Category Archives: universality

HERE IS THE VISION! A GLOBAL MOVEMENT FOR A CULTURE OF PEACE

Featured

Posted on by

(Une version française suit en dessous)

Last month we said “Here are the people.” And we asked, “Where is the vision?”

And now, as if in response, the United Nations has declared that the official theme for this year’s International Day of Peace is “Cultivating a Culture of Peace” with reference to the 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace.

This is the vision that is needed ! This is a very important opportunity to advance the agenda of history and to safeguard the future of human civilization !

The millions of people who participate each year in the International Day of Peace should be forged into the action that is proposed in the Programme of Action: “Partnerships between and among the various actors as set out in the Declaration should be encouraged and strengthened for a global movement for a culture of peace.”

Who are the various actors set out in the Declaration? They are listed in Article 8 of the UN Declaration: A key role in the promotion of a culture of peace belongs to parents, teachers, politicians, journalists, religious bodies and groups, intellectuals, those engaged in scientific, philosophical and creative and artistic activities, health and humanitarian workers, social workers, managers at various levels as well as to non-governmental organizations.

That tells us what is to be done ! It gives us a programme of action. We need to contact and involve all of these actors to make this years’ International Year for the Culture of Peace the launching date for the global movement.

Parents? We can already see the dawn of a global youth movement for action against climate change. They should engage their parents, pointing out that the Programme of Action calls for “Actions to promote sustainable economic and social development.”

Teachers? The teachers associations, internationally and nationally, including Education International and the Associated Schools of UNESCO, should inform and mobilize their members to take a leading role. In turn, the teachers can inform and inspire their students.

Politicians? Yes, there are still many progressive politicians in the world ! How can we reach them to put this project into their programs?

Journalists? The journalists of alternative media are well-placed to carry this message to thousands of readers. Although the mainstream media journals are mostly consumed by the culture of war, their journalists, in many cases, wish to see a better world. How can we reach them, and how can they manage to slip the message into the mass media.

Religious bodies and groups? State religions adopt the state’s culture of war, but otherwise religions work for peace. Pope Francis is not the only religious leader who is actively and explicitly calling for a culture of peace ! All religious bodies and groups should be encouraged to play a leading role !

Intellectuals, those engaged in scientific, philosophical and creative and artistic activities? When we needed to publicize the Seville Statement on Violence, we were able to involve the American Psychological Association, American Anthropological Association, American Sociological Association and other scientific and humanistic associations around the world. That can serve as a model to mobilize intellectuals. And as for the creative writers and artists, here is an opportunity for them to insert a new and vital theme into their creations !

Health and humanitarian workers, social workers? The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985 for their work to make the world healthy on a global scale. They give us a good example. They and many other organizations like them can play an important role.

Managers at various levels? There are millions of managers around the world who are concerned with the day-to-day management of their various organizations. But in addition to that they should think about the future, not only of their enterprise but also of the community, country and region in which they work. How can we reach and mobilize them? What role can they assume?

Non-governmental organizations? During the United Nations Culture of Peace Decade we documented the contributions of almost a thousand non-governmental organizations? They continue to mobilize annually for the International Day of Peace. They should be mobilized to play a key role in the launching of the movement. Already in France, Mouvement de la Paix sets the example by mobilizing and dedicating each International Day of Peace to a movement for the culture of peace.

In addition to the preceding actors listed in Article 8 of the Declaration, the following actors are listed in section A of the Programme of Action: Member States; Civil Society; United Nations system; UNESCO in particular.

Although most Member States are caught up in the culture of war, there are some that are committed to the culture of peace, especially in Africa and Latin America, and they can help launch the global movement. The African Union sponsors the biennale of Luanda for a culture of peace in Africa. In 2014 the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace  proclaimed Latin America and the Caribbean as a ‘Zone of Peace.’ Point 6 calls for “The promotion in the region of a culture of peace based, inter alia, on the principles of the United Nations Declaration on a Culture of Peace.”

Civil society is covered by the actors mentioned above in the Declaration.

The UN system has launched the process. Now its many agencies and departmets should take up the task. UNESCO is mentioned in particular in the Programme of Action saying that it “should continue to play its important role in and make major contributions to the promotion of a culture of peace.” How can this be stimulated?

There are other important actors that are not mentioned in the Declaration and Programme of Action, but can play an essential role in the development of the global movement:. These include women’s organizations, trade unions, and cities.

Unlike men who make up most of the military officers and soldiers around the world and who are the CEO’s of the military-industrial complex, women tend to be engaged in work for a healthy world, including the birthing and raising of the next generation. Their associations, that we see around the world on International Women’s Day, can play an essential role.

Trade unions represent millions of workers for their day-to-day protection. We see them on the streets on May 1. But also they mobilize for the future, as for example in the negotiation of the contracts for their employment. Should they not also mobilize for the future of the planet by joining the global movement on the International Day of Peace?

Unlike states, cities have no nuclear weapons, no armies, no military-industrial complex, no borders to defend or to regulate travel and commerce, no enemies, in short, no culture of war. Cities with peace commissions and cities in general can dedicate this year’s celebration to the launching of a global movement for the culture of peace. Almost 400 cities take part in the International Cities of Peace. And eight thousand cities are members of Mayors for Peace. What a tremendous contribution they would make if they would mark this year’s International Day of Peace by launching an alternative security council to issue regular press releases on what mayors would do if they ran the UN Security Council !

We have work to do ! Please add your suggestions by sending a comment to coordinator@cpnn-world.org

* * * * *

VOICI LA VISION ! UN MOUVEMENT MONDIAL POUR UNE CULTURE DE LA PAIX

Le mois dernier, nous avons dit : « Voici le peuple ». Et nous avons demandé : « Où est la vision ? »

Et maintenant, comme en réponse, les Nations Unies ont déclaré que le thème officiel de la Journée internationale de la paix de cette année est « Cultiver une culture de la paix », en référence au 25e anniversaire de la Déclaration et du Programme d’action des Nations Unies sur une culture de la paix.

La voici, la vision dont nous avons besoin ! Il s’agit d’une opportunité très importante de faire avancer l’agenda de l’histoire et de sauvegarder l’avenir de la civilisation humaine !

Les millions de personnes qui participent chaque année à la Journée internationale de la paix devraient être associées à l’action proposée dans le Programme d’action : « Les partenariats entre les différents acteurs visés par la Déclaration doivent être encouragés et renforcés pour un mouvement mondial en faveur d’une culture de la paix.”

Quels sont les différents acteurs identifiés dans la Déclaration ? Ils sont énumérés à l’article 8 de la Cultiver une culture de la paix », en référence au 25e anniversaire de la Déclaration : “les parents, les enseignants, les hommes politiques, les journalistes, les organismes et groupes religieux, les intellectuels, les personnes qui exercent une activité scientifique, philosophique, créatrice et artistique, les agents de services de santé ou d’organismes humanitaires, les assistants sociaux, les personnes qui ont des responsabilités à divers niveaux ainsi que les organisations non gouvernementales.”

Cela nous dit ce qu’il faut faire ! Cela nous donne un programme d’action. Nous devons contacter et impliquer tous ces acteurs pour faire de l’Année internationale de la culture de la paix de cette année la date de lancement du mouvement mondial.

Parents? Nous pouvons déjà voir l’aube d’un mouvement mondial de jeunesse pour agir contre le changement climatique. Ils devraient impliquer leurs parents, en soulignant que le Programme d’action appelle à « des actions visant à promouvoir un développement économique et social durable ».

Enseignants? Les associations d’enseignants, aux niveaux international et national, y compris l’Internationale de l’Education et les Ecoles associées de l’UNESCO, devraient informer et mobiliser leurs membres pour qu’ils jouent un rôle de premier plan. À leur tour, les enseignants peuvent informer et inspirer leurs élèves.

Les politiciens? Oui, il existe encore de nombreux hommes politiques progressistes dans le monde ! Comment pouvons-nous les atteindre pour inscrire ce projet dans leurs programmes ?

Des journalistes ? Les journalistes des médias alternatifs sont bien placés pour transmettre ce message à des milliers de lecteurs. Bien que les journaux des grands médias soient pour la plupart absorbés par la culture de la guerre, leurs journalistes souhaitent, dans de nombreux cas, voir un monde meilleur. Comment pouvons-nous les atteindre et comment peuvent-ils parvenir à faire passer le message dans les médias ?

Organismes et groupes religieux ? Les religions d’État adoptent la culture de guerre de l’État, mais par ailleurs, les religions œuvrent pour la paix. Le pape François n’est pas le seul chef religieux à appeler activement et explicitement à une culture de paix ! Les organismes et groupes religieux devraient être encouragés à jouer un rôle de premier plan !

Les intellectuels, ceux qui exercent des activités scientifiques, philosophiques, créatives et artistiques ? Lorsque nous avons eu besoin de faire connaître la Déclaration de Séville sur la violence, nous avons pu impliquer l’American Psychological Association, l’American Anthropological Association, l’American Sociological Association et d’autres associations scientifiques et humanistes du monde entier. Cela peut servir de modèle pour mobiliser les intellectuels. Et quant aux créateurs et artistes, voici l’occasion pour eux d’insérer un thème nouveau et vital dans leurs créations !

Travailleurs de la santé et humanitaires, travailleurs sociaux ? L’Association internationale des médecins pour la prévention de la guerre nucléaire ont reçu le prix Nobel de la paix en 1985 pour leur travail visant à rendre le monde plus sain à l’échelle mondiale. Ils nous donne l’example. Eux et de nombreuses autres organisations comme elles peuvent jouer un rôle important.

Des managers à différents niveaux ? Il existe des millions de managers dans le monde qui se préoccupent de la gestion quotidienne de leurs différentes organisations. Mais en plus de cela, ils doivent penser à l’avenir, non seulement de leur entreprise mais aussi de la communauté, du pays et de la région dans lesquels ils travaillent. Comment pouvons-nous les atteindre et les mobiliser ? Quel rôle peuvent-ils assumer ?

Organisations non-gouvernementales? Au cours de la Décennie de la culture de la paix des Nations Unis, nous avons documenté les contributions de près d’un millier d’organisations non gouvernementales ? Ils continuent de se mobiliser chaque année pour la Journée internationale de la paix. Ils doivent être mobilisés pour jouer un rôle clé dans le lancement du mouvement. Déjà en France, le Mouvement de la Paix donne l’exemple en mobilisant et en consacrant chaque Journée internationale de la paix à un mouvement pour la culture de la paix.

Outre les acteurs précédents énumérés à l’article 8 de la Déclaration, les acteurs suivants sont répertoriés dans la section A du Programme d’action : les États membres ; Société civile; Système des Nations Unies ; L’UNESCO en particulier.

Même si la plupart des États membres sont prisonniers de la culture de la guerre, certains sont attachés à la culture de la paix, notamment en Afrique et en Amérique latine, et peuvent contribuer à lancer le mouvement mondial. L’Union africaine parraine la biennale de Luanda pour une culture de paix en Afrique. En 2014, la Proclamation de l’Amérique latine et des Caraïbes comme zone de paix a proclamé l’Amérique latine et les Caraïbes comme une « zone de paix ». Le point 6 appelle à « la promotion dans la région d’une culture de paix fondée, entre autres, sur sur les principes de la Déclaration des Nations Unies sur une culture de paix.

La société civile est couverte par les acteurs mentionnés ci-dessus dans la Déclaration.

Le système des Nations Unies a lancé le processus. Ce sont désormais ses nombreuses agences et départements qui devraient se charger de cette tâche. L’UNESCO est mentionnée en particulier dans le Programme d’action, affirmant qu’elle “devrait continuer à jouer son rôle important et à apporter des contributions majeures à la promotion d’une culture de paix”. Comment peut-on stimuler cela ?

Il existe d’autres acteurs importants qui ne sont pas mentionnés dans la Déclaration et le Programme d’action, mais qui peuvent jouer un rôle essentiel dans le développement du mouvement mondial : Il s’agit notamment des organisations de femmes, des syndicats et des villes.

Contrairement aux hommes qui composent la plupart des officiers et des soldats dans le monde et qui sont les PDG du complexe militaro-industriel, les femmes ont tendance à travailler pour un monde sain, notamment en donnant naissance et en élevant la prochaine génération. Leurs associations, que l’on voit partout dans le monde à l’occasion de la Journée internationale de la femme, peuvent jouer un rôle essentiel.

Les syndicats représentent des millions de travailleurs pour leur protection quotidienne. Nous les voyons dans les rues le 1er mai. Mais aussi ils se mobilisent pour l’avenir, comme par exemple dans la négociation de leurs contrats de travail. Ne devraient-ils pas également se mobiliser pour l’avenir de la planète en rejoignant le mouvement mondial à l’occasion de la Journée internationale de la paix ?

Contrairement aux États, les villes n’ont pas d’armes nucléaires, pas d’armées, pas de complexe militaro-industriel, pas de frontières à défendre ou à réguler les déplacements et le commerce, pas d’ennemis, bref, pas de culture de guerre. Les villes dotées de commissions pour la paix et les villes en général peuvent consacrer la célébration de cette année au lancement d’un mouvement mondial pour la culture de la paix. Près de 400 villes participent aux International Cities of Peace. Et huit mille villes sont membres de Mayors for Peace. Quelle énorme contribution ils apporteraient s’ils marquaient la Journée internationale de la paix cette année en lançant un conseil de sécurité alternatif pour publier régulièrement des communiqués de presse sur ce que les maires feraient s’ils dirigeaient le Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU !

On a du travail à faire ! Veuillez ajouter vos suggestions en envoyant un commentaire à coordinator@cpnn-world.org

THE BRICS SUMMIT

Featured

Posted on by

(Une version française suit en dessous)

The global divide between North and South widened this month at the summit of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) that took place in Johannesburg:

The complete BRICS Declaration, a major historic document, is published in full by media in South Africa, Brazil, China, South Africa, Russia, Azerbaijan, Nigeria, India, Nicaragua, Peru, and Colombia. But in Europe and North America, only alternative media and no major media has published the full text, as of a search in Google as of August 28.

Worse than that, the reports about the Summit by the major media of the North distorted its message with regard to the war in the Ukraine, in a way that continues to justify the actions of NATO.

Here is the paragraph of the BRICS declaration in this regard:

“9. We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in and around Ukraine as expressed at the appropriate fora, including the UNSC and UNGA. We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy, including the African Leaders Peace Mission and the Chinese proposed path for peace.”

The BRICS approach to the war is correctly reported by media in India, Turkey and Brazil as follows:

The Print, India: BRICS countries to continue support efforts to end Russia-Ukraine conflict through dialogue: Ramaphosa

Anadolu Ajansi, Turkey: BRICS countries support mediation proposals to end Russia-Ukraine conflict

Government of Brazil: Speech by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva during the Brics Summit open plenary session including the following: “The war in Ukraine highlights Security Council limitations. BRICS must act as a force towards understanding and cooperation. Our willingness is expressed in the contributions of China, South Africa and my own country to the efforts to resolve the conflict in Ukraine.”

The opposite approach is taken by the major media of the North:

Putting the words “BRICS” and “Ukraine” into the Google search engine for the dates of the conference and two days after, August 22-26, we find the following articles in media of the North which concentrate on Putin’s remarks instead of the Summit declaration.

New York Times: In Speech to BRICS Nations, Putin Again Blames West for Ukraine War

BBC: Putin blames West for Ukraine war after drone attacks on Russia

Radio France International: Sommet des Brics à Johannesburg: Vladimir Poutine justifie sa guerre en Ukraine

The question of the war in the Ukraine was a only a minor issue at the BRICS summit. In addition to the paragraph quoted above, there are 94 paragraphs in the Declaration, covering most of the major political and economic issues of our times.

The Declaration places BRICS initiatives in the context of the United Nations, include a paragraph calling for its reform to to increase the representation of developing countries in the membership of the Security Council. There are also references to the SDGs (Strategic Development Goals) of the UN and to its specialized agencies, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.

There is no mention of UNESCO, despite reference to its domains of education, science, culture and communication. For example, there is a reference to proposals made during the 10th Meeting of BRICS Ministers of Education, the BRICS Network University, the BRICS Science Technology and Innovation Steering Committee and the BRICS Working Group on Culture. Curiously, there is no reference to the communication initiative, reported recently in a CPNN article, at the Shanghai meeting of media organizations including representatives from Press TV,TeleSUR, RT and CGTN, and members of progressive media organizations such as Pan African TV, ArgMedios, and Brasil de Fato, and over 100 researchers and media professionals from China, Ghana, Zambia, South Africa, Brazil, and Russia seeking to develop an alternative to American and European dominance of the media. 

Although the Declaration places BRICS within the existing context of the United Nations System, it also makes reference to many independent parallel initiatives such as the following:

BRICS Counter-Terrorism Working Group
BRICS Working Group on security in the use of ICTs
Action Plan 2021-2024 for Agricultural Cooperation of BRICS Countries
BRICS Digital Economy Working Group
BRICS Framework for Cooperation on Trade in Service
BRICS Alliance for Green Tourism
BRICS Intellectual Property Rights cooperation mechanism
BRICS Payment Task Force
BRICS Think Tank Network for Finance
BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement
BRICS Virtual Vaccine Research and Development Center
BRICS High-Level Forum on the Traditional Medicine
BRICS Working Group on Nuclear Medicine
BRICS Remote Sensing Satellite Constellation agreement
BRICS Energy Research Cooperation Platform
BRICS Youth Energy Summit
BRICS Youth Summit
BRICS Business Forum
BRICS Business Council
BRICS Women’s Business Alliance
BRICS Academic Forum
BRICS Think Tanks Council
BRICS Political Parties Dialogue
BRICS Sport Cooperation Framework
the BRICS Games
BRICS Urbanisation forum

As the BRICS expands and the American/European Empire begins to crumble, what will be the relation between the many BRICS initiatives and those of the United Nations? Will the United Nations be able to reform itself so that the Global South gains equality, or will the United Nations continue to be dominated by the US and Europe to the point that a new global organization will emerge to replace it?

This tension is most evident on the questions of war, peace and the global economy The United Nations, controlled by its Security Council, is unable to resolve the questions of war and peace, most recently, in the case of the War in the Ukraine. And the World Bank is unable to help the countries of the South. Can they be reformed or must they be replaced? Already the New Development Bank of BRICS begins to replace the World Bank.

The gulf between North and South is likely to increase even more next year when six more countries join the BRICS (Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran,Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates), and the BRICS Summit is scheduled to take place in Russia.

* * * * *

LE SOMMET DES BRICS
Le fossé mondial entre le Nord et le Sud s’est élargi ce mois-ci lors du sommet des pays BRICS (Brésil, Russie, Inde, Chine et Afrique du Sud) qui a eu lieu à Johannesburg :

La Déclaration complète des BRICS, un document historique majeur, est publiée dans son intégralité par les médias en Afrique du Sud, au Brésil, en Chine, en Afrique du Sud, en Russie, en Azerbaïdjan, au Nigeria, en Inde, au Nicaragua, au Pérou et au Colombie. Mais en Europe et en Amérique du Nord, seuls les médias alternatifs et aucun média majeur n’ont publié le texte intégral, selon une recherche effectuée sur Google le 28 août.

Pire encore, les reportages sur le Sommet par les principaux médias du Nord ont déformé son message sur la guerre en Ukraine, d’une manière qui continue de justifier les actions de l’OTAN.

Voici le paragraphe de la déclaration des BRICS à cet égard :

“9. Nous rappelons nos positions nationales concernant le conflit en Ukraine et aux alentours, telles qu’exprimées dans les contextes appropriés, notamment le Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies et l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies. Nous notons avec satisfaction les propositions pertinentes de médiation et de bons offices visant à une résolution pacifique du conflit par le dialogue et la diplomatie, y compris la Mission de paix des dirigeants africains et la voie de paix proposée par la Chine.”

L’approche des BRICS dans la guerre est correctement rapportée par les médias en Inde, en Turquie et au Brésil comme suit :

The Print, India: BRICS countries to continue support efforts to end Russia-Ukraine conflict through dialogue: Ramaphosa

Anadolu Ajansi, Turkey: BRICS countries support mediation proposals to end Russia-Ukraine conflict

Gouvernement du Brésil : Discours du Président Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva lors de la séance plénière ouverte du Sommet des Brics, comprenant le texte suivant : « La guerre en Ukraine met en évidence les limites du Conseil de sécurité. Les BRICS doivent agir comme une force vers la compréhension et la coopération. Notre volonté s’exprime dans le contributions de la Chine, de l’Afrique du Sud et de mon propre pays aux efforts visant à résoudre le conflit en Ukraine.

L’approche inverse est adoptée par les grands médias du Nord :

En insérant les mots « BRICS » et « Ukraine » dans le moteur de recherche Google pour les dates de la conférence et deux jours après, du 22 au 26 août, nous trouvons dans les médias du Nord les articles suivants qui se concentrent sur les remarques de Poutine au lieu du Sommet : déclaration.

New York Times: In Speech to BRICS Nations, Putin Again Blames West for Ukraine War

BBC: Putin blames West for Ukraine war after drone attacks on Russia

Radio France International: Sommet des Brics à Johannesburg: Vladimir Poutine justifie sa guerre en Ukraine

La question de la guerre en Ukraine n’a été qu’un sujet mineur lors du sommet des BRICS. Outre le paragraphe cité ci-dessus, la Déclaration compte 94 paragraphes qui couvrent la plupart des grandes questions politiques et économiques de notre époque.

La Déclaration place les initiatives des BRICS dans le contexte des Nations Unies et comprend un paragraphe appelant à sa réforme afin d’augmenter la représentation des pays en développement parmi les membres du Conseil de sécurité. On y trouve également des références aux ODD (Objectifs stratégiques de développement) de l’ONU et à ses agences spécialisées, le Fonds monétaire international et l’Organisation mondiale du commerce.

Il n’y a aucune mention de l’UNESCO, malgré la référence à ses domaines de l’éducation, de la science, de la culture et de la communication. Par exemple, il y a une référence aux propositions faites lors de la 10e réunion des ministres de l’Éducation des BRICS, de l’université du réseau BRICS, du comité directeur de la science, de la technologie et de l’innovation des BRICS et du groupe de travail des BRICS sur la culture. Curieusement, il n’y a aucune référence à l’initiative de communication, rapportée récemment dans un article du CPNN, lors de la réunion de Shanghai des organisations médiatiques, y compris des représentants de Press TV, TeleSUR, RT et CGTN, et des membres d’organisations médiatiques progressistes telles que Pan African TV,  ArgMedios, et Brasil de Fato, ainsi que plus de 100 chercheurs et professionnels des médias de Chine, du Ghana, de Zambie, d’Afrique du Sud, du Brésil et de Russie cherchant à développer une alternative à la domination américaine et européenne des médias.

Bien que la Déclaration place les BRICS dans le contexte existant du système des Nations Unies, elle fait également référence à de nombreuses initiatives parallèles et indépendantes telles que les suivantes :

– Groupe de travail antiterroriste des BRICS
– Groupe de travail des BRICS sur la sécurité dans l’utilisation des TIC
– Plan d’action 2021-2024 pour la coopération agricole des pays BRICS
– Groupe de travail sur l’économie numérique des BRICS
– Cadre de coopération des BRICS sur le commerce des services
– Alliance BRICS pour le tourisme vert
– Mécanisme de coopération des BRICS en matière de droits de propriété intellectuelle
– Groupe de travail sur les paiements des BRICS
– Réseau de groupes de réflexion des BRICS pour la finance
– Arrangement de réserve contingente des BRICS
– Centre virtuel de recherche et de développement de vaccins des BRICS
– Forum de haut niveau des BRICS sur la médecine traditionnelle
– Groupe de travail des BRICS sur la médecine nucléaire
– Accord sur la constellation de satellites de télédétection BRICS
– Plateforme de coopération en matière de recherche énergétique des BRICS
– Sommet des jeunes sur l’énergie des BRICS
– Sommet de la jeunesse des BRICS
– Forum des affaires des BRICS
– Conseil des affaires des BRICS
– Alliance des femmes d’affaires des BRICS
– Forum académique des BRICS
– Conseil des groupes de réflexion des BRICS
– Dialogue des partis politiques des BRICS
– Cadre de coopération sportive des BRICS
– Les jeux BRICS
– Forum sur l’urbanisation des BRICS

Alors que les BRICS s’étendent et que l’empire américano-européen commence à s’effondrer, quelle sera la relation entre les nombreuses initiatives des BRICS et celles des Nations Unies ? Les Nations Unies seront-elles capables de se réformer pour que les pays du Sud obtiennent l’égalité, ou les Nations Unies continueront-elles à être dominées par les États-Unis et l’Europe au point qu’une nouvelle organisation mondiale émergera pour la remplacer ?

Cette tension est plus évidente sur les questions de guerre, de paix et d’économie mondiale. Les Nations Unies, contrôlées par leur Conseil de sécurité, sont incapables de résoudre les questions de guerre et de paix, plus récemment dans le cas de la guerre en Ukraine. Et la Banque mondiale est incapable d’aider les pays du Sud. Peuvent-ils être réformés ou doivent-ils être remplacés ? La nouvelle banque de développement des BRICS commence déjà à remplacer la Banque mondiale.

Le fossé entre le Nord et le Sud risque de se creuser encore davantage l’année prochaine lorsque six pays supplémentaires rejoindront les BRICS (l’Argentine, l’Égypte, l’Éthiopie, l’Iran, l’Arabie saoudite et les Émirats arabes unis) et que le sommet des BRICS aura lieu en Russie. .

The International Day of Peace

Featured

Posted on by

The International Day of Peace (IDP), as officially proclaimed by the United Nations, is certainly the most universal action for peace in our times, and there is no doubt that it contributes greatly to the consciousness throughout the world that we need to turn from the culture of war to a culture of peace.

With this in mind it would be good to be able to measure the IDP actions each year, to know if they are increasing or not, and to know if this is occuring throughout the world, or more in some regions than in others.

During the first decade of this century, extensive international surveys were conducted by the Culture of Peace Initiative (see suveys from 2005 and 2009 as documented in Wikipedia), but they were discontinued, and there was nothing to replace them until 2017 when I conducted the first IDP survey from CPNN, searching for articles by Google and using other, less complete surveys.

This is now the third time that I have done the survey – not an easy task requiring something like 100 hours of labor – and I continue to find hundreds of events throughout the world, with the largest number from USA/Canada and Western Europe.

There is no doubt that, despite my best efforts, we continue to under-estimate the number and scope of actions involved. Many actions are not put on the internet. In addition to the languages recognzed by the United Nations (English, French, Russian, Arabic, Chinese and Spanish), I have searched via Google in Ukrainian, German and Portuguese, but no doubt there are actions described in articles in other languages as well.

There are other surveys of IDP events, but it is difficult to assess their data in some cases.

Pathways to Peace, the successor to the Culture of Peace Initiative, provides a map where people can enter their actions for the IDP. This year’s map has 642 entries, but perhaps half of them are from 2018, and perhaps half of the entries from 2019 are marked as meditation (not action in the sense defined by CPNN). The others from 2019 that are marked as music, march or multiple actions have been included in the CPNN survey.

The Campaign for Nonviolence lists CNV 3314 total actions, mostly in the United States, but this includes multiple actions by the 205 sites listed on their map. I have included all the 205 sites in the CPNN data.

One Day One Choir says that for the International Day of Peace “since we started in 2014, more than a million people around the world have connected with us to sing for peace and unity,” There are almost a thousand entries on their map of the world, but I could not use the data because it seems to be an accumulaton of all the events since 2014, with no indication in what year or years the action occurred.

The website of Montessori schools says that “In 2017, “Sing Peace” involved over 150,000 children from some 65 different countries.” The site provides a listing of 1141 schools “signed up to sing” and these are shown on a map of the world,, but as in the case of OneDayOneChoir, it is not clear if this is an accumulation of data over many years or if it refers to actions in 2019.

In addition, I should mention the website of Peace One Day which states that “throughout the years, millions of people have been active on Peace Day in every country of the world. . . In 2016, after several years work with global management consulting firm McKinsey & Company, it was estimated that 2.2 billion people had been exposed to the Peace Day message, that 940 million were aware of the day and that 16 million behaved more peacefully as a result.” But since the website provides no listing or source for particular events, I don’t see how its claims. can be verified.

Failing to realize that the data from One Day One Choir and Montessori Sing Peace were not necessarily up-to-date, I included their data in the totals last year (2018). For that reason it makes no sense to compare this year’s CPNN total of 655 to last year’s total of 835. Although it is not possible to be precise, it seems likely that the number of IDP actions listed on CPNN might be as much as doubled if it were possible to obtain up-to-date information from One Day One Choir and the Montessori Schools.

Despite the incompleteness of the quantitative data, there is plenty of qualitative information to be found in the CPNN survey, as described in this month’s CPNN bulletin, and I think this justifies the labor involved. For example, it turns out that data cited from Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, France, Ukraine, and Yemen are not reflected in the other surveys mentioned above.

The UN Resolution for the Culture of Peace

Featured

Posted on by
1

(Une version française suit en dessous)

This summer and fall is seeing an increase in the number of international conferences dedicated to the culture of peace and basing their analysis on the Declaration and Program of Action for a Culture of Peace that was adopted 20 years ago by the UN General Assembly.

The UN resolution provides a holistic, positive view of peace. For each of the eight aspects of the culture of war, it proposes the alternative as described here. The resolution proposes specific actions to promote each of these eight program areas. And furthermore, it calls for a global movement for a culture of peace through partnerships between an among international, national and civil society organizations promoted through sysems of information exchange (such as the Culture of Peace News Network) on their initiatives.

The struggle for a culture of peace could gain much more force if this resolution were used as the basis for analysis and practice by more organizations around the world, but unfortunately it is relatively unknown.

The situation reminds me of the use of another landmark UN document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR).

The adoption of the UNDHR by the UN General Assembly in 1948 did not immediately yield results. For the first 40 years the document sat on the shelf and was rarely mentioned, as shown in the following graph which shows the citations of human rights in academic publications as monitored by the Science Citation Index. It has only in recent years that references have exploded into thousands of times per year.

Figure drawn from my book World Peace throught the Town Hall.

Now over 70 years after its adoption, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been taken up by thousands of other organizations and struggles in all social movements as a powerful tool for justice.

We may assume that the increased attention to human rights after the 1970s was largely due to the Nobel Peace Prize of 1977 to Amnesty International because of their efforts for human rights.

Hopefully, we will not have to wait another 20 years for such effective use of the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace. The work for culture of peace has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in recent years, and if it were to be recognized by the Prize, that could help produce the kind of universal recognition and historical impact as that of the UNDHR.

* * * * *

La résolution des Nations Unies pour la culture de la paix

Pour cet été et cet automne, le nombre de conférences internationales consacrées à la culture de la paix a augmenté. Leur analyse est souvent basée sur de la Déclaration et Programme d’action pour une culture de la paix adoptés il y a 20 ans par l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies.

La résolution de l’ONU offre une vision globale et positive de la paix. Pour chacun des huit aspects de la culture de la guerre, il propose une alternative (voir ici). La résolution propose des actions spécifiques pour promouvoir chacun de ces huit domaines de programme. En outre, il appelle à un mouvement mondial pour une culture de la paix par des partenariats entre des organisations internationales, nationales et de la société civile, promues par des systèmes d’échanges et d’informations (comme CPNN) sur leurs initiatives.

La lutte pour une culture de la paix pourrait gagner beaucoup plus de force si cette résolution était utilisée comme base d’analyse et de pratique par plus d’organisations dans le monde, mais malheureusement, elle est mal connue.

La situation me rappelle l’utilisation d’un autre document historique des Nations Unies, la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’Homme (DUDH).

L’adoption de la DUDH par l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies en 1948 n’a pas immédiatement donné de résultats. Pendant les 40 premières années, le document était sur l’étagère et rarement mentionné, comme l’illustre le graphique ci-dessous, qui montre les citations des droits de l’Homme dans des publications universitaires suivies par le Science Citation Index. Ce n’est que ces dernières années que les références ont explosé des milliers de fois par an.

[Figure tirée de mon livre “Paix mondiale à travers les municipalites”.]

Aujourd’hui, plus de 70 ans après son adoption, la Declaration universelle des droits de l’Homme a été reprise par des milliers d’organisations et de luttes dans tous les mouvements sociaux, en tant que puissant outil de justice.

Nous pouvons supposer que l’attention accrue portée aux droits de l’Homme après les années 1970 était largement due au prix Nobel de la paix de 1977 attribué à Amnesty International en raison de ses efforts en faveur des droits de l’Homme.

Espérons que nous n’aurons pas besoin d’attendre encore 20 ans pour une utilisation aussi efficace de la Déclaration et du Programme d’action pour une culture de la paix. L’œuvre pour la culture de la paix a été nominée pour le prix Nobel de la paix ces dernières années. Si elle devait être reconnue par le prix, elle pourrait contribuer à produire le type de reconnaissance universelle et d’impact historique de la DUDH.


 

Consciousness + Institutional Change = Culture of Peace

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

People are taking to the streets to defend human rights and demand democracy around the world, including Hong Kong, Russia, Sudan, Algeria, Czech Republic and Brazil as described on the pages of CPNN and reviewed in this month’s CPNN bulletin.

They join the millions of people who have taken to the streets for human rights and democracy in the last few years in France , Germany and the United States.

And perhaps most important, it is the new generation that has often taken the lead, as we have seen in the global student movement to demand that we change the policies that are contributing to global warming. This is the new generation that is on the front lines every year to celebrate the international day of peace.

We see the development of a global, universal consciousness. But is it strong enough to counter the rise of authoritarian governance that is also developing at this moment of history, whether in the rich counties or in the poor countries?

In my little utopian novella I have imagined that people will take to the streets to resist the imposition of fascism after the present system crashes. It was fascism that was installed when the financial system collapsed in the 1930’s?

I come from the generation of the 60’s which also saw people taking to the streets to oppose the American war in Vietnam. In fact, in the 1990’s when we looked around the table of UNESCO workers developing the Culture of Peace Program, it turned out most of us had been involved in the movements of the 60’s in one way or another in France, Ecuador, Costa Rica and the United States. The consciousness developed in the 60’s came to fruition in the 90’s.

But consciousness is not enough. We need institutional change towards a culture of peace such as the initiative developed thanks to the leadership of Federico Mayor at UNESCO in the 1990’s. The United Nations resolution for a culture of peace which he inspired will have its 20th anniversary this September and will be celebrated at the annual High Level Meeting on the Culture of Peace at UN headquarters.

To see and understand these institutional changes, we cannot depend on the commercial media to which they are almost invisible. This was the case with the UNESCO culture of peace initiative, which was never mentioned in the American press at the time despite our signed agreements with two American institutions with 50 million members, the American Association of Retired Persons and the National Council of Churches, and the 75 million signatures on the Manifesto 2000 obtained around the world.

At CPNN we provide an alternative media that seeks out news about institutional change towards a culture of peace. A good example is the adoption of restorative justice princiiples and practices by the entire judicial system of Brazil, as described this month in CPNN. Over the years we have followed this initiative that was largely due to the work of Judge Leoberto Brancher. I don’t think it is by accident that prior to this he was involved in the development of city culture of peace commissions that came out of the UNESCO program and the UN Decade for a Culture of Peace.

We need more such institutional change if we are to harness the consciousness of people in the coming decade when the global financial system has crashed and a window of opportunity opens for us to move from the culture of war to a culture of peace.

Roadmap for peace activism

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

In this month’s bulletin of CPNN we try to identify those to whom we can look for peace leadership in these turbulent times. Let us consider their actions and advice.

Let’s listen first to the new generation of youth activists.

The Panafrican Panafrican Youth Network for the Culture of Peace has provided a roadmap for actions in Gabon, which can serve as a model everywhere. It includes promotion of a culture of peace, support for the UN SR resolution 2250 on youth, peace and security, and development of social enterprises for youth employment.

The Resolution 2250 is especially important because provides a link between the developing global youth movement which has taken the lead in the fight to save the climate to global warming (see blog this April ) and the United Nations which, despite its weakness at the present moment of history, is still our best hope for a future institutional base for the culture of peace (see blog on the paradox of the United Nations). Resolution 2250 was adopted as the result of several years of intensive lobbying by youth organizations for the UN to recognize and guarantee the role of youth in peacebuilding and violence prevention.

At the same time, let us also listen to “the Elders.” Mary Robinson, now President of the Elders, formerly President of Ireland and UN Commissioner for Human Rights, recalls the founding of their organization by Nelson Mandela in 2007. “At first I was quite skeptical. Isn’t it a bit arrogant to want to be elders for the global village. But as soon as he [Nelson Mandela] sat with us and talked, it was as if we had a mandate that was overwhelmingly important.”

The Elders continue to be involved as peacemakers around the world and to give us good advice. Most recently in Ethiopia, they have lauded efforts to establish universal health care. As stated by Mandela’s widow, Graça Machel, “Health is a human right, and health workers are human rights champions.” Among other priorities identified by the Elders are the development of Green economies, the continuation of the Colombia peace process, multilateralism as now championed by China (while it seems increasingly abandoned in the West), and a solution to the terrible suffering in the Middle East by means of a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine.

And let us listen to those who have won the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel Women’s Initiative recently brought 50 women from over 20 countries together in Monrovia, Liberia to discuss feminism, power, activism and peace. According to one of the participants, “the overarching theme was that we (women) are powerful and worthy; that we must claim our space, we must use our voice and we must not ask for permission to do so.”

One of the themes at Monrovia was the need for “self and collective care, wellbeing and healing as critical components in our struggles for rights, justice and peace. We heard from Jody Williams and Rigoberta Menchú Tum on how they look after themselves and how they continue to do the work that they do. Jody mentioned how easy it is to feel overwhelmed by urgency and righteous indignation, however with time she has learned the value of granting herself personal time and space. By exposing their own humanity and vulnerability, these powerhouse women let the young people in the room know that it’s ok to not feel strong sometimes.”

Another major theme at Monrovia was the need for alliance building, tapping into different networks on a local and global scale. There was a commitment to feminist leadership, to multi-generational organising and to building communities of care.

Alliance-building was also an important theme in the work of the Panafrican Youth Network for Peace Culture; they are urged to collaborate with other youth organizations for greater synergy and social impact.

A concrete example of alliance-building comes from the plans for the 17th World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates. In addition to at least 21 Nobel Laureates, the meeting expects to include representatives of the following Institutions: American Friends Service Committee, Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet, International Peace Bureau, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, Albert Schweizer Institute, International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Amnesty International, Institute of International Law and the Kim Dae-Jung Presidential Library and Museum.

The preceding themes, activism, affiliation, personal integration and world historic consciousness, correspond to steps of consciousness development identified in the survey of great peace activists described in my 1986 book, Psychology for Peace Activists. They provide a universal roadmap for the development of peace activism.

Let us continue to listen to the youth, to the women, to the Elders, to the Nobel Peace Laureates, and let us strengthen our commitment to activism, affiliation, personal integration and world historic consciousness as we work for the transition to a culture of peace !

Towards a global movement against all violence

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

The growing mobilizations by teenagers in the US and Palestine, cited in this month’s CPNN bulletin, remind me of the mobilizations by youth against the War in Vietnam in the 1960’s and by youth against Apartheid in the 1970’s.

If we learn from those mobilizations, now 50 years ago, there is a possibility that they can be expanded into a global movement against all violence.

Both began as localized movements and rapidly spread around the world, especially through the engagement of young people.

I had been active in the anti-Vietnam movement in the mid-60’s in the US and spent a year in Italy in 1968. The students in Italy joined the movement with enthusiasm and enlarged the agenda to include a general demand for education reform. 25 years later, working with the UNESCO team for a National Culture of Peace Program in El Salvador, we discovered that each of us had been radicalized in the movement of the 60’s and active in more than one country (USA/Italy, Nicaragua/France, Ecuador/France, etc.).

The student-led movement against Apartheid in South Africa was picked up by students around the world, including those at my university in the United States which became the first American university to divest its portfolio from companies doing business with the Apartheid regime. I was proud to be their advisor.

At that time there were still active movements of Communist Parties around the world that provided strategic and tactical support to the youth movements, helping them to achieve global networks and inspiration.

The Communists also helped broaden the agendas of action against all sorts of violence. Our actions in the USA against the Vietnam War were linked by the Left to the actions of the Civil Rights movement against the violence of racism. For example, with the help of the Left, a civil rights activist from the South who had been threatened with death in the South came north to help with our political campaign in Connecticut which gained the greatest number of votes of any anti-war candidate in 1966. And in April 1967 Martin Luther King united the civil rights movement with the anti-war movement in two dramatic speeches, one of which he delivered to an anti-war march to the United Nations. Accused of being pro-communist by FBI director J.Edgar Hoover, he was assassinated one year later.

In the 1960’s, It was Communist veterans from the 1930’s who taught us to recognize the agents provocateurs of COINTELPRO, the government agents who tried to infiltrate our ranks with guns and dynamite in order to give the government an excuse to crush our movement with violence.

The movement against the violence of Apartheid produced political leadership of people like Bishop Tutu and Nelson Mandela whose inspiration reached far beyond South Africa, inspiring us all towards a global movement against all kinds of violence and oppression.

Those of us who are veterans of the 60’s and 70’s need to assume the role played by veterans of the 30’s in those years and provide strategic and tactical support to the new generation. We need to help them broaden their agenda to protest all forms of violence and broaden their scope to become a truly global movement.

The time is short. Johan Galtung has repeated his prediction, first made in 2004, that the American Empire cannot be sustained beyond the year 2020. The window of opportunity is soon arriving when the culture of war and violence can be transformed into a culture of peace and nonviolence. The strength is in the hands of the new generation, but the support and advice of the older generation is still needed.

Success of the United Nations

Featured

Posted on by

We know all too well the failures of the United Nations. At this moment of history, its failures include the wars and potential wars everywhere in the world, including the potential of a catastrophic nuclear war. As we have stated previously, as long as the United Nations is run by the Member States, it will not be able to control their culture of war.

But let us not ignore the successes of the United Nations.

First, it has succeeded in developing around the world a universal consciousness for peace.

This is shown in the celebration of the International Day of Peace, which, as we have documented in this month’s CPNN bulletin, has been taken up by millions of people in all parts of the world. And, as we have mentioned in the bulletin, this follows in a tradition that includes the 75 million signatures on the Manifesto 2000 for the International Year of the Culture of Peace and the mobilization for peade by thousands of organizations of the civil society during the International Decade for a Culture of Peace 2001-2010.

The universal consciousness for peace follows on the heels of the universal consciousness for human rights.

In both cases, a key moment was the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of a key Declaration. For human rights it was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, and for peace it was the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace of 1999. The simple fact that all the countries of the world could adopt a resolution has enabled the UN to play a key role in the development of universal consciousness.

In sum, one great success of the United Nations has been its standard-setting function.

Second, the United Nations has succeeded in managing international matters on a global scale when they are not part of the culture of war.

Here are some examples:

In 1967 there were 130,000 cases of smallpox in the world. By 1984, there were no cases and the virus was declared extinct. This was due to the global vaccination program of the World Health Organization, one of the United Nations agencies.

At any given moment there is a bewildering number of airplanes taking off and landing in airports around the world without accident. This is due to the work of the International Civil Aviation Organization, another United Nations agency.

You can mail a letter to any destination in the world by puttiing it in a mailbox in any country. This is due to the work of the Universal Postal Union, yet another United Nations Agency.

In all these cases, success comes because the problems are not political. They are simply technical.

That leaves us with the big question: could the United Nations succeed in bring us a global culture of peace? Not just peace consciousness, but could it achieve a true and universal disarmament, just as dueling, slavery and other such practices were previously eliminated? The problem here is not technical. It is political.

My experiences when I worked at UNESCO tell me that a culture of peace is technically possible. As I have described previously, we were able, as an agency of the United Nations, to involve the people of Mozambique and El Salvador to design national peace programs during the 1990’s following their civil wars, and I believe that they would have achieved peace and disarmament in those countries if the Member States had supported our work. But they did not support our work – for political reasons. I am reminded of that history when I see the progress towards disarmament that is being achieved these days in Colombia, and I hope that they can sustain the peace despite the arrival of political changes.

Yes, a culture of peace is possible. What is needed is a radical reform of the United Nations, putting it in the hands of the people instead of the states.

The Universality of the Movement for a Culture of Peace

Featured

Posted on by

This month’s CPNN bulletin shows that initiatives for a culture of peace are taking place in most regions of the world.  As discussed in previous blogs, Latin America and Africa are in the leadership, although this may be difficult for the North to accept . The Arab States took two steps forward with the “Arab Spring”, although the turnaround in Egypt moved them one step back.  The only region which seems to lag is East Asia.

The apparent lag of East Asia may be an illusion caused by our different terminologies.  I recall a personal luncheon with the Ambassador from China to UNESCO at the time when I was director of the International Year for the Culture of Peace.  After listening intently to my description of our initiatives for the culture of peace, he said suddenly, “Oh, now I understand.  You are talking about social harmony.”  The terminology of China was molded in the philosophy of Confucius which is quite different from Western philosophy.

The universality of the culture of peace was ensured by the adoption in 1999 of the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace by the UN General Assembly which is the closest we come to a universal forum of humanity.   Just as the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights provided universal recognition for human rights, so, too, the 1999 Declaration and Programme of Action has provided, with its 8 action areas, a universal basis for the culture of peace.

This was summed up by Ambassador Anwarul Chowdhury who shepherded the Declaration and Programme of Action through the difficult process of adoption.  Presenting the document to the General Assembly, the Ambassador said that it brought in subjects that the Assembly had rarely touched in its 50 year history: “I believe that this document is unique in more than one way. It is a universal document in the real sense, transcending boundaries, cultures, societies and nations. Unlike many other General Assembly documents, this document is action-oriented and encourages actions at all levels . . . All people from all walks of life and all sorts of backgrounds can contribute to its implementation.”

As Ambassador Chowdhury correctly stated, one aspect of its universality is its relevance to the everyday actions of people throughout the world.

Another aspect of the universality of the UN declaration was ensured by the manner in which we prepared it.  We began by analyzing and forming the alternative to its antithesis which is another universal culture, the culture of war, which has dominated the world at least since Neolithic times.  It has become, over time, the culture of the state.  As I have often remarked, if you placed Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, Napoleon and General MacArthur in a room with interpreters, they would find themselves in complete accord.

Given the universality of the culture of war, the only way we can arrive at a culture of peace is through a universal transformation of one to the other.  In a previous blog, with the title “Can a Culture of Peace be created in only one zone of the world?”, I answered that it has not been possible, because previous attempts limited in scope have been crushed by the culture of war.

Only when the states of the culture of war crash universally will there be a chance to install a culture of peace.  This occurs periodically, including four times in the previous century:  World Wars I and II, the Great Depression, and (in half of the world) the crash of the Soviet Empire.  And it will no doubt occur fairly soon again in this 21st Century.

But when the next crash comes, will we be ready to establish a culture of peace universally?  That is the key question.  If we only establish the culture of peace in one or two regions, it is likely that the culture of war will be re-established and once again return to crush our attempts at a culture of peace.

L’universalité du Mouvement pour une culture de paix

Featured

Posted on by

Le bulletin de CPNN fait apparaître ce mois-ci que les initiatives pour une culture de paix viennent de la plupart des régions du monde. Comme nous avons vu dans les blogs précédents, ce sont l’Amérique latine et l’Afrique qui en sont leaders, même si le Nord ait du mal à le reconnaître.   Avec le « printemps arabe» , les États arabes ont fait deux pas en avant, bien que, en Egypte, l’évolution de la situation leur a fait faire un pas en arrière.  Seule, l’Asie orientale semble en dehors du circuit.

Le décalage apparent de l’Asie orientale peut être une illusion causée par nos différences de terminologie. Je me souviens d’un déjeuner personnel avec l’ambassadeur de Chine à l’UNESCO quand j’étais directeur de l’Année internationale de la culture de la paix. Après avoir écouté attentivement la description de nos initiatives dans ce domaine, soudainement il a dit, “Oh, maintenant je comprends. Vous voulez parlez d’harmonie sociale.”  Le vocabulaire chinois a été modelé par la philosophie de Confucius, ce qui diffère tout à fait de notre approche occidentale.

L’universalité de la culture de paix a été assurée en 1999, lors de l’adoption par l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies de la Déclaration et Programme d’action sur une culture de la paix. L’ Assemblée générale est la forme la plus proche pour parvenir à un forum universel de l’humanité. Tout comme la Déclaration Universelle des Droits de l’Homme de 1948 a permis la reconnaissance universelle des droits humains, la Déclaration et Programme d’action de 1999 a fourni, avec ses huit domaines d’action, une base universelle pour la culture de paix.

Ceci a été résumé par l’Ambassadeur Anwarul Chowdhury qui a piloté la Déclaration et Programme d’action à travers le difficile processus d’adoption. Dans sa présentation du document à l’Assemblée générale, l’ambassadeur a dit qu’il avait rapporté à l’Assemblée, des sujets rarement soulevés en 50 ans d’histoire. “Je crois que ce document est unique à plus d’un titre.  C’est un document universel dans le sens réel qu’il transcende les frontières, les cultures, les sociétés et les nations. Contrairement à de nombreux autres documents de l’Assemblée générale, ce document est orienté vers l’action et encourage les actions à tous les niveaux … Tous les gens de tous horizons et de toutes sortes de milieux peuvent contribuer à sa mise en œuvre ».

L’ambassadeur avait raison: l’un des aspects de l’universalité, c’est la pertinence des actes quotidiens des gens partout dans le monde.

Un autre aspect de l’universalité de la culture de paix a été assurée par la manière dont nous avons préparé la Déclaration. Nous avons commencé par l’analyse d’une autre culture universelle, celle dans laquelle baigne notre humanité depuis au moins le Néolithique : la culture de guerre.  Elle est devenue au fils du temps, la culture de l’Etat.  Ensuite, nous y avons projeté et construit une alternative: la culture de paix.  Comme j’en ai souvent fait la remarque, si vous pouviez placer Alexandre le Grand, Gengis Khan, Jules César, Napoléon et le général MacArthur dans une chambre avec des interprètes, ils se trouveraient tous en complet accord !

Compte tenu de l’universalité de la culture de guerre, la seule façon par laquelle nous pouvons parvenir à la culture de paix passe à travers une transformation universelle de l’une à l’autre.  Dans un blog précédent, avec le titre “Est-ce qu’une culture de paix peut être créé dans une seule zone du monde?”,  j’avais répondu que jusqu’à aujourd’hui cela n’avait pas été possible, car chaque tentative localisée a été écrasée par la culture de guerre.

C’est seulement quand les Etats guerriers échoueront universellement qu’il y aura la possibilité d’installer une culture de paix. Des tels échecs arrivent périodiquement: par example, dans le siècle dernier, cela s’est produit quatre fois: -Les deux guerres mondiales, la grand dépression, et la chute dans la moitié du monde de l’Empire Soviétique.  Et cela va sans doute se reproduire bientôt.

Mais quand le prochain crash arrivera, serons nous prêt pour établir une culture de paix de manière universelle?  Si nous établissons une culture de paix dans seulement une ou deux régions, ce sera insuffisant, parce qu’il est probable que la culture de guerre reviendra et l’écrasera.

Sowing the culture of peace: The International Day of Peace

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

When I went to work in Mozambique on behalf of UNESCO to help develop a national culture of peace program in the early 90’s, my African friends criticized the European notion of building a culture of peace.  “No, they told me, you don’t build a culture of peace.  You cultivate it.”

The culture of war, on the other hand, is built.  Empires and their states are built on fear through domination, exploitation, control of information, and the development and use (or threat) of armed force.  Economic enterprises are constructed within this shield.  Entire economic systems are built, eventually to be ruled by speculation.  As a result the culture of war is not sustainable.  Fear is eventually overcome by courage, and the truth eventually will out.  Arms production exhausts the economy.  And speculation, like a house of cards, eventually crashes.  From time to time, these spectacular, unsustainable institutions collapse and leave space for the sustainable processes of culture.

And so human history, human culture, slowly, by fits and starts, makes its way forward.  Culture is not a state of being, but a process.  It is not static, but dynamic.  It is not built but cultivated.  As stated in the UN Declaration on a Culture of Peace (UN Resolution A-53-243), it consists of “values, attitudes, traditions and modes of behavior and ways of life.”  It is a social, not an individual process.  It is not “inner peace.”  Instead, it is political in the sense that Aristotle meant when he began his greatest work with “Man is a political animal”, linking the word “political” to “polis,” the city.

The process is not steady.  We may plant seeds and fail to see the results afterwards.  We may harvest fruit and have to wait for the winter before planting again.  But slowly, over time, the culture grows – that is our theme and our hope for the future.

There is a terrible urgency to what we are doing.  We know from history that when empires crash, there is great suffering, and there is an immediate cry to rebuild the structures of the culture of war that are stronger than ever – what is known as fascism.  If we are not prepared at that moment to make the transition from a culture of war to a culture of peace, we will risk a transition to fascism.

To help us attain universality for the culture of peace we need to continue involving the United Nations in this process.  Even though it is now controlled by states with their cultures of war, the time will come when we can reclaim the United Nations, as the Charter says, in the name of “We the peoples….”