Can NATO win the war in Afghanistan?

Well, I say "NO!"

On 19 July 2009, I participated as an audience member for a political media debate for Press TV on NATO war in Afghanistan. It was a stimulating debate between panelists Mohammad Asif (President of the Scottish Afghani Society), Chris Nineham (Stop the War Coalition), Charlie Wolf (American journalist/broadcaster), Colonel Mike Dewer (military analyst). This debate was chaired by MP Derek Conway who held back the two division of speakers very well.

Scroll to 31.25 for my question to the panelist regaring civilian safety particularly women and children who become targetted in protected UN institutionalised safe holds. My question was not answered very well, and was only attempted by the Colonel labelling that "the reality of war is that people will die...". Collateral damage is an unjustifiable excuse.

The full debate can be viewed on:
http://www.presstv.ir/programs/detail.aspx?sectionid=3510511

Beyond Obama

Priorities towards Nuclear Abolition

In a joint effort before its formal amalgamation, Action for UN Renewal, and World Disarmament Campaign hosted this event based on nuclear disarmament at the House of Parliament, chaired by Lord Peter Archer. With the close arrival of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NTP) summit, talks to assign security measures against NPT non-signatories India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea is fundamental if Obama is to lead his commitments for nuclear abolition.

The event was split into two sessions. The first hosted esteemed speakers:
Lord Peter Archer of Sandwell
Lord Hannay of Chiswick (former President of United Nations Association UK)
Humphrey Hawksley (BBC Foreign Affairs Correspondent)
Rebecca Johnson (Co-founder of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy).

While this report only covers the first session, note that the second session consisted of speakers:
Colin Archer (Secretary General of International Peace Bureau)
Vijay Mehta (Author and Chair of Action for UN Renewal)
Jeremy Corbyn (MP)
Brian Cooper (Co-ordinator of World Disarmament Campaign).

Lord Archer’s opening statement commented on the frightful increase of nuclear states, despite the NPT and bilateral agreements. While global leaders prepare for next year’s NPT Review, it is fundamentally important that civil society plays a role in bringing about fruitful negotiations.

Owning nuclear for many countries has become a political leverage, an idea which is replicated in Israel, Iran, Pakistan and India. Shockingly, at least 50% of Cold War nuclear materials such as uranium are insecurely stored across the world and readily available. Kazakhstan is highly enriched with uranium, and will not be long until another country occupies this material.

For the 8-9 nuclear states that already exist, at least 4 countries remain unsigned, establishing the NPT’s unequal status relationship. North Korea and Iran have openly defied international laws by conducting nuclear tests. Coerced effort to sign is not the way forward towards nuclear disarmament. The five recognised nuclear states under "Negative Nuclear Assurance" have already committed themselves towards steps for nuclear abolishment, however this is yet to be concrete steps since 1999. Outcomes of the 2005 NPT conference were non-adopted, and a complete time-waster. Therefore what measures are needed to ensure that the next review is not a complete fiasco?
Lord Hannay suggested the best option is to put pressure for negotiations with the willingness for the US to openly talk about disarming. New elements need to be introduced and civil nuclear energy must be avoided.

Rebecca Johnson interestingly pointed out that the role of nuclear tactics in military doctrines and policies must reduce if disarmament is to ever become a reality. Nuclear weapons is seen as an unconditional nuclear assurance however its impact if used is catastrophic. A review of any previous policies must not be criticised, instead use such example to discuss tactical arrangements to decrease proliferation; separating the ‘what happened’ to ‘what will happen.’

In regard to civil society action, BBC correspondent Humphrey Hawksley illustrated his personal experience of North Korea. While owning nuclear weapons has leveraged North Korea in the political arena, priorities of civil society is very different. If the economy within the country grew, there will be less important on nuclear weapons. Young people within the country would much rather focus on education and development than owning dangerous weapons for their state. However, while there is optimism that younger generation may drive the need for nuclear weapons out, monitoring of nuclear growth and economic reform must take the place of further nuclear development and testing, and this action can start at home.

The general advice was to praise your government for the effort they are putting towards nuclear abolition, highlighting any recent accomplishments. However, urge the government to ensure negotiations at the NPT Review is focused on progressive and concrete steps towards disarmament and finding a safe alternative to domestic nuclear energy. Forge links between climate change and nuclear energy, and write letters to select committees and your MP in prioritising towards nuclear abolition.

Aim for Global Zero!

Cop 15 - Observer Status

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom may be given an 'observer status' within the Climate Change COP 15 meeting in 7-15 December. This is a very exciting opportunity to watch world leaders in formulating a new agenda from the Kyoto Protocol.

Having participated at the Youth Forum with Global Humanitarian Forum, starting a working group based on the Copenhagen Manifesto we had created would be a great start ti communicating our message to world leaders. Join WILPF and help get our message for climate change at COP 15, so that you do not miss this chance to join leaders.

The Copenhagen Manifesto was created by young adults from across the world, which states our expectations of the COP 15 in Copenhagen and our demands to the representatives of their home countries:

We the young adults demand, that:

1. The leaders of nations as well as corporations should no longer justify the emissions caused by their acts, but rather should create policies that are to the benefit of all

2. Developed countries have to support developing countries to adapt to the impacts of climate change as well as create a renewable energy development fund

3. The Copenhagen conference has to result in an agreement that addresses the needs of all

4. Climate refugees must be given the same legal status as any other refugees

5. It is a human right not to suffer from climate change related disasters

6. There is more pressure on countries to meet their Kyoto commitments and that the Copenhagen agreement should drive fundamental systemic change

7. Negotiations are viewed through collaborative online media, to create complete transparency and openness

8. Climate awareness must be a part of every school curriculum

9. We move beyond self-interested concepts of nationalism to an integrated vision of one system: earth

Death of News

Death of News: Is Media Freedom being strangled in the Commonwealth
29 June 2009

This meeting held at Portcullis House in Westminster was hosted by the Commonwealth Journalists Association. While the media brings news to the public, journalists are being arrested, victimised and sometimes killed in countries such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Zimbabwe. While the Commonwealth declares a freedom of expression, the media in many countries lack resources, falling under tremendous pressure from government and commercial interest, even threats from criminals and terrorist. This event, chaired by Rita Payne (former BBC executive), highlighted common threats, censorship and the need for international regulation from the United Nations.

Martin Bell, well known as the BBC correspondent of the Bosnian War, clearly stated that the world has become more dangerous since 1945. Nuclear proliferation is threatening world stability, climate change has created a refugee sweep, and there are unnecessary war fought all over the continent. In conflict areas, journalists are often targeted as highlighted by the news of the dead journalist in Sri Lanka. Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch, commented that countries in Asia are moving towards media freedom and away at the same time. While elections in Bangladesh had brought about new freedom, journalists there and in Pakistan have less freedom to cover news, instead enjoy freedom through English-sources and services published in their language. English news is very different from news in Bengali or Urdu.

Those from the Commonwealth look up to news covered by the BBC as a trusted and open source of information. William Horsley, director of the Centre for the Freedom of the Media, argued that the West have a great deal to answer for as a media model. However, loss of privacy and censorship is high but hidden within the media system, exemplifying that UK telephone companies retain conversations for a minimum of 6 weeks, which the media can get a hold of. Peter Horrocks (Director of BBC World Service) assured that the BBC is independent of British government scrutiny, stating that the BBC brings “Free Journalism” to the rest of the world, however it is difficult to replicate this standard across borders with adjusting stakeholder interests.

Wilf Mbanga, editor of Zimbabwean, addressed the crisis in governance in Southern Africa. South Africa has the most unregulated media, stating it as “enemies of the establishment”. With this in mind, media expression is repressed harshly ejecting intimidation and torture to journalists who try to cover news. Key phrases such as, “in the interest of public health”… “for our national security” are used by governments to ensure censorship. Wilf suggested that a ‘well-nourished’ media watchdog is needed to regulate governance.

Soli Sorabjee, former attorney-general of India, made an extremely good point about “freedom AFTER speech”. Intolerance is the root to censorship, using this as an excuse for regimes to torture journalists after a story has been covered. In countries like India, the government is the biggest advertisers in the media, therefore can only propagate the good work of the governance disabling media from different points of view. Even e-news come under threat of detention such as the Malaysian website Malaysiakini, however with its wide readership it would be a big political decision to shut it down. Farah Faizal, Maldives High Commissioner in the UK, gave cause for optimism describing the end of President Gayoom’s 30 year dictatorship. Moving into democracy has brought about small changes to media freedom with two graduates from Britain revolutionising the spread of news through a fortnightly publication called Sangu. She stated that international news on the Maldives is helping the country move into a democratic state, which brings hope to other Commonwealth states.