By Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 7 2015 (IPS)

Another reality that emerges very distinctly in culture of peace is that we should never forget when women – half of world’s seven billion plus people – are marginalised and their equality is not established in all spheres of human activity, there is no chance for our world to get sustainable peace in the real sense.

Photo Courtesy of Ambassador Chowdhury

I would reiterate that women in particular have a major role to play in promoting the culture of peace in our violence-ridden societies, thereby bringing in lasting peace and reconciliation. While women are often the first victims of armed conflict, they must also and always be recognised as key to the resolution of the conflict.

I believe with all my conviction that without peace, development is not possible, without development, peace is not achievable, but without women, neither peace nor development can be realised.

Integral connection between development and peace

In today’s world we continue to perceive an inherent paradox that needs our attention. The process of globalisation has created an irreversible trend toward a global integrated community, while at the same time, divisions and distrust keep on manifesting in different and complex ways.

Disparities and inequalities within and among nations have been causing insecurity and uncertainty that has become an unwanted reality in our lives. That is why I strongly believe that peace and development are two sides of the same coin. One is meaningless without the other; one cannot be achieved without the other.It is being increasingly realised that over-emphasis on cognitive learning in schools at the cost of developing children’s emotional, social, moral and humanistic aspects has been a costly mistake.

Education as the most critical element in the culture of peace

A key ingredient in building the culture of peace is education. Peace education needs to be accepted in all parts of the world, in all societies and countries as an essential element in creating the culture of peace.

The young of today deserves a radically different education –“one that does not glorify war but educates for peace, non-violence and international cooperation.” They need the skills and knowledge to create and nurture peace for their individual selves as well as for the world they belong to.

As Maria Montessori had articulated so appropriately, “Those who want a violent way of living, prepare young people for that; but those who want peace have neglected their young children and adolescents and that way are unable to organize them for peace.”

It is being increasingly realised that over-emphasis on cognitive learning in schools at the cost of developing children’s emotional, social, moral and humanistic aspects has been a costly mistake.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon asserted at the very first High Level Forum on the Culture of Peace in 2012 that “…. We are here to talk about how to create this culture of peace. I have a simple, one-word answer: education. Through education, we teach children not to hate. Through education, we raise leaders who act with wisdom and compassion. Through education, we establish a true, lasting culture of peace.”

In this context, I commend the initiative of the Soka University of America located near Los Angeles in initiating in 2014 its annual “Dialogue on The Culture of Peace and Non-Violence” as an independent, unbiased, non-partisan, intellectual forum to outline avenues and direction for incorporating the culture of peace and non-violence into all spheres of the educational experience.

Never has it been more important for us to learn about the world and understand its diversity. The task of educating children and young people to find non-aggressive means to relate with one another is of primary importance.

As I had underscored at the conference hosted by the Hague Appeal for Peace on “Educating toward a World without Violence” in Albania in 2004, “the participation of young people in this process is very essential. Their inputs in terms of their own ideas on how to cooperate with each other in order to eliminate violence in our societies must be fully taken into account.”

Peace education is more effective and meaningful when it is adopted according to the social and cultural context and the country’s needs and aspirations. It should be enriched by its cultural and spiritual values together with the universal human values.

It should also be globally relevant. The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice rightly emphasises that “…culture of peace will be achieved when citizens of the world understand global problems; have the skills to resolve conflicts constructively; know and live by international standards of human rights, gender and racial equality; appreciate cultural diversity; and respect the integrity of the Earth.”

Indeed, this should be more appropriately called “education for global citizenship”. Such learning cannot be achieved without well-intentioned, sustained, and systematic peace education that leads the way to the culture of peace.

The U.N. Secretary-General’s Global Education First Initiative’s essential objective is to promote global citizenship as the main objective of education. Connecting the role of individuals to broader global objectives, Dr. Martin Luther King Junior affirmed that “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.”

Let me conclude by asserting that to turn the culture of peace into a global, universal movement, basically all that is needed is for every one of us to be a true believer in peace and non-violence, and to practice what we profess.

Whether it is at events like the annual High Level Forums, in places of worship, in schools or in our homes, a lot can be achieved in promoting the culture of peace through individual resolve and action. Peace and non-violence should become a part of our daily existence. This is the only way we shall achieve a just and sustainable peace in the world.

Part One can be read here.

Edited by Kitty Stapp

Excerpt:

By Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury
Sep 7 2015 (IPS)

This week, for the fourth time in a row, the annual gathering of the apex intergovernmental body of the United Nation deliberating on peace and non-violence will take place at the U.N. headquarters in New York.

Photo Courtesy of Ambassador Chowdhury

President of the ongoing 69th session of the General Assembly Mr. Sam Kahamba Kutesa has convened the fourth U.N. High Level Forum on the Culture of Peace on Sep. 9.

This daylong event is an opportunity for U.N. Member States, U.N. system entities, media and civil society interested in discussing the ways and means to promote the Culture of Peace and to join the discourse on strengthening the global movement for the implementation of the U.N. Declaration and Programme of Action on the Culture of Peace as adopted by consensus by the General Assembly on Sep. 13, 1999.

It also creates a platform for various stakeholders to have an exchange on the emerging trends and policies that can significantly impact on advancing the culture of peace.

Historical context

The adoption of the Declaration and Programme of Action on Culture of Peace was a watershed event as a possible response to the evolving dynamics of global war and security strategies in a post-Cold War world. It has been an honour for me to Chair the nine-month long negotiations that led to the adoption of the Declaration and Programme of Action.The United Nations needs to be more than a fire brigade rushing in to put out the conflagrations and then withdraw from the scene without doing anything to ensure that fires do not break out again.

This historic norm-setting document is considered as one of the most significant legacies of the United Nations that would endure generations. I would always treasure and cherish that. For me this has been a realisation of my personal commitment to peace and my humble contribution to humanity.

In the responsibility that the United Nations – as the only universal body – must shoulder in fulfilling its Charter obligation of maintaining international peace and security worldwide, stronger focus on prevention and peace building is essential.

The United Nations needs to be more than a fire brigade rushing in to put out the conflagrations and then withdraw from the scene without doing anything to ensure that fires do not break out again.

In a historical perspective it is worthwhile to note that asserting and re-affirming the commitment of the totality of the United Nations membership to build the Culture of Peace, the General Assembly has been adopting resolutions on the subject every year since 1997.

The Assembly, through its annual substantive resolutions, has highlighted the priority it attaches to the full and effective implementation of these visionary decisions which are universally applicable and sought after by the vast majority of all peoples in every nation. It recognises the need for continuous support to the strengthening of the global movement to promote the Culture of Peace, as envisaged by the United Nations, particularly in the current global context.

The Forum in 2013 included Ministerial level participation and at its 68th session, the General Assembly adopted, by consensus, Resolution 68/125 on “Follow-up to the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace”, which was co-sponsored by 105 Member States.

This year the keynote speaker at the Forum is the fifth grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, Mr. Arun Gandhi, who prides calling himself “The Peace Farmer” as he sows the seeds of peace and non-violence following the footsteps of his grandfather whose birthday on Oct. 2 is observed by the United Nations and the international community as the International Day of Non-Violence.

He builds on the message of last year’s keynote speaker Ms. Leymah Gbowee, 2011 Nobel Peace Prize laureate who is a global legend leading civil society activism for peace and equality. Of course, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will join the Forum at the opening with his ardent advocacy for the culture of peace.

The 2015 Forum will comprise of two multi-stakeholders interactive panels which will focus on: (1) “Promotion of the Culture of Peace in the context of the Post-2015 sustainable development agenda; and (2) “Role of the media in the promotion of the culture of peace”.

This High Level Forum is taking place at a time of some of the worst violence against civilians we have seen in recent years. Clearly, the hope that the new millennium would be a harbinger of peace has turned out to be rather misplaced.

The lesson in this, I believe, is that however much the world around us changes, we cannot achieve peace without a change in our own minds, and thereby in the global consciousness.

The wealth and the technology can only open up the opportunity to better the world. We must have the mind to seize that opportunity; we must have the culture of peace developed in each one of us both as an individual as well as a member of the global society.

Also, we must remember that technology and wealth can be put to destructive use too. The difference between war and peace, between poverty and prosperity, between death and life, is essentially prompted in our minds.

Why the culture of peace?

Peace is integral to human existence — in everything we do, in everything we say and in every thought we have, there is a place for peace. Absence of peace makes our challenges, our struggles, much more difficult. I believe that is why it is very important that we need to keep our focus on creating the culture of peace in our lives.

One lesson I have learned in my life over the years is that to prevent our history of war and conflict from repeating itself – the values of non-violence, tolerance, human rights and democratic participation will have to be germinated in every man and woman – children and adults alike.

When we see what is happening around us, we realise the urgent need for promoting the culture of peace – peace through dialogue – peace through non-violence. In a world where tragedy and despair seem to be everywhere, there is an urgent need – if not an imperative – for a global culture of peace.

Each of us can make an active choice each day through seemingly small acts of love, compassion, forgiveness, empathy, cooperation or understanding, thereby contributing to the culture of peace. Eminent proponents of peace have continued to highlight that the culture of peace should be the foundation of the new global society.

In today’s world, more so, it should be seen as the essence of a new humanity, a new global civilisation based on inner oneness and outer diversity.

Part Two can be read here.

Edited by Kitty Stapp

Excerpt:

By Mairead Maguire
BELFAST, Aug 18 2014 (IPS)

I once asked Dan Berrigan, the great American anti-war activist, for some advice to me in my life as a peace activist. He replied “Pray and Resist”.But I would like to ask how serious we are about resistance? What is our vision? And how does resistance fit into this? What do we need to resist? How can we resist effectively? And what methods are allowed? In resisting, what are our aims and objectives?

Mairead Maguire

I would like to propose that the world’s peace movement adopt a vision of the total abolition of militarism. Such a vision would empower us to know where we are going. It would inspire and energise each of us to pursue our different projects, be it the fight against the arms trade, nuclear abolition, non-killing/non-violence, the culture of peace, the abolition of arms and drone warfare, human rights and environmental rights.

We will know, as we work towards this vision of a demilitarised, disarmed world, that we are part of an ever-growing new ‘consciousness’ of men and women, choosing to uphold human life, the right to individual conscience, loving our enemies, human rights and international law, and solving our problems without killing each other.

Why resist militarism? We are witnessing the growing militarism of Europe, and its role as a driving force for armaments, and its dangerous path, under the leadership of the United States/NATO towards a new ‘cold war’ and military aggression.

The European Union and many of its countries, which used to take initiatives in the United Nations for peaceful settlements of conflicts, particularly allegedly peaceful countries like Norway and Sweden, are now among the most important U.S./NATO war assets.“The greatest danger to our freedoms being eroded by governments and endangered by ‘armed’ groups is a fearful, apathetic, civil community, refusing to take a stand for human rights and real democracy, and against violence and war”

The European Union is a threat to the survival of neutrality, as countries are being asked to join NATO, and forced to end their neutrality and choose (unnecessarily) between West and East.

Many nations have been drawn into complicity in breaking international law through U.S./U.K./NATO wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and so on, Germany, the third largest exporter of military hardware in the world, continues to increase its military budget and is complicit with NATO, facilitating U.S. bases, from which drones leave to carry out illegal extrajudicial killings on the order of the U.S. president, in countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Germany has also provided Israel with its nuclear submarine and continues to be complicit under the Geneva Convention in Israeli war crimes against Gaza and in the illegal occupation of Palestine.

We need to abolish NATO and increase our task of dismantling the military-industrial complex, through non-violent and civil resistance.

The means of resistance are very important. As a pacifist deeply committed to non-killing/non-violence as a way to bring about social/cultural/political change, I believe that we need to use means consistent with the end, and it is wrong to use violence.

Our message that militarism and war do not solve our problem of violence challenges us to use new ways and that is why we need to teach the science of peace at every level of society.

We are all aware there are forces at work which are determined to continue their agenda of the militarisation of our societies and there are governments/corporate/media attempts to make violence and war acceptable.

The greatest danger to our freedoms being eroded by governments and endangered by ‘armed’ groups is a fearful, apathetic, civil community, refusing to take a stand for human rights and real democracy, and against violence and war.

We can take hope from the fact that most people want peace not war. However, we are facing a civilisation problem. We are facing a political/ideological challenge with the growth of what president Ike Eisenhower warned the U.S. people against ­– the military/industrial complex. He warned that it would destroy the United States.

We know now that a small group made up of the world’s military/industrial/media/corporate/academic elite – whose agenda is profit, arms, war and
valuable resources – now holds power and has a stronghold on our elected governments. We see this in the gun and Israeli lobbies, among others, which hold great power over U.S. politics.

We have witnessed this in ongoing wars, invasions, occupations and proxy war, all allegedly in the name of ‘humanitarian intervention and democracy’. However, in reality, they are causing great suffering, especially to the poor, through their policies of arms, war, domination and control of other countries and their resources.

Unmasking this agenda of war and demanding the implementation of human rights and international law is the work of the peace movement. We can turn away from this path of destruction by spelling out a clear vision of what kind of a world we want to live in, demanding an end to the military-industrial complex, and insisting that our governments adopt policies of peace.

We, the Peace Movement, are the alternative to militarism and war, and because we want a different world, we must be part of building it. We must not be satisfied with improvements to and reform of militarism but rather offer an alternative.

Militarism is an aberration and a system of dysfunction. Militarism should be outdated and disappear – like hanging and flogging! (END/IPS COLUMNIST SERVICE)

(Edited by Phil Harris)

Excerpt:

A street fight in Cairo over ousted Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi. Credit: Hisham Allam/IPS

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 6 2013 (IPS)

Against the backdrop of widespread sectarian violence in Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt and Syria – and rising xenophobia and Islamophobia in Western Europe and the United States – the United Nations hosted its second high-level forum on the “culture of peace”.

One of the key questions before delegates Friday was particularly timely: is the U.N.’s message on culture of peace failing to get across to countries steeped in violence and civil wars?"The magnitude of these problems requires all human beings to work together in finding new, workable, realistic solutions." -- Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury of Bangladesh

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury of Bangladesh, special guest at the high-level forum and chair of the General Assembly’s drafting committee for the U.N. Declaration and Programme of Action (PoA) on Culture of Peace (1998-99), told IPS, “My own perception and experience will not let me say that the U.N.’s message on the culture of peace is failing to get across.”

Civil society worldwide has been in the forefront of the global movement for the culture of peace, working diligently and patiently at the grassroots level, he said.

“I find it is the governments and power structures which are the most persistent foot-draggers with regard to advancing the culture of peace through policy steps and action,” said Chowdhury, a former U.N. under-secretary-general and currently representing civil society and the Global Movement for the Culture of Peace.

The agenda of the high-level forum included a panel discussion on “The role of interfaith cooperation in promoting a global culture of peace”, and “The culture of peace as the agenda for a new global civilisation: Where are we now?”

Convened by the current president of the General Assembly, Vuk Jeremic, the forum focused specifically on the implementation of the PoA adopted by the General Assembly in September 1999.

The PoA identified eight specific areas of action at all levels, including education; sustainable economic and social development; human rights; equality; democratic participation; understanding, tolerance and solidarity; communication and the free flow of information and knowledge; international peace and security.

Addressing delegates, Jeremic said member states rightly chose to put education first on the list, inspired in no small measure by what India’s Mahatma Gandhi had enjoined three quarters of a century ago, that “if we are to teach real peace in this world, and if we are to carry on a real war against war, we shall have to begin with the children.”

To effectively meet the challenges of the 21st century, Jeremic said, “I believe the generations to come should be instilled with the ethics of non-violence, and equipped with the right tools to flourish as adults – as future parents, responsible community leaders, and engaged citizens.”

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, one of the strongest proponents of the culture of peace, has repeatedly said today’s culture of violence should be replaced by a culture of peace.

He said people intuitively understand there can be no military solution to conflicts and that the world’s scarce resources should be spent to help people flourish, not to fund weapons that cause more suffering.

“But too many decision makers do not get this simple logic,” he added.

The world spends almost twice as much on weapons in one day than the United Nations spends for its global mission of peace, human rights and development in one year, Ban pointed out.

He said about 1.7 trillion dollars was spent on weapons in 2011 alone.

That is an enormous cost to people who go to bed hungry, children who die because they lack clean water, and farmers who cannot till land because it is rendered unusable by land mines, he added.

“Economists call this an opportunity cost. I call it a moral outrage,” Ban said.

Asked about the widespread sectarian strife, Chowdhury told IPS, “Most disturbing to me is that today’s atrocities often are directed to people living in the same community or neighbourhood.”

Hatred and intolerance have blurred the vision of the perpetrators. Great differences still exist between peoples and regions, and the world is experiencing a new era of insecurity and uncertainty, he added.

The United Nations, he pointed out, has shown great vision by adopting its historic, norm-setting Declaration and PoA on the Culture of Peace in 1999, but has not been organised enough in making the document a system-wide flagship effort of the world body.

“I am a believer that the world, particularly the governments, will come to realise its true value and usefulness sooner than later,” Chowdhury said.

Asked how much of the PoA has been implemented, Chowdhury said it is an agreement among nations, governments, civil society, media and individuals – all of them identified in this document as key actors.

Identifying eight specific areas, it encourages actions at all levels the individual, the family, the community, the nation, the region and, of course, the global level.

The PoA does not have a time-bound structure, he said.

“It was intentionally done that way as we, the drafters, realised that the challenges to sustainable peace will mutate and our constant vigilance in advancing the culture of peace will be needed,” he added.

The interdependency of today’s world, if not addressed with sanity, he said, can turn into a social, economic, nuclear or environmental catastrophe.

“The magnitude of these problems requires all human beings to work together in finding new, workable, realistic solutions,” Chowdhury said.

And the values of non-violence, tolerance and democracy which augment the flourishing of the culture of peace will generate the mindset that is a prerequisite for the transition from force to reason, from conflict and violence to dialogue and peace, he said.

“This I have seen first hand as my work took me to the farthest corners of the world,” he noted. “What I have seen has outraged me but also has given me hope and encouragement that there are forces who are determined to turn our planet into a livable place for all and where human dignity has taken strong roots.”

Women’s bodies are not spoils of war, say the women of Colombia. Credit: Intermón Oxfam

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Nov 27 2012 (IPS)

Against the backdrop of an upcoming U.N. Security Council (UNSC) meeting on women, peace and security, a coalition of some 63 international women’s groups and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has decried the absence of women during peace negotiations in post-conflict situations.

In a letter to Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson and Under-Secretary-General Michelle Bachelet, executive director of U.N. Women, the coalition says of the nine peace agreements that were signed last year, only two contained women and peace and security provisions.

Furthermore, out of the 14 peace processes that were underway in 2011, only four of the negotiating party delegations included a woman delegate.

The coalition, which includes the Global Network of Women Peacebuilders (GNWP) and the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), has specifically expressed “deep concern” over the absence of women at the negotiation table in the current peace talks between the government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the ongoing transitional political processes in Mali.

Mavic Cabrera-Balleza, GNWP’s international coordinator, told IPS that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s 2012 “Report on Women, Peace and Security” has already highlighted that words and resolutions have not been translated into actions.

She said sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) is both the root cause and consequence of women’s lack of representation in decision-making.

“This scourge will only continue if women are not part of the decision-making. Women will always be vulnerable if their strength and leadership is not acknowledged and valued,” she added.

On Friday, the UNSC is expected to discuss the implementation of its landmark resolution 1325 adopted in 2000, which was primarily aimed at integrating gender into its core mandate: the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security.

Cora Weiss, president of the Hague Appeal for Peace and U.N. representative of the International Peace Bureau, told IPS it is time for the UNSC to have a small working group to vet all of its resolutions for their impact on and participation of women.

She said UNSC Resolution 1325 has gotten more attention, and more lip service than most other resolutions. “Everyone talks about women. But where are we?” she asked.

“I hope the talk is not a trend, but will lead to a permanent condition where it will be taken for granted that women are equal to men, and are equally represented in all decision making. To reach that goal much more needs to happen.”

Weiss called on the secretary-general to appoint a woman to a permanent office on women’s participation in peace processes.

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, who presided over the 1990 UNSC meeting and was the prime mover of the 1325 resolution, has since helped bring to global attention “the unrecognised, under-utilised and under-valued contribution women have been making to preventing war, to building peace and to engaging individuals and societies live in harmony”.

But he has continued to warn that the historic and operational value of the resolution has been undercut by the disappointing record of its implementation.

Cabrera-Balleza told IPS the progress in 1325 implementation has been slow and inconsistent.

For example, 12 years on, there are only 38 National Action Plans on 1325, a mere 19 percent of the 193 U.N. member states.

At this rate, she said, “it would take more than 50 years before we would see at least 50 percent of the member states demonstrating political will and putting in place a systematic translation of 1325 and its supporting resolutions into executable, measurable and accountable actions.”

“And why are governments not using the indicators developed under Resolution 1889 (adopted in October 2009 which included follow up indicators to Resolution 1325)?” she asked.

“The indicators are not meant to be used to point fingers at who is doing or not doing their work. They are guideposts that will help improve implementation,” she noted.

Weiss told IPS right now there are at least two opportunities for peace: Colombia and Mali.

The Colombian FARC talks in Havana should have women at the table as an independent voice, not associated with the “sides”.

“There are many networks of women in Colombia, they have brilliant, experienced people who have been witness to and victims of the 50-plus year war,” she said.

She also said they support the peace process and have reasonable demands, such as no impunity for perpetrators of sexual violence.

Meanwhile, she said, the tragedy in Mali will see a six to 12 month process for rebuilding its military, and a parallel peace process.

“Where are the women in that process? We are told the ‘political forces’ will be at the table,” she said.

And one of the five permanent members of the UNSC (whose identity Weiss did not reveal) has said they cannot dictate to a sovereign state what to do.

“How will states ever carry out the decisions of the UNSC if they are not reminded of their obligations under the Charter?” she asked.

Women were told they could not come to the Irish Peace table because it was only set for political parties.

So they went and formed a political party and the two women at the table made history and institutionalised human rights into the Good Friday Agreement, said Weiss.

“What happens in Colombia and Mali will influence future peace processes. They can be role models,” she said.

“We hope that women’s equal participation in decision making, adherence to human rights and peace education will be among the measures taken to create a lasting peace in all future peace agreements.”

A Karachi street during the rioting on Sep. 21. Credit: Adil Siddiqi/IPS

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 24 2012 (IPS)

When the United Nations commemorated International Day of Peace last week, the celebrations were marred by news of widespread rage in the Islamic world, a continued bloody civil war in Syria, suicide bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan and violent demonstrations in Pakistan, Indonesia and Bangladesh against a video caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad.

“As we gather today to celebrate peace,” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Friday, “the world is facing global protests and violence in response to another ugly attempt to sow bigotry and bloodshed.”

But he also directed his jabs at the media. In today’s world, he said, the loudest voices tend to get the microphone.

“The television cameras focus on the fringe. The extremists gain easy publicity with their bonfires of bigotry,” he said.

Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, was equally unhappy with the news coverage when she said the best way to deal with provocations, including religious intolerance, was to ignore them. But the news-conscious media doesn’t.

“Deliberate and obnoxious acts of this type should be deprived of the oxygen of publicity,” she urged.

At a panel discussion during a recent High-Level Forum, Mario Lubetkin, director general of the Rome-based Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency, said the General Assembly in its 1999 Declaration on the Culture of Peace had called for better understanding, tolerance and cooperation among people, through, among other things, an appropriate use of technology and flow of information.

That resolution, adopted by consensus, also supported the important role and contribution of the media in the promotion of a culture of peace and ensured press freedom, as well as freedom of information and communication.

“Thirteen years later, can we affirm that this resolution is outdated, or is not valid any more?” he asked.

“We could either assess critically that in those days the internet was seen as ‘just a tool’, or consider the dimension that the internet had in changing human behaviour,” Lubetkin said.

In any case, he added, “we can clearly affirm that the values and ideas that the General Assembly promoted in 1999 are still completely valid today, in September 2012.”

The point here is not the tools, but the contents, what to convey, because the paths have exponentially multiplied, and this task cannot be a responsibility of a single organisation, or a single country or community, Lubetkin pointed out.

“It is to have the capacity to generate all kind of partnerships, to help boost the ideas of participatory communication, to generate more awareness around the issues of culture of peace, among more millions of people,” he said.

“But when we refer to partnership, we cannot only think about the action of the media, which are undoubtedly a key element. Our experience shows we are now on a new phase of partnership, in which the media, civil society, the national and international organisations have to be active partners, since communication is the responsibility of everybody, and not only of experts.”

“Our experience at IPS, a global news agency born nearly 50 years ago, shows it is possible to advance with information contents focused on the culture of peace, to better communicate on a global level,” he added.

“Our strong growth in the internet sector in the last years, with these contents, with millions of page views and millions of readers, shows that more and more people are concerned about those issues,” Lubetkin declared.

Dr. Natalie J. Goldring, a senior fellow with the Security Studies Program in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, told IPS that at its best, mainstream media outlets serve as honest brokers, investigating the claims of governments and individuals, with the power to disseminate those results and hold people to account.

Unfortunately, many newspapers have reduced their international coverage in recent years. Some have closed their international bureaus. And mainstream media seems increasingly prone to following the story of the day, rather than giving consistent attention to important global issues, she added.

“In recent years, I’ve relied increasingly on IPS to help fill gaps left by ‘mainstream’ sources,” she said. “IPS provides international coverage of key issues such as the international weapons trade, current conflicts, and excessive military spending. IPS also follows issues over time.”

The continuity that IPS provides gives significantly more depth to these stories than would otherwise be the case, said Goldring, who also represents the Acronym Institute at the United Nations on conventional weapons and arms trade issues.

The concept of a culture of peace integrates themes from disarmament, conflict resolution, and human security. It is an incredibly ambitious undertaking, but it’s also an extremely important one. Each of the themes of a culture of peace will require sustained effort on the part of the world community, she noted.

Goldring said the media can also contribute to efforts toward disarmament by covering – and often amplifying — the work of non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

Unfortunately, many media outlets give far more attention and credibility to the statements of governments than to NGOs, she complained.

Across the globe, NGOs are often doing the critical work on the ground to try to prevent conflicts, reduce the costs of conflict when they occur, and to aid with conflict resolution efforts.

NGOs have also been responsible for bringing international attention to issues such as the widespread illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, and the devastation they cause, she added.

Achieving disarmament will require continuing efforts by governments and civil society. The media can aid in this effort by helping to publicise successes and failures along the way.

Sharing accounts of successes in one region can increase the prospects of success in other regions, for example, as governments and civil society learn from each others’ efforts. International media sources can provide the information necessary to aid these efforts, Goldring declared.

Cora Weiss, president of The Hague Appeal for Peace and former president and current U.N. representative of the International Peace Bureau, said, “The amazing support that IPS gave to the High-Level Forum on a Culture of Peace certainly helped to mobilise the crowd that filled the General Assembly and conference rooms later. The use of the graphic was creative and compelled the reader to read more.”

After singling out some of the threats to peace – including high military spending, global warming and violence against women – Weiss told delegates there’s also good news.

India and Pakistan have signed a new visa agreement; peace talks between the rebels and the Colombian government was taking take place in Oslo; and Cuba, Venezuela and Chile are working together to make these welcome peace talks happen after over 50 years of armed violence.

“The United Nations has decreed an end to slavery, colonialism, and apartheid. It has unanimously called for a Culture of Peace. Its mission is to ‘save succeeding generations from the scourge of war’. It is time to abolish war,” she said.

Flutist Eileen Ain performs a musical interlude at the opening session of the General Assembly’s High-level Forum on the Culture of Peace. Credit: UN Photo/Evan Schneider

By Walter García and Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 17 2012 (IPS)

Amidst growing political tensions in the Islamic world over a video caricature of the Prophet Muhammad originating in the United States, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is making an “urgent “plea for political harmony worldwide.

Decrying the rising toll of civilian deaths in Syria, the killings of U.S. diplomats in Libya, the desecration of sacred religious sites in Mali and the “disgusting film” on Islam, he said, “When we look at the suffering in our world, we know how urgently we need a culture of peace.”

Addressing delegates at a High Level Forum Friday, Ban singled out skyrocketing military expenditures worldwide as one of the primary roadblocks to the creation of a culture of peace.

“The world spends almost twice as much on weapons in one day than the United Nations spends for our global mission of peace, human rights and development in one year,” Ban said.

Last year’s military spending was estimated at a staggering 1.7 trillion dollars, mostly on the manufacture and purchase of weapons worldwide.

“That is an enormous cost to people who go to bed hungry … children who die because they lack clean water… farmers who cannot till land because it is polluted by mines,” he said.

“Economists call this an ‘opportunity cost’. I call it a moral outrage. I have made disarmament a key priority in the U.N.’s five-year action agenda,” he said.

Ban said he has a simple, one-word answer: education. “Through education, we teach children not to hate. Through education, we raise leaders who act with wisdom and compassion. And through education, we establish a true, lasting culture of peace,” he declared.

Back in September 1999, the U.N.’s highest policy-making body, the General Assembly, adopted a consensus resolution on a U.N. Declaration and Programme of Action on Culture of Peace.

Through this landmark resolution, the General Assembly laid down humanity’s charter for the approaching millennium.

Addressing the High-Level Forum, General Assembly President Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser said the culture of peace is a set of values, attitudes and ways of life, based on the principles of freedom, justice, democracy, tolerance, solidarity, and respect for diversity, as well as on dialogue and understanding.

“I believe spreading the culture of peace is most critical to our society today. If we are to come out of the shadows of conflict and make a new beginning, all members of society must be inspired by the culture of peace,” he said.

He said he was pleased to observe that the culture of peace is receiving increasing global attention.

Through the efforts of the United Nations, civil society, regional organisations and peace-loving states, a global movement for the culture of peace is emerging, he added. “I believe the universal character of its applicability and relevance for the international community emerges very clearly through four special dimensions of the Declaration and Programme of Action.”

If the culture of peace is to take deeper root, he said, “We will need to reach out more effectively to the younger minds as they grow up. We must place crucial focus on peace education.”

To effectively meet the complex challenges of our time, the young of today deserve a radically different education – one that does not glorify war but educates for peace, he added.

“We need an education that focuses on peace, non-violence and global understanding,” he declared.

Federico Mayor, president of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace and a former director-general of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), cited the opening lines of the U.N. charter which gave pride of place to the concept of “We the peoples.”

But “the bloody history of male absolute domination,” along with moves by powerful countries to weaken the United Nations with their vetoes, had undercut the post-war dream of peaceful co-existence, Mayor said.

“Indeed, security had trumped all and a culture of conciliation and alliance had been disregarded in favour of a culture of violence and war,” he said.

“We the peoples urgently need to (remake) the United Nations into a truly democratic multilateral system,” he said, pointing out that just as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had provided guidance more than 65 years ago, it was now time to craft a Universal Declaration of Democracy to chart the world body’s future.

“It’s here, in this hall, that this historical shift can take place — from force to words and from weapons to dialogue — towards a United Nations system with the moral authority and the security forces needed to redress so many urgent situations,” he added.

Further, the U.N. should be rebuilt without veto power resting with a few powerful nations, but with more fairly weighted voting procedures through which “the peoples” of the Charter — the General Assembly — were equitably represented.

He also called for the establishment of a “security council” on the environment, and another dealing with economic issues.

“We are in the only international institution that could start this new beginning, the way towards a world of equal human dignity for all,” he said.

The High Level Forum on Culture of Peace was organised by the Office of the President of the 66th U.N. General Assembly in cooperation with the Foundation Culture of Peace, Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency and the Global Movement for the Culture of Peace (GMCoP).

It was supported by the Permanent Missions of Bangladesh, Benin, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kazakhstan, the Philippines and South Africa.

There were also two panel discussions: “The Culture of Peace at the core of humanity’s agenda: New partnerships, new developments”.

The second panel was on: “Strengthening the global movement, advancing the implementation of the UN Programme of Action on Culture of Peace: the way forward”.

By Rousbeh Legatis
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 14 2012 (IPS)

Conflicts of interest can be viewed as drivers of societies and human development, although recourse to violence has destroyed millions of people’s lives and leaves generations wounded for decades and even centuries.

Tarja Turtia. Credit: Edouard Janin

Constituting one of society’s cornerstones, media and journalists are key actors when it comes to peacebuilding, reconciliation and institutional reconstruction in conflict-ridden societies.

Through their work they may nurture a culture of peace, defined as “values, attitudes, modes of behaviour and ways of life that reject violence and prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations” – though they also often fail in this task.

By rebuilding and strengthening capacities, the Paris-based United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) supports media and journalists with millions of dollars and projects around the world.

Tarja Turtia, programme specialist at UNESCO’s Division for Freedom of Expression, spoke with U.N. correspondent Rousbeh Legatis about why media and journalists are important to reach out to local populations who are turning peace into lasting societal behaviour, and how they can be strengthened in this pivotal function to transform a culture of conflict resolution from simmering violence into constructive dialogue and understanding.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: Involvement of local actors and creating local ownership are key success factors for lasting peace structures in post- conflict societies. Could you elucidate which function media and journalists hold in this equation?

A: It is an important feature of UNESCO’s work to assist civil society actors and local initiatives in all areas, conflict phases and levels of intervention.

Empowering local communities through capacity building of local media professionals, including marginalised and vulnerable groups, to participate in peace-building processes, and responding to their need to access critical information such as peace agreements, reconciliation initiatives, elections and public decisions taken throughout the transition period, will be among the major tasks.

The capacity of the media plays a constructive role in the post-conflict reconciliation process by promoting unbiased information, avoiding stereotypes and incitement in order to foster mutual understanding.

In some cases, the media can start debates that could not be initiated openly before. Blogging for instance, is currently an effective medium used by journalists and officials in Iraq to launch debates that they would not dare address in public.

Q: What are common features of the media and journalism landscape in post-conflict societies that peacebuilders are confronted with day in day out?

A: Peace builders are confronted with two major obstacles to the full enjoyment of human rights, as also are media-related legal frameworks that do not comply with international standards: democratic deficit and weak institutions. Indeed, insufficient constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, regulations restricting media content or Internet freedom, no freedom of information laws, lack of ICT policies promoting universal access to the Internet represent important challenges.

In post-conflict areas, the very absence of media is a challenge: Afghanistan, for instance, moved from the post-2001 situation with virtually no media to today’s vibrant, professional and pluralist Afghani media sector.

One of the main challenges faced in conflict torn societies is the lack of safety of journalists. Over the last 10 years alone, more than 500 journalists and media workers have been killed worldwide.

For example, in Nepal, civil war, ended since 2006, has created a situation whereby exercising their rights and taking the role of watchdogs, journalists put themselves at risk: a high number of threats and violence against journalists take place in many parts of the country, often as the result of investigative journalism.

Q: As to whether media has a lasting constructive impact on successful conflict transformation efforts, some say there is only anecdotal evidence for this cause-and-effect relationship. What are your experiences?

A: Free, independent and pluralistic media are essential for strengthening transparency and fighting corruption, being key facilitators of the public’s demand for accountability and responsiveness from their society’s leaders. In turn, freedom of expression, the free flow of information, and the work of the media are crucial for poverty eradication, economic and social development, i.e. to equitable and sustainable development.

The Arab Spring has been and still is a key experience in which the media, if free, independent and pluralistic, have proven their influence in facilitating dialogue and enabling national movements. They ask for accountability, inclusiveness, the credibility and legitimacy of transitional authorities and transparent and peaceful elections.

That is why UNESCO has engaged in supporting the development of the free flow of information, safety of journalists and media professionals in the conflict-driven yet promising context of the Arab Spring.

Q: How is UNESCO supporting media and journalistic work in post-conflict societies to strengthen peacebuilding and to achieve more tangible deliverables?

A: For instance, UNESCO plays a vital role in supporting election reporting. The aim regarding elections is to strengthen the capacity of the media to provide fair and balance coverage of electoral activities. This works as a vital factor for the local democratisation process. Any democracy based on the respect of freedom of expression has an electorate that can make use of their right to vote on the basis of clear and non-biased media coverage.

In Iraq, for instance, UNESCO is currently implementing a project that trains media professionals to cover the election process: they are trained to inform the electorate and to build the capacity and enhance the performance of Iraq’s media regulator whose role it is to weaken factional and sectarian divisions.

Another key area promoted by peacebuilding efforts in a post-conflict setting is ensuring that information reaches the widest public. Lack of information or misinformation can trigger conflicts, especially in post-conflicts election scenarios. UNESCO supports community radio, the main source of communication for people in remote areas in Africa, through its International Programme for the Development of Communication, IPDC, programmes. In Sierra Leone, for instance, UNESCO’s support to the Independent Radio Network (IRN) a collection of community radios ensures that the local population has timely access to accurate information, especially in electoral periods to avert recourse to violence.

UNESCO actions in Nepal two decades ago can be cited as another example: the creation of radio Sagarmatha, the first community radio station in Nepal, which piloted a new concept of media in the Himalayan country, was enabled. This project had an ice-breaking impact on the country, paving the way to the spontaneous proliferation of community radio stations in Nepal in the late 90s. In the difficult years that followed, the community radios movement has been a force striving for peace and democracy as well as for sustainable development.

Q: Does constructive media and journalistic work get sufficient attention as supportive elements in peacebuilding efforts?

A: The level of attention this role attracts differs from country to country. For instance, in Sierra Leone, the peacebuilding efforts have mostly focused on building media institutions and capacities; while this has not been the case in Liberia or Cote d’Ivoire.

It may not be easy to deduce a cause-effect relationship, but of the three post-conflict states, Sierra Leone seems to be the one that is developing faster into norms of democratic governance and stability.

More generally, while the importance of media workers within a peacebuilding process is generally acknowledged, insufficient attention is paid to the needs journalists have in order to be useful to democratisation. Indeed, only with well-trained journalists who understand their rights and responsibilities can help media take its crucial place in strengthening the democracy and disseminating information to people.

Excerpt:

By Walter García and Lawrence Del Gigante
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 13 2012 (IPS)

Following the revolution that culminated in the ouster of longtime President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January 2011, Tunisia embarked on a transitional justice process with the intention of addressing the gross human rights violations of the dictatorship.

Said Mechichi. Credit: UNDP

The new administration established commissions with the purpose of addressing the abuses committed during the popular protests, and to aid them in this endeavour, a Ministry of Transitional Justice and Human Rights was created.

The country is also transitioning from a justice system that was fraught with corruption, impunity and lack of autonomy, to a model of judicial integrity. In a post-revolutionary society, this process is not a straightforward one.

Said Mechichi serves as state secretary of reform in the Ministry of the Interior of Tunisia. A lawyer by profession, he is a member of the Tunisian Association for the Defence of Human Rights and of the National Council of Civil Liberties and is also a founding member and director of the Centre for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession, a founding member of the Tunisian Association Against Torture and serves on the lawyers’ committee of the Tunisian branch of Amnesty International.

Speaking with IPS correspondent Lawrence Del Gigante, Mechichi discussed the important steps needed to ensure a Culture of Peace in Tunisia, as well as the challenges that the country currently faces.

Q: What role does trust play in re-establishing the rule of law?

A: The question is more than good. Why was the revolution launched? It’s a protest against the institutions of the regime, and the revolution is launched assuming that there was no longer any credibility for the prevailing institutions.

Naturally the revolution shows that there is no link, that there is a severed link between the institutions and the citizenry. The most important action to be taken post-revolution is to restore confidence in the institution of the state; the judiciary, the media, the institutions that are in charge of social and economic affairs, the institutions that represent the sovereignty of the state, the officials who are in charge of administration and public affairs domestically, regionally and nationally, beginning with the lowest employee all the way up to the prime minister and the president.

Trust must be built so that we can respond to the basic needs, in the initial phase. In the subsequent phase there must be thinking of reform relating to the laws and employment, jobs and the positions that govern the work of these institutions. A new culture must be propagated widely in all fields, to do away with the culture inherited from the previous regime.

Q: What is happening at a grassroots level in Tunisia, from a humanitarian point of view?

A: The people who launched the revolution have certain benefits because they have demanded improving their socioeconomic conditions. Since the inception of the revolution until now, there have been no protests or demonstrations that call for employment and improvement of the situation.

Naturally, we seek to meet all demands and support the budget that is set aside for development in particular, and to accelerate the study and implementation of development projects in cooperation with fraternal and friendly countries and specialised agencies.

Unfortunately, there are many, many demands. Many of them are extremely urgent and they have to do with providing the basic necessities such as water, power, roads and basic equipment for the work of the authorities. We are seeking to provide for these needs because there has been a delay in the support.

We are awaiting an improvement in the situation and the provision of resources and the provision of support by donors and by the organisations.

Q: What are the barriers to fostering a Culture of Peace in a post-revolutionary country?

A: The biggest is the disruption of dialogue between the basic parties and the major players. One of the most important impediments is the failure to achieve, as far as development is concerned, because people will run out of hope, having entertained great hopes, and they may have reactions which are uncalculated and unexpected.

Excerpt:

Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed, says the preamble to the constitution of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).

“Unless women are in the forefront of this culture of peace, long-term solutions will elude us,” says Ambassador Anwarul Karim Chowdhury, the prime mover of the 1999 General Assembly resolution that adopted the U.N. Declaration and Programme of Action on the Culture of Peace. Credit: UN Photo/Ky Chung

Signed in November 1945, the constitution came into force one year later following ratification by 20 countries, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, India, Lebanon, UK and the United States.

The UNESCO constitution clearly states that “ignorance of each other’s ways and lives has been a common cause, throughout the history of mankind, of that suspicion and mistrust between the peoples of the world through which their differences have all too often broken into war.”

These sentiments will be very much in evidence Friday as the General Assembly hosts a High-Level Forum on the Culture of Peace – even as protests in Egypt and Libya Wednesday resulted in the killings of U.S. diplomats, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi, over a video ridiculing the Prophet Muhammad, who is revered by Muslims worldwide.

The Israeli-American real estate developer Sam Bacile, who is credited with funding the reportedly amateurish video, was quoted as saying that “Islam is a cancer.”

Article 3 of the U.N. Declaration on a Culture of Peace, which is likely to be cited by speakers at the Forum and at the subsequent panel discussions Friday, calls for “advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity among all civilizations, peoples and cultures, including ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities.”

“The world must build a culture of peace,” insists Ambassador Anwarul Karim Chowdhury, the prime mover of the 1999 General Assembly resolution that adopted the U.N. Declaration and the Programme of Action (PoA) on the Culture of Peace and the subsequent proclamation of the “International Decade for Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for Children of the World, 2001-2010.”

Asked about his role, Chowdhury told IPS, “Yes, it was my sole initiative, and that initiative was possible because at that time I was the ambassador to the United Nations, and I happened to represent Bangladesh.

“I chaired the General Assembly drafting committee that prepared the declaration and Programme of Action after nine-month-long complex and intense negotiations,” he said.

In 1997, Chowdhury proposed to the secretary-general the inclusion of “Culture of Peace” as an agenda item to be deliberated upon in the General Assembly plenary.

In 1998, he also proposed the U.N. International Decade for Culture of Peace and Non-violence “at the request of all living Nobel Peace Laureates made to me,” he added.

And since 1997, Bangladesh has remained the focal point for the Culture of Peace agenda item at the United Nations.

Chowhdury’s second initiative, in March 2000 as the president of the Security Council, led to the adoption of the groundbreaking U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325 on women’s contribution in peace and security.

When the United Nations commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights back in December 1998, a coalition of civil society organisations launched a global campaign for the universal recognition of the human right to peace.

They called upon all “to prevent violence, intolerance, and injustice in our countries and societies in order to overcome the cult of war and to build a Culture of Peace”.

“Both of these high aspirations remain elusive,” Chowdhury wrote in an op-ed piece published on the Inter Press Service (IPS) wire back in January 2010.

“In today’s world,” Chowdhury said, “the culture of peace should be seen as the essence of a new humanity, a new global civilisation based on inner oneness and outer diversity.

“The flourishing of a culture of peace will generate the mindset in us that is a prerequisite for the transition from force to reason, from conflict and violence to dialogue and peace. A culture of peace will provide the foundation for a stable, progressive, and prosperous world for all,” he added.

The High-Level Forum is being held in conformity with Article 9 of the Declaration which says the United Nations should continue to play a critical role in the promotion and strengthening of a culture of peace worldwide.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon Monday singled out Egypt’s transition from longstanding authoritarian governments to a multi-party democracy as the most recent example of the culture of peace.

“Ä democratically elected president – they say, the first election in 5,000 years – in Egypt,” he said in his address in to the University of Geneva Monday.

The consolidation of reforms in Tunisia and Libya are all encouraging, he said, even though there are some forms of instability still. “But we can help them,” Ban said.

Article 3 of the Charter also says the fuller development of a culture of peace is integrally linked to promoting democracy, development and universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and strengthening democratic institutions and ensuring full participation in the development process.

Chowdhury argued the international community should assert that there is no more crucial social responsibility or more pressing task than securing sustainable peace on our planet.

Global efforts towards peace and reconciliation can only succeed with a collective approach built on trust, dialogue, and collaboration. For that, we must build a grand alliance for the culture of peace amongst all, particularly with the proactive involvement and participation of the young people, he said.

“This is the first priority as we look ahead,” said Chowdhury, who will be moderating a panel discussion Friday on “Strengthening the global movement, advancing the implementation of the UN Programme of Action on Culture of Peace: the way forward”.

He said the second area “we need to concentrate on is giving long-overdue recognition to the fact that women also have a major role to play in promoting the culture of peace, particularly in strife-torn societies, and in bringing about lasting peace and reconciliation.

“Unless women are in the forefront of this culture of peace, long-term solutions will elude us. Women have proved again and again that it is often they who foster the culture of peace by reaching out across divides and encouraging others to do likewise.”
The third crucial focus, he said, is peace education, which must be accepted in all societies and all countries of the world as an essential element in creating culture of peace.

To effectively meet the complex challenges of our time, the young of today deserve a radically different education – one that does not glorify war but educates for peace, non-violence, and international cooperation.

“All educational institutions need to prepare students to be responsible and productive citizens of the world to introduce teaching that builds the culture of peace,” he said.

Explicit recognition of the human right to peace by the Human Rights Council and by the U.N. General Assembly should be the fourth area of focus.

In addition, he said, civil society has a major role to play in the full and effective implementation of the Culture of Peace Programme of Action, particularly in holding national governments and relevant international organisations accountable for their commitments.

“The seeds of peace exist in all of us, and they must be nurtured by all of us – individually and collectively – so that they flourish. Peace cannot be imposed from outside, it must be generated from within,” Chowdhury declared.

Activists protest in front of the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia. Credit: Caravan4Peace

By Zoha Arshad
WASHINGTON, Sep 12 2012 (IPS)

Mexican activists winding down a month-long U.S. tour warned Tuesday that guns licensed in the United States were playing a massive part in gang- and drug cartel-related violence in Mexico.

Those speaking in Washington on Tuesday were part of a movement of activists and families known as the Caravan for Peace with Justice and Dignity. The movement was started by Mexican poet Javier Sicilia in 2011 in direct response to the murder of his son, a victim of the drug war being waged both in Mexico and the United States.

According to the organisation, more than 60,000 people have died and at least 20,000 others have “disappeared” since Mexican President Felipe Calderon took office in 2006, bringing with him a newfound militarisation of the struggle against the drug trade. Over the first half of 2012 alone, an estimated 21,500 people were murdered due to drug-related violence.

The Caravan for Peace activists are calling on U.S and Mexican authorities to change these militarised policies and end the drug war. In particular, they are urging the United States to crack down on the trafficking of arms to Mexico, which has played a crucial part in the thousands of murders and disappearances and the ongoing violence that pervades the country.

“There is strong evidence that these weapons are coming from the USA,” Sergio Aguayo, a noted Mexican academic, said Tuesday, speaking of arms in drugs-related violence.

Aguayo has long had a reputation for being both critical of lax U.S gun control and contemptuous of a perceived lack of regard for Mexican lives.

The Mexican drug cartels tend to favour AK-47 and AR-15 assault weapons, the group says, which are easily available at almost all U.S. gun shops near the U.S.-Mexican border.

The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has confirmed that approximately 70 percent of the guns being used and recovered in the Mexican drug war are of U.S origin.

And while many activists and organisations have repeatedly called on U.S. legislators to enact stricter gun control laws and stem the flow of arms into Mexico, Caravan for Peace’s agenda has always been to urge both the Mexican and U.S governments to find alternatives to the drug war.

Over the course of the past month of touring the United States, the movement has showcased individuals who have lost family members to the drug war. Olga Reyes, for instance, spoke on Tuesday about losing six members of her family to the drug-related violence, noting that she has more than 20 additional members of her family now living in exile for the same reason.

Aguayo is also highly critical of the Mexican government. “Felipe Calderon’s government has not fulfilled its commitment” towards the victims of the drug war, he says. He also warns that, despite the fact that Calderon term in office ended with the July elections, his militarised anti-drugs policies have not been halted.

But Aguayo says that much of the responsibility for the drug violence in Mexico lies with the U.S. government. “Help put out the fire at your neighbour’s house before your house catches fire and ends in ashes,” he said Tuesday, paraphrasing the former U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

For his part, Sicilia, the poet and founder of the Caravan for Peace, is clear about what is really at stake for the movement.

“We have travelled across the United States to raise awareness of the unbearable pain and loss caused by the drug war, and of the enormous shared responsibility for protecting families and communities in both our countries,” he says. “Our purpose is to honour our victims, to make their names and faces visible.”

The members of the caravan march along the streets of Washington DC, with Javier Sicilia (wearing a sombrero) in the middle. Credit: Courtesy of Caravan4Peace

By Salvador G. Sarmiento
WASHINGTON, Sep 11 2012 (IPS)

On Monday, after a month-long trek across the United States, a caravan of victims of violence in Mexico made its way to Washington, D.C.

Protesting more than 50,000 deaths and countless cases of torture and displacement in last six years, the caravan will make its case to the United States that “drug-war” policies have only served to strengthen impunity in Mexico, while doing nothing to stop the flow of weapons into the country.

For three days in the capital, the group will share their stories with government, residents, and civil society, and culminate their U.S. journey with a Wednesday evening Vigil & Peace Procession supported by a broad representation of Washington’s faith-based, neighbourhood, and advocacy community groups.

On Aug. 12, the Caravan for Peace with Justice and Dignity (La Caravana Para la Paz con Justicia y Dignidad) launched from San Diego, California with more than one hundred victims and allies. The group is led by Javier Sicilia, a poet whose son was kidnapped and killed almost two years ago and who famously invited families to support the original two caravans for peace across Mexico last summer.

The caravans, which crossed Mexico from Chiapas in the south to the City of Juarez in the north, raised the profile of victims’ suffering and demands for justice, and perhaps for the first time in the last six years, broke the “official story” that has dominated the media in Mexico.

In the United States, the caravan visited 20 states as they headed east, sharing their testimonies and opening up a space for dialogue with communities across the country, many of which have also struggled with gun-violence and over-reaching drug laws.

Caravan participants have shared their testimonies of losing loved ones and receiving threats for denouncing abuse, at times from cartels, other times from security forces, and just as often, from both. Despite the obstacles, the Caravan for Peace has served to inspire hope for victims, their families, and those who share their grief, that violence can be defeated and victims can find justice.

Well over 50,000 people have died in the last six years as a result of violence related to the drug war. Alongside cartel killings and kidnappings, legal and human rights organisations have also denounced countless cases of torture, extortion, extrajudicial killings, and enforced disappearances committed by security forces.

Yet, the Caravan reminds us that the violence in Mexico is not random, but the result of misguided security policies that seem to prioritise prohibition of drugs over the prohibition of high-powered assault rifles. Listening to the testimonies of courageous survivors of violence makes it abundantly clear where these policies have taken Mexico.

This week, the Caravan has arrived to Washington, D.C. and will make its case for a peace in Mexico with justice and dignity. The participants of the Caravan have crossed borders and states to affirm their love for those who have died and their faith that justice must be done. They have shared a reality in Mexico that we need to know about – one impacted by heavy militarisation and gun-trafficking.

Now, it is we who must affirm what we believe in; joining the caravan this week is a good place to start.

*Salvador G. Sarmiento is an Advocacy Officer for the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights based in Washington, DC. Follow him on twitter.

A young girl proudly shows her drawing of Boudha Stupa - a symbol of peace - during the 2012 Nepal Peace Exchange organised by Creating Peace Project. Credit: Creating Peace.

By Kim-Jenna Jurriaans
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10 2012 (IPS)

When Ross Holzman packs for a work trip, he brings three bags with him: One with blank postcards, one with crayons, and one with thousands of artworks created by children around the world.

The artworks, called “peace cards”, are canvasses on which children express their visions for peace in drawings and text.

During Peace Exchange workshop, children, ages eight to 18, are encouraged to discuss what peace means to them and what they can do to build it. Every child who completes an artwork, in turn, receives a card from another child across the globe.

“The inspiration for what I do is really based on looking around in our society in America having travelled abroad,” Holzman, 37, told IPS. “We don’t discuss peace. We take for granted that we essentially live in a peaceful environment, but there is violence in our schools, our media, our communities.”

Post-graduate stints in the corporate marketing world led him to India in 2002 from where, he said, he returned transformed, taken aback by the negativity and fear that permeates U.S. media.

A former-business-consultant-turned-peace-educator, Holzman started making political art following the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but soon realised that fighting aggression with angry art was not creating the positive change he really sought.

At the same time that the U.S. was spending billions on two wars abroad, Holzman saw art education programmes going on the chopping block in schools across the country, limiting possibilities for youth to process their experiences in the world artistically.

He started working on collaborative art projects, including large-scale peace banners with youth and “grown ups” to foster cooperation and self-expression in the Bay Area.

With Banners for Peace he subverted a classic U.S. American advertising technique – the omnipresent billboard– and used it to draw attention to peace education.

But setting ego and personal vision aside to build a shared vision was a learning experience for Holzman as well.

“I had to get over my own resistance to working with others,” he said. “Collaborating with art can be a really difficult thing – it can push people’s buttons. But in order to harmoniously coexist, we have to experiment in new ways of being and working together.”

He founded the Creating Peace Project, a San Francisco-based NGO, in 2008, to give a home to his existing peace education projects and embark on an international Peace Exchange between children from different cultures.

He has since facilitated peace-card workshops in India, Nepal and Uganda, where he’s worked with thousands of children, including refugees and children affected by civil war.

For him, the key to peace is self-awareness. “The thing that I’ve learned is that self expression, being creative is one of the premier tools for learning about ourselves – the more we learn about ourselves, the more we are at peace with ourselves.”

Shifting one’s perspective inward to connect with feeling and emotions allows for a change in our relationship to those feelings, Holzman said, “even if they are dark and negative and potentially violent.”

A typical workshop takes two to three hours, involves discussion, a short meditation and a free-form hour in which children paint their own peace cards that will travel in Holzman’s bag to another school across the world.

The young artists share their work and vision with the group before handing their artwork to the instructor, who, in turn, sets off a frenzy of excitement by handing out cards created by children across the world.

The act of sharing and letting go is another essential part to peace building, according to Holzman. “You’re translating emotions into something real and then you give it away. You create something you are attached to and then you let it go.”

Creating Peace Project falls into a line of civil society organisations working toward creating a Culture of Peace as articulated by the 1999 Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace adopted by the U.N. General Assembly.

Spearheaded by UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the declaration acknowledges the need for creating peace culture through means other than political cooperation and economic development.

Education for peace, disarmament and building cooperation and solidarity are among the defined elements of moving from a culture of war to a Culture of Peace at a family, community and global level, according to the declaration.

On Sep. 14, the 193-member General Assembly will once again take on the issue of building a Culture of Peace during a High-Level Forum , a week before World Peace Day on Sep. 21.

Holzman , meanwhile, is happy to continue to learn from and be surprised by the children he works with.

Bringing a bag of cards from Colombia into a privileged San Francisco school recently, he got a bit nervous.

“I was sure these hipster San Francisco kids are just going to be like ‘whatever.’ That was my own negative premonition, and I was totally wrong,” he recalled about the class’s heartfelt responses that day.

“It’s not about the calibre of creativity, but that something is given and received and it teaches them that we are part of a global culture and that we all want the same things.”

Soldiers of the Sudanese People's Liberation Army (SPLA) redeploy to form a new Joint Integrated Unit (JIU) battalion with the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), under the terms of the agreement of the Abyei road map. Credit: UN Photo/Tim McKulka

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 8 2012 (IPS)

When U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addresses the High-Level Forum on Culture of Peace later this week, he will transmit a message that underlines his political philosophy: all disputes need to be resolved by peaceful means, not through military might.

And time and again, he has warned that the militarisation by both parties of the 17-month political crisis in Syria, which has claimed over 18,000 lives, would never result in a peaceful settlement.

The culture of violence, he believes, has to be replaced with the culture of peace – even as military conflicts and insurgencies have destroyed human lives and caused devastation in Sudan, Syria, Cote d’Ivoire, Somalia, Colombia, Mali, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.

In his address, Ban is expected to reiterate the urgent need to comply with the basic principles of the U.N. Declaration and Programme of Action on the Culture of Peace adopted by consensus by the General Assembly back in September 1999.

“Unfortunately,” said a Third World diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, “violence seems to be a cultural thing worldwide, judging by the recent shootings in South Africa, the ruthless suppression of demonstrators in Bahrain and Syria and the suicide bombings in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan.”

As the Declaration points out, he said, the United Nations should strengthen its ongoing efforts to promote a culture of peace and effectively implement the Programme of Action (POA).

Article 1 of that Declaration calls on all U.N. member states to commit to peaceful settlement of conflicts.

And Article 3 says the fuller development of a culture of peace is integrally linked to promoting peaceful settlement of conflicts, mutual respect and understanding, and international cooperation.

Cora Weiss, president of The Hague Appeal for Peace and former president and current U.N. representative of the International Peace Bureau, told IPS: “People are tired of war. The price of violence is astronomic.

“And if we continue the culture of violence, we will be forever grieving for the dead and caring for the wounded,” she said.

“It is time to work harder to ensure that we… save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” said Weiss, who will be a keynote speaker, representing civil society, at the High-Level Forum scheduled to take place Sep. 14.

Besides Weiss, the other keynote speakers will include the secretary-general, the General Assembly President Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, and Federico Mayor, president of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace.

A special focus will be on the implementation of the 1999 POA on Culture of Peace, as well as for the further strengthening of the global movement that has emerged.

The POA calls for, among other things, actions to foster a culture of peace through education, promote sustainable economic and social development, respect for human rights, equality between men and women, democratic participation, and international peace and security.

Weiss told IPS the upcoming Forum will bring together member states and civil society and will inspire governments to think about what they can do to implement the unanimous resolutions which called for a Culture of Peace and a POA.

The Forum will also will stimulate civil society to continue to press for non-violence, for mediation of disputes, for greater efforts at disarmament and for full participation of women at all levels of decision making, she added.

“We will gently remind governments of their votes and agreements which created a 16-point action agenda yet to be well implemented. We will encourage civil society to never give up.”

She said the history of successful reforms and achievements initiated and promoted by civil society has empowered the powerless, and demonstrated that mere citizens are the real superpower.

Weiss said the president of the General Assembly, the secretary-general and their advisers “should be congratulated and thanked for bringing us together as humanity, not separated by titles”.

“Because the threats to peace do not separate us,” she added.

“Families of governmental members and families of civil society are equally threatened by inadequate education, populations that are poorly fed, and in poor health. Global warming, nuclear weapons, and epidemic disease do not recognise borders, names of victims or titles,” she said.

The Forum, initiated by the president of the General Assembly, is taking place with the cooperation of Foundation for Culture of Peace, Inter Press Service (IPS) news agency and the Global Movement for the Culture of Peace, with support from the Permanent Missions of Bangladesh, Benin, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kazakhstan, the Philippines and South Africa.

The Forum will include two panel discussions, one on “The Culture of Peace at the core of humanity’s agenda: New partnerships, new developments”, and the second panel on “Strengthening the global movement, advancing the implementation of the UN Programme of Action on Culture of Peace: the way forward”.

Cheerful young students in their traditional dress proudly waive their national flags during the Peace Bell ceremony of the observance of the International Day of Peace: "Peace - A Climate for Change", at UN Headquarters in New York. Credit: UN Photo/Paulo Filgueiras

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 6 2012 (IPS)

Amidst growing attacks on religious groups and a rising intolerance toward migrants and minorities worldwide, the 193-member General Assembly will hold a High-Level Forum next week to discuss one of the key issues on the U.N. agenda aimed at promoting social, economic and political harmony: a culture of peace.

Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, president of the General Assembly, the prime initiator of the Forum, said the United Nations was built on the premise that dialogue is the best path to peace.

“And that cultural diversity, freedom of thought, and knowing each other enhances respect and tolerance,” he said.

The United Nations, he noted, recognised the notion that the international community consists of different faiths and religions.

“It was unfortunate that in some parts of the world there is growing intolerance, xenophobia, and incitement to hatred,” he added.

When the General Assembly adopted a consensus resolution on a wide-ranging U.N. Declaration and a Programme of Action on “culture of peace” back in September 1999, they were aimed at propagating a set of values, attitudes, traditions and modes of behaviour and ways of life.

These norms included respect for life, promotion of human rights, the right to development, full respect for national sovereignty, commitment to peaceful settlement of conflicts and an end to gender discrimination.

But 13 years – and hundreds of hate-killings – later, the world continues to witness racial and religious profiling, homophobia, discrimination against migrants and minorities, and the spread of Islamophobia, specifically targeting Muslims.

Last month, a gunman killed six worshippers at a Sikh temple in the United States – a murderous rampage described as a bias crime because the killer was under the mistaken assumption he was training his gun on Muslims, erroneously associating turbaned Sikhs with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

In July 2011, a lone gunman walked into a youth camp on the Norwegian island of Utoya and killed nearly 77 people, mostly teenagers. The attacker, a Norwegian national, was described as a right-wing extremist who hated Muslims and migrants.

The High-Level Forum, scheduled to take place Sep. 14, is meant to be an additional boost to the global movement to promote the Culture of Peace, as envisaged by the United Nations, particularly in the current global context.

The day-long, first-ever General Assembly Forum is also intended to be an open platform for U.N. member states, U.N. agencies, civil society, including non-governmental organisations (NGOs), media, private sector and all others interested to have an exchange of ideas and suggestions on ways to build and promote the Culture of Peace, according to a statement released here.

A special focus will be on the implementation of the 1999 Programme of Action (POA) on Culture of Peace, as well as for the further strengthening of the global movement that has emerged.

The POA calls for, among other things, actions to foster a culture of peace through education, promote sustainable economic and social development, respect for human rights, equality between men and women, democratic participation, and international peace and security.

The keynote speakers at the High-Level Forum will include Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, General Assembly President Al-Nasser, Federico Mayor, president of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace, and Cora Weiss, president of The Hague Appeal for Peace and former president and current U.N. representative of the International Peace Bureau.

Speaking at a forum in the historic Italian city of Rimini last month, Al-Nasser said in some societies, culture is perceived as a source of division, instead of a path to dialogue and human solidarity.

Still, he said, in some regions minorities are subject to atrocities or mass killings, because they belong to different religions. Holy books are burned, religious symbols are defamed.

“This is not a society we want to live in,” said Al-Nasser. “We should protect the diversity in our societies. We have entered a world in which these issues will continue to unsettle us, unless we realise the benefits of diversity and share the fruits of globalisation in a just and harmonious way between all members of the human family.”

The General Assembly, the U.N.’s highest policy-making body, has always expressed its special concern over hatred and religious intolerance, and it has taken several initiatives to fight these scourges, the president said.

The General Assembly, through its Human Rights Council, has endlessly introduced Human Rights resolutions prohibiting discrimination on grounds of religion, race, xenophobia and of related intolerance.

Multi-ethnic, multi-faith, multi-lingual and multi-cultural societies are to be viewed as a source of wealth for all humanity.

“We should also recognise the wisdom of member states – when realising this need – establishing the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations, given the important contribution of dialogue for peace and development,” he said.

The Alliance was established at a time when grave tensions rooted in cultural differences gripped the world.

“This new institution emerged as a new hope for the international community to stem the tide of intolerance and offer a perspective of hope and fraternity,” Al-Nasser said.

It is encouraging that today, the Group of Friends of the Alliance of Civilizations has reached more than 107 U.N. member states, in addition to other partners.

“I am hopeful that, in the future, the membership of the Group will be universal,” he said.

The Alliance of Civilizations has contributed, through its various activities, to a clear shift “in the way we look at diversity”.

Following the Madrid, Istanbul and Rio Forums, the fourth forum of the Alliance was held last December in Doha, Qatar.

It focused on the interconnection between diversity and development. It is obvious that without harmony among different groups in a society, it is not possible to reach prosperity and sustainable economic development, Al-Nasser said.

“Now, we are looking forward to the next forum that will be hosted by Austria next year in Vienna, which I am confident that will substantially contribute to the issues we are discussing,” Al-Nasser added.

He said the Alliance has a role in a world, “where different religions need not divide us, but unite us and serve as a bridge for a more peaceful and tolerant human family”.