of peace demands courageous practice.”

Arun Gandhi, a grandson of the late Mahatma Gandhi, delivered the keynote address at the meeting, and shared some of the knowledge he said he had gathered from one of the great leaders of the Indian independence movement.

“What I learned from grandfather is that each one of us contributes to violence all the time. Many times in ways we don’t even know and recognize,” he said. “Unless we individually transform ourselves and accept a non-violent way of life, we cannot create peace in the world today.”

He said that, in the words of his grandfather, “we must become the change we wish to see in the world,” adding that “unless we change ourselves and our attitudes, we are not going to be able to change the world at all.”
for the world we want.

(Click here for a version of this article in French

Question related to this article:

 

Can the UN help move the world toward a culture of peace?

The following comes from the CPNN Coordinator’s blog of October 2012

The United Nations and the Culture of Peace

My ten years working in the United Nations system left me with a sweet and sour taste: the sweet side was the universality of the UN, both its staff and mandate, and its great significance for raising the consciousness of the peoples of the world; the sour side was the jealousy of the Member States who make sure that the UN does not encroach on their freedom to rule over their own citizens, as well as people in other countries that they may dominate through neo-colonial relations. This became crystal-clear to me when the United States delegate, during the informal meetings of the UN General Assembly in 1999, opposed the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, saying that it would make it more difficult for them to start a war. In fact, throughout history, war (call it “defense” if you prefer) has always been the most fundamental “right” of the state

With this in mind, I have been pleasantly surprised by the extent to which the UN system has once again taken up the culture of peace as a priority, as shown in this month’s CPNN bulletin, just as it was a priority in the Year 2000 when I was the director of the UN International Year for the Culture of Peace

Of course, this does not happen by chance, and great credit belongs to two men who played key roles for the Year 2000, Federico Mayor Zaragoza, who made the culture of peace a priority of UNESCO, and Anwarul Chowdhury, who played the role of midwife at the UN General Assembly, guiding the culture of peace resolution through nine months of opposition by the powerful states. Once again, this last month, these two men motivated and spoke eloquently at the High Level Forum on a Culture of Peace at the UN

As always it was the countries of the South who supported the initiative (see the CPNN article of September 24 and its discussion), but at least this month it was not blocked by the powerful states

In fact, it is my impression that the powerful states pay less and less attention to the United Nations. When there was a financial crisis a few years ago, the powerful states did not turn to the UN agencies , the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, but set up their own temporary system of finance ministers, and when it came time for the review of nuclear non-proliferation, President Obama held his own meeting with heads of state in Washington and ignored the UN conference where the only head of state to speak was that of Iran. And the US has pulled out of UNESCO entirely, forcing drastic cuts in its budget

In fact, the lack of attention by the powerful states may provide the UN system with an opportunity to push the agenda of the culture of peace without their opposition – let us hope that the UN can take advantage of this

Of course, in the long run, the UN, or any other institution, cannot mandate a culture of peace; instead, the culture of peace can only grow from the consciousness, both understanding and action, of the peoples of the world (see last month’s blog below). That’s why the role of the UN for consciousnes-raising is ultimately its greatest contribution!

FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION, global, United Nations,