Make Your Plans for #PeaceWork in September

There are abundant events and campaigns in September 2016 that enable people to get to work for peace. Find one (or more!) and sign up, attend, volunteer, share, lead, . . . .

#peacework: September 2016 ... happening everywhere!
(Please share.)

There are many ways to work for peace. One part of achieving peace is recognizing the strength we have through the diversity of our peace efforts, and the degree to which these peace efforts are happening worldwide.

And let's be clear: this is work. All the characteristics that you find in other types of work are present in peace work, too: long-term commitment, attention to outcomes, teamwork, organization-building, resource management, problem-solving . . . .

September is a big month for peace work organizing - the UN International Day for Peace is September 21.  As you plan your peace work for September, consider how you will directly and/or indirectly participate in and support of these activities taking place around the world.

And please help involve more people by using the #peacework hashtag!

(event hashtag to be advised)
September 9-11
Build Peace 2016
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Convener: @howtobuildpeace
Description: "How can we use technology, arts and research for peace, towards transformation?"
More information: http://howtobuildpeace.org/programs/
See also: #peacetech

(event hashtag to be advised)
September 18-25
Campaign Nonviolence Week of Actions 2016
Location: may locations - see website
Convener: @campaignnv
Description: "During Campaign Nonviolence Week, September 18-25, our goal is 500 marches for a culture of peace and nonviolence in cities and towns in all 50 states and in nations around the world, Campaign Nonviolence will march against violence and for a world of peace, justice and sustainability."
More information: http://www.paceebene.org/programs/campaign-nonviolence/campaign-nonviolence-week-of-actions/
See also: #nonviolence

#PJSA2016
September 22-24
Peace and Justice Study Association Conference
Location: Nelson, British Columbia
Convener: @PJSAtweets
Description: "At this year’s conference, we will explore methods and strategies that not only address the challenging attributes of our relationships and our world, but also showcase the success of visionary projects and movements that have built new ways of being and doing (that is, building the world we want) from the interpersonal to the global."
More information: http://www.peacejusticestudies.org/conference
See also: (additional hashtag(s) to be advised)

(event hashtag to be advised)
September 23-25
No War 2016: Real Security Without Terrorism
Location: Washington, DC
Convener: @worldbeyondwar
Description: "As the war system keeps societies in a state of permawar, we have reached a stage in human history at which we can say with confidence that there are better and more effective alternatives. Of course we know the question: “You say you are against war, but what’s the alternative?” This event will develop answers to that question, building on World Beyond War’s publication A Global Security System: An Alternative to War."
More information: http://worldbeyondwar.org/NoWar2016/
See also: (additional hashtag(s) to be advised)

#TalkingPeace
September 21 - October 2
Talking Peace Festival
Location: London, UK
Convener: @talkpeacefest
Description: "Art, Food, Film, Technology ... The Talking Peace Festival is a global unique arts and cultural platform organised by peacebuilding charity International Alert designed to engage people in the most urgent issues of peace and conflict around the world."
More information: http://talkingpeacefestival.org/
See also: #peacehack, #ART4PEACE

(event hashtag to be advised)
September 30 - October 2
Disarm! For a Climate of Peace – Creating an Action Agenda: IPB World Congress 2016 on Military and Social Spending
Location: Berlin, Germany
Convener: @intlpeacebureau
Description: "Talks, presentations, roundtables, panel discussions, workshops, information booths, exhibitions, cultural activities; high point in the recently-launched Global Campaign on Military Spending; apart from the Global Day of Action on Military Spending (mid-April), preparatory events will be held in major cities around the world over the coming year."
More information: https://www.ipb2016.berlin/
See also: (additional hashtag(s) to be advised)

 . . . PLUS more peace events worldwide - hashtag #PeaceDay!


Related posts

I've realized that when we ask ourselves, "What is it that we hope people will do?" we must include an element of recursivity: One of the things we want people to do is to involve more people in doing it. In a way, that element of recursivity -- dare I say "evangelism"? -- defines what it means for people to really become part of a movement.

(See Invite More People into Activism! (Pass It Along!) )











It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)













Yesterday was the UN International Day of Peace. The day nudged me to think about what -- if anything -- I feel I really know about peace and the movement for peace. Here are 10 things that are true for me . . . .

(See #PeaceDay 2015 - Ten Thoughts on Peace)

Education in Angola: RISE!

Areas where RISE International is working in Angola.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and peace: what better inspiration than this report from my friend Melissa about her work with RISE International in Angola. I'm so grateful to Melissa and RISE for this!

I have just returned from my sixth visit to Angola. I so appreciate the support and interest in my work while I am there. This year we embarked on a new, very exciting project. Over the past twelve years, RISE International has built 159 primary schools in 3 provinces of Angola. There are now over 100,000 children attending these schools. This year RISE received a grant from BP to install five school libraries. This June we have just completed installation on two of the libraries. I am so invested in books, education, and children and this adventure has been among my favorite experiences.

A bit of context may be helpful. The two villages that we visited, Jimba Silili and Kuquema, are located in remote areas near the city of Kuito. The children in these villages have not previously had access to books, with the exception of a few government provided textbooks (workbooks, really). Typically children attend school for half a day, and while in class, there are 50 students with one teacher. Due to a myriad of additional issues (weather, health problems, lack of clean water, lack of food, teachers not being paid, gas shortages, parental illiteracy, school being closed unexpectedly for odd reasons…), school is not always in session five days a week. As you can imagine, learning in this setting is slow, and it is not uncommon for fourth and fifth graders to still be emergent readers.

New classroom ... ready for learning!

When we arrived in each village, our team worked to install the furniture and the books. We developed a simplified card catalog using a modified Dewey Decimal system. We hung posters, we labeled and stamped the books, and we filed the cards and worked solidly for an entire day. We were even fighting the sunset as we attempted to finish in just one day. And since it is winter in Angola just now, it was fully dark at 6pm.

During our installation process, we also held teacher trainings about use of the library. Topics ranged from “What is a library?” to “How to choose a good book”. The teachers were interested and engaged and it was a pleasure to work with primary school colleagues and administrators.

We also held a community session with village leaders, parents, children and the principal. During this meeting we introduced the parents and community members to the library. We discussed why reading is important and how it can change one’s life.

Books!

I feel so fortunate to have been a part of this plan. I enjoyed every minute of the organizing and the teacher workshops. It felt really wonderful to be a part of something very significant and to be able to share my areas of interest with others.

As always, I am so glad that I went and pleased that I can help with one aspect of the needs of the people that we visit. With dropping oil prices in the past few years, the economy is quite bad and the people are suffering even more than I had experienced before. There is more prevalent starvation, an insurgence of malaria, and a disastrous outbreak of yellow fever. Hopefully the medical community will be able to respond to the overwhelming need. And hopefully the kids who learn to read in these schools and libraries will be part of the solutions in the future.


(For background, check out this informative timeline reflecting Angola's recovery from colonial rule and civil war in recent decades.)


Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)












Let's face up to the impossibility of peace without education -- in fact, to the virtual congruence of peace and education! -- and expand our commitment to making education the real thing.

(See Education for Peace? or "Education IS Peace"?)

SDG 15 and Peace: "We are but one thread ... "

The connection of peace/war and SDG 15 (Life on Land)? Think US history -- especially the decimation of the buffalo and the Native American genocide.

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Life on Land is goal #15.

You can certainly see the truth about a country's attitude toward people by watching how it treats other forms of life on the land.


National mammal

Just weeks ago, the American Bison was named the US "national mammal" -- a reminder of the inexplicable slaughter of that animal in the American West at the end of the 19th century, and of that slaughter to genocide carried out on Native Americans.  It took me less than a minute to reference this quote from Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West by Dee Brown:

Of the 3,700,000 buffalo destroyed from 1872 through 1874, only 150,000 were killed by Indians. When a group of concerned Texans asked General Sheridan  if something should not be done to stop the white hunters' wholesale slaughter, he replied: "Let them kill, skin, and sell until the buffalo is exterminated, as it is the only way to bring lasting peace and allow civilization to advance." (p, 254, in Chapter 11, "The War to Save the Buffalo")

The decimation of the buffalo, like the decimation of the native people, was a decades-long process. More information is in the Wikipedia article on bison hunting.

"Slaughtered for a Pastime"
"Shall the Buffalo Go? Reminiscences of an Old Buffalo Hunter"
Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly, Vol. XV, May 1883, New York,
Original vintage wood engraving, 1883. 11.1 x 15.9 cm
(Source: thegallerii.com )

I have always carried with me the memory of a painting of the hunters shooting buffalo from a passing train. Searching for it led me to the image above. Please take a moment to look at the many beautiful images of buffalo on the website of thegallerii.com. )


If looks could kill . . . 

When I was a teenager, back in the 1970s, I was a huge Beatles fan and would spend hours at the piano and guitar playing through all of their songs -- often just starting at the front of the book ("Act Naturally") and going straight through to the end ("You've Really Got a Hold on Me"). So, of course, when I got to the C's I would play "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill." Even as I was playing, I would be thinking, "What kind of a song is this? It's not a love song . . . it's not a rock 'n' roll song . . . it's not psychedelic . . . I think it's a satire but . . . what's the point?"

The children asked him if to kill was not a sin
"Not when he looked so fierce", his mummy butted in
If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him
All the children sing . . .

I didn't quite know what it was saying at the time, but it has stayed with me.

Over the years I've realized that the most perceptive observers of a culture tend to be outsiders, and sometimes the only way insiders can hear the truth is to sit with it for a few years -- or decades. The Beatles were perfectly positioned to help with that. "If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him" is sort of the US explanation for everything it does in the world.


The last word . . .

"Humankind has not woven the web of life.
We are but one thread within it . . . . "
(Please share this message.)

More and more, people are looking to the wisdom of indigenous people to give us strength as we confront the climate crisis and other problems. Apt words come from Chief Seattle:

Humankind has not woven the web of life.
We are but one thread within it.
Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.
All things are bound together.
All things connect.

I guess this is another of those truths that is hard to hear, and takes years to sink in.


Where else in the world do we see this connection between the presence or lack of respect for other forms of life in the land, and justice and peace for people?


Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)












"We need to first acknowledge the genocidal origins of OUR nation’s history of ethnic cleansing and occupation."

(See Native American Rights: Acknowledge the Occupation)














In much of the 20th century, conflict and war centered on oil resources and the Middle East. Will the 21st century see conflict and war center on fisheries, particularly in the Pacific?

(See Pacific Fisheries' Futile Conflict: How about sharing?)

"Education for Peace"? or "Education IS Peace"?

Education is peace when we value methods, humanism, formal literacy, listening, experimentation, and meta-analysis.

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Quality Education is goal #4.

People working for peace are intensely attuned to the way education impacts peace efforts -- and also war efforts.

Hence, a major section of A Global Security System: An Alternative to War is "Spreading and Funding Peace Education and Peace Research," and education about peace is viewed as central to "Creating a Culture of Peace."

A problem is that individuals, groups, and states recognize the power of education and often co-opt it, hoping to be able to treat humans as instruments of their power.  For instance, schools become pipelines for the military. In many locations, peace groups have begun to push back against the militarization of schools. (See, for instance, the Chicago Veterans for Peace "Education not Militarization" project.)

Denial of education is another (and, thankfully, vanishing) form of the co-opting education by individuals, groups, and states. Thinking about common factors in successful education for peace requires us to consider the ways in which (a) denial of education; (b) hindering of education; (c) slanting of education; and (d) wholesale co-opting of education are all part of the overall threat to peace.

Let's face up to the impossibility of peace without education -- in fact, to the virtual congruence of peace and education! -- and expand our commitment to making education the real thing.

Some food for thought:

(1) Methods that work - The US is experiencing a crisis in education; in my opinion, it's because we have made every teacher a free agent, responsible for rising or falling by their own test results. If we were as serious about our education as we are about our business and industry, we would recognize a responsibility to equip teachers with methods that are proven to work. Not just a list of what is to be taught, but the actual methods that have been proven (see (6) below) to be successful. (Yes, I recognize this represents a wholesale change in the way the job of teaching is currently structured in the US .... )  An important value in a quality education is equipping teachers with methods that work.

(2) People, not machines - That said, our analytic and mechanistic outlook can lead us to view people as little more than another set of tools ... instruments ... input-output boxes. This is especially true now that people everywhere are connected 24/7 to the Internet. Jaron Lanier has delved into this problem in You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto. An important value in a quality education is recognizing the whole person.

(3) Literacy - Often what we think of when we think of "education" is literacy - being able to read, being able to write, being able to speak, and basic math skills. Unquestionably, an important value in a quality education is literacy -- literacy opens all doors. At the same time, it is essential to recognize that even the barest literacy is developed within a context, and that context can have just as much importance to the outcome as the formal literacy itself. Hence the succeeding points . . . .

(4) Listening - I spent 17 years in classrooms listening to teachers, but it has only been late in life that I have begun to listen to people -- particularly in that "people, not instruments" sense of point (2) above. Could there be any more important skill in learning to live in peace? How do we see this skill being taught in our schools? In addition to literacy, an equally important value in a quality education is developing the ability to listen to people.

(5) Experiments - The ultimate education is one which encourages people to be successful experimenters. As the world becomes more and more sophisticated, there is more and more temptation to believe that there is no real need to discover truth, that truth is just sitting around, ready to be consumed. In my opinion, the single greatest value in a quality education is that of conducting experiments in the hope of discovering truth.

(6) Meta - Now more than ever, we stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. Yes, we need to be able to go to the source and discover our own truth . . . and, yes, we need to be able to scoop up the abundance of knowledge and experience that others have put at our disposal and make the most of it.(This is, itself, a sort of experiment. It requires choices about what learnings to look to, and how many are needed to find a common truth. This is quite a bit different than simply absorbing a pre-packaged tutelage that is shoveled at you.) An important value in a quality education is being able to learn from what others have learned.

(To be continued . . . . )


Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)












I wondered at how we could have covered all that in just a minute or two -- the time it takes to go a few stops.  After all, when I walked onto that bus we were strangers.

(See Listening for Community (A Chicago Encounter))




"You may not understand every word, you may feel uncomfortable, you may have to spend time later trying to figure it out or to humble yourself now and ask for help; you may have to work at it. But in the long run . . . a Spanish speaker is what you are . . . because that's the community you're a part of!"

(See Don't speak Spanish? "Sure you do . . . .")



I wonder if, years from now, we will be thinking back to today and feeling surprise at how little we thought about some of the developments in our world, and in our country, and how we talked about them even less. Someday will I have to explain to my kids, or to my kids' kids, why it was that "people just weren't talking about it" . . . ?

(See Why Weren't People Talking About It? )





"To see the atom bomb museum," I said. And again I wondered, what can a child in Nagasaki think when they see a person from the US who has come here to see the atom bomb museum?

(See Encounter in Nagasaki )









I don't think Alanna and I ever talked about what it must be like to be trying to escape a shower of sparks and hot ash. But she seemed to know that the sparks and hot ash are too important a part of the picture to be left out.


(See The Children Are Waiting )

SDGs: Does US Militarism Harm "Peace and Justice" (and Other) Efforts?

Peacekeeping and peacebuilding are keys to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). How is the US contributing? How is the US creating problems?

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Moreover, the day for recognizing US peacekeepers was May 29. It is seems like an appropriate moment to consider this aspect of the SDGs.  Peace and Justice is goal #16.


The UN and peacekeeping: how does the US contribute? 

When A Global Security System: An Alternative to War was first published, and we were preparing the online version, I was very impressed by the importance of the UN to peace and security generally, and particularly to the question of how peacekeeping and peacebuilding would be carried out.

The US, as the richest and most powerful country in the world, provides a large amount of support to the UN.  However, consider the support the US gives compared to its own military budget:

Two rectangles showing the relative size of the U.S. military
budget (over $600 billion/year), left, vs. the U.N. operating
budget (under $3 billion/year, from contributions from every
country in the world), right.

What does this tell you about the US commitment to peaceful conflict resolution?

Moreover, the US Congress chronically blocks US payments that have been promised to the UN. (What does this tell countries in the rest of the world about US intentions?)

As the UN General Assembly opened in fall, 2015, the US was
behind in its payments to the UN to the tune of $3 billion.

By the way - the vast majority of peacekeepers serving in UN peacekeeping operations are supplied from countries other than the US. In my opinion, it's fine (and perhaps preferable) for the US to be a minor or absent supplier of personnel for any specific UN peacekeeping mission, or, in fact, for all of them. However, every peacekeeping mission depends, in substantial part, for its strength and credibility on the overall strength and credibility of the UN. That's where US support indirectly makes or breaks UN peacekeeping efforts.


What's the non-governmental role in peacebuilding?

UN peacekeeping missions, which include uniformed peacekeepers ("blue helmets") from member countries, are just part of the solution.

A vast network of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) work in peacebuilding conflict zones worldwide.

A quick review of the range of organizations involved in peacebuilding makes it clear that civil society plays a vital role in building and keeping real peace.

Part of the reason that NGOs are so vital to this process is precisely that they do not represent national agendas, and, in particular, are not yoked to national militaries.

I think this is important because it underlines the fact that bringing about peace really isn't a military operation.


Those other US activities . . . . 

Everyone knows about the major aspects of current US militarism: invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq . . . ongoing drone strikes in Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen . . . air strikes in Syria . . . .

What message does US enthusiasm for kinetic military activity send to people engaged in diverse aspects of peacekeeping and peacebuilding efforts around the world?

Moreover, the US seldom seems to miss an opportunity anywhere in the world to encourage militarism. Four news events from recent days are a reminder of this:

* Barack Obama made a visit to Vietnam and signaled improved relations . . . by authorizing arms sales. ("Vietnam Arms Embargo to Be Fully Lifted, Obama Says in Hanoi")

* The US signaled improved relations with Nigeria . . . with a promise to sell weapons. ("After Years of Distrust, U.S. Military Reconciles With Nigeria to Fight Boko Haram")

* Suggesting a return to the days prior to political changes in the Philippines in the early 1990s, the US is back to leasing military bases there. ("Eye on China, U.S. and Philippines Ramp Up Military Alliance")

* The US military is training soldiers and police in Burkina Faso, Kenya, Gabon, Senegal. ("U.S. Increases Antiterrorism Exercises With African Militaries")

What message is the US sending to the world with this pattern of activity?


A Peace Day 2016 proposal

Here's a proposal for Peace Day, September 21, 2016:

What would happen if the US Nobel Peace Prize President Barack Obama gave an order to "slow it down"? He only has a few months left in office. There's little he can accomplish now. But wouldn't it be worth something if US military officials around the world got the message to just back off, give the world a breather, and slow the spread of militarism for just a few weeks or months?

Think of the message it would send . . . .


Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)

To those of us who have worked hard to get U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, it is flabbergasting to see reports that U.S. officials see a "need" for someplace else to send troops and material: apparently, there's no such thing as demobilization, only re-deployment.

(See AFRICOM: The Heart of Darkness)












As I read the Chinese language paper every day, it is clear to me that -- in the absence of sustained civic discourse on the security issues in the Pacific region -- our future is being shaped by military posturing.

(See SOUTH CHINA SEA FACE OFF: Does this make ANY sense?)







Today, we may not be seeing kinetic (currently unleashed) violence on anything like the scale that consumed Europe and other parts of the world and resulted in 60 million deaths. Instead, thanks to technology, we have potential (waiting to be unleashed) violence -- nuclear devastation just the push of a button away.

(See Obama's (and Putin's) Missed Opportunity at Hiroshima)

Pacific Fisheries' Futile Conflict: How about sharing?

In much of the 20th century, conflict and war centered on oil resources and the Middle East. Will the 21st century see conflict and war center on fisheries, particularly in the Pacific?

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Life Below Water is goal #14. With Barack Obama visiting Asia, and the G7 meeting in Japan, it's a good time to see how Life Below Water ties to issues of war and peace.

I was intrigued by an op-ed by outgoing Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou in the Wall Street Journal.  It was a closely argued piece on the appropriate way to observe (and adjudicate) economic rights in the Pacific. (See "Taiwan's Stake in the Western Pacific") This was Ma's swan song -- it appeared on the eve of his retirement from the presidency, and the (historic) swearing in of the Taiwan's new (woman) president.

I know that these ocean rights are important. But really? Why ask people to consider a point-by-point analysis of the respective merits of Taiping Island and Okinotori Reef claims by Taiwan, the Philippines, and Japan?

I've lived in Taiwan. I knew there were a lot of fish in Taiwan.
I just never stopped to think about where the fish came from.

It made me stop and think: Ma felt this was the most important topic to talk about as he walked out the door. In effect, Ma was saying: Hey! Pay attention to these fishing rights! They will be the most important thing of all to us in the years to come!

(N.B.: not "the Mainland"!)

Consider: "Oceans serve as the world’s largest source of protein, with more than 3 billion people depending on the oceans as their primary source of protein." (See Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources) Won't that percentage grow steadily as more and more people turn away from beef, pork, and other land-based and farmed sources of animal protein?

So this is causing me to think differently about a topic I've written about before: the growing tensions in the South China Sea. In a previous post, I emphasized oil and gas rights there, and wrote: "[A]ren't the assets that lie under the South China Sea precisely the kind of oil and gas properties that are rapidly becoming valueless in light of the carbon bubble?  Given that the oil companies already have five times as many reserves as they can ever put to use without breaking the planet, aren't those South China Sea hydrocarbons destined to stay beneath the sea where they belong?" (See SOUTH CHINA SEA FACE OFF: Does this make ANY sense?)

Now I'm waking up.

"It's the fish, stupid." 

It's not just a question of one country or another being entitled. It's a question of how we are going to share this . . . and how we're going to make sure we don't mess it up.

Red indicates extreme over-fishing. (Source: Trashpatch.org interactive map)

A good place to start is to examine UNCLOS -- the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It "defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world's oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources."  It is the authority that nations are referring to in dealing with the current conflicts in the South China Sea, for instance.

The US has refused to ratify UNCLOS and so stands outside of it. Perhaps it's time for the world to tell the US that to come to the table and participate in the conversation about the future of life below water as an equal partner with the other nations of the world. And to leave their warships at home.


Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)












What people in Asia (and others) have seen for the past century is that something is happening in the Pacific, and it's being driven in part by advances in naval (and, subsequently, aviation and electronics) technology, and in part by powerful nations (principally, but not limited to, the U.S.) proximate to the area.

(See The Imperialized Pacific: What We Need to Understand)





As I read the Chinese language paper every day, it is clear to me that -- in the absence of sustained civic discourse on the security issues in the Pacific region -- our future is being shaped by military posturing.

(See SOUTH CHINA SEA FACE OFF: Does this make ANY sense?)







My hope and belief is that a Berkeley forum on peace and prosperity in the Pacific would reveal a shared interest in de-escalating the South China Sea confrontation, and dramatically increase awareness of shared Pacific prospects for well-being.

(See 21st c. Berkeley: More Relevant Than Ever to Antiwar Movement)

Gender Equity and Peace: Let's ALL have a say in conflict resolution

What does gender have to do with war and peace? Old view: "men are from Mars, women are from Venus." New view: it's about equity.

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Gender Equality is goal #5.

When I was a young adult, a popular book was Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus: The Classic Guide to Understanding the Opposite Sex. It encouraged people to accept different styles of interaction it recognized in men and women. Since men were inherently "competitive, individualistic, not into 'caring and sharing,' wanting to be admired for their ability to hang tough and deliver the goods yet unwilling to communicate the fact they need admiration" and women inherently "craving respect from their men, looking for emotional bells and whistles and not so much material status symbols as their men might suppose, prone to cycles of emotional fatigue and dependent on their mates to cherish them" (so the theory went, as summarized by one Amazon reviewer), the way for everyone to get along best is to accept the world as it is and try a little harder to speak each other's language.

This view of two starkly different "sexes" ends up reinforcing a common view about war and peace: it's the guys who are responsible for war -- they can't help themselves, it's biological -- and it's the women who make good peace activists -- because, you know, they're more peaceful.

Boys fight wars, girls heal. (Right?)
(Florence Nightingale -- Natl Lib of Medicine image)

I confess to reaching, myself, for the convenient and comforting idea that women are civilization's great, reliable backstop against the looming destruction of human society via wars cooked up by men. According to this rather magical line of thinking, women's biology provides a kind of guaranteed reservoir of peace elixir, which will surely prevail once unleashed.


But gender is a social construct . . . .

In large part due to the #BlackLivesMatter movement and the movement for LGBTQ justice, I have begun to understand the ways in which categories like race and gender are social constructs, i.e. they function principally to bestow or deny power.

I've come to understand that gender cannot be understood just on the basis of body morphology or biochemistry. A big part of gender -- and a part that is of enormous consequence for conflict and cooperation -- is socially constructed. How we treat each other when we're together has overwhelming importance to this thing called gender.

Walt Whitman, Civil War nurse

Just as focusing on skin pigmentation makes us miss the point that "race" exists to enable some people to claim and maintain privilege, so focusing on estrogen or testosterone makes us miss the point that "gender" exists to enable some people to dominate the conversation and dictate the course of action.


Surprising findings on gender equity

About 18 months ago, I read some startling findings about women and men working together.

Some researchers wanted to know what predictors could be found for teams that were successful at achieving results. To their surprise, they found that the predictors that you might expect -- particularly expertise, past experience, even hard work -- were not the ones that correlated closely with success. Here's what did:

* Successful teams consisted of members who were capable of reading each other's verbal and non-verbal clues, in order to better listen to them.

* The members of successful teams each spoke about an equal amount of the time.

* On average, successful teams had more women.

(See the description of the findings, originally published in Science, in "Why Some Teams Are Smarter Than Others" by Anita Woolley, Thomas W. Mallone and Christopher F. Chabris)

Hey, it's science!

What I found really exciting is the potential to take these findings and follow them up in our own environments. We're all on committees and teams right? We all attend meetings. So go into a meeting and watch what happens. Who gets to speak? Does one person (or a few people) dominate? Are people listening to each other? Have people heard each other, or do they talk over each other?

And what I discovered when I started to pay attention to how these factors operate in my own environment was that there tended to be a very "gendered" environment in a lot of group settings -- a few people (mostly men) doing all the talking, and the rest (mostly women) unable to get a word in edgewise. I also noticed that the gendered nature of the gatherings would tend to snowball -- once people realized there wouldn't be an equal chance for everyone to be heard, they stopped trying to listen to each other and became anxious to simply get a chance to speak.

I noticed a couple of other things. For one thing, I noticed that the more a given meeting fit this pattern, the more likely people were to leave the meeting and behave as if it had never happened. People would just go their own ways, and do whatever it was they were originally planning to do.

I also noticed that if a small effort was made -- "Hey, let's hear from some of the people who haven't had a chance to speak yet" -- it was actually possible to move the proceedings toward equitable participation. And those tended to be the meetings that had noticeable follow-through.

So when we say conflict resolution and peace may have something to do with gender, maybe what we're really saying is that something different happens when people listen to each other . . . when everyone gets an equal chance to speak . . . and when people who are most likely to be denied a place at the table actually get to participate.


Gender Equity, the SDGs, and Peace

Having a say:
Pray the Devil Back to Hell

I have my doubts about whether every single one of the SDGs is of equal importance in bringing us to a world without war.

(I frankly wonder whether eliminating war isn't a precondition for some of them.)

But there is no question in my mind that gender equity is foundational to moving us closer and closer to a world where conflict is addressed through cooperation and compromise, and not through domination and violence.

In fact, in some ways "gender equity" as I understand it -- "everybody gets about an equal chance to be heard" -- may very well be synonymous with "conflict resolution."



Related posts



It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)











In a composition suggestive of a yin-yang symbol, a woman in a burka (but wearing audacious red glitter platform heels) is surrounded by genie-ish tableaus of the many male obsessions/pastimes that some of us rail about frequently -- sexualized pop singers, professional sports -- as well as some that we probably should rail about more (such as patriarchy in religion and political violence).

(See VIOLENCE: " . . . and the women must live with the consequences . . . " )

Women Without Men is a recent movie by the artist Shirin Neshat, based on the novel by Shahrnush Parsipur.. The first time I saw it, at the end I walked straight to the ticket window and bought another ticket and walked right back in and watched it again. The film contains haunting scene after haunting scene, and it makes it clear that Iran is a place where people are able to ask questions about patriarchy and about what it is going to take to overcome it.

(See Women Without Men as a US-Iran Cultural Bridge)

SOLAR PANELS: A Force for Peace in Africa?

Will the people in Africa who are starved for electricity get it via solar panels supplied from China? What impact might this have on violent conflict?

Sustainable Development Goal 9:
Industry, Innovation, Infrastructure

The UN International Day for Peace 2016 has been tied to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. I was interested to see that an event titled World Economic Forum Africa 2016 is happening in Rwanda in the next several days. It made me curious to see what the Davos people might have to say about development (and, by extension, about peace) in Africa.

There's a big emphasis on digital and education at WEF Africa 2016. More information, more communication, more opportunity -- it's hard to argue with that as a good in general, and an essential lever in eliminating conflict in particular. Notably, WEF Africa 2016 is sponsored by a the Gates Foundation, numerous tech giants (Google, Microsoft, CISCO, Huawei, SAP), as well as the assortment of banks, consulting companies, and other corporate giants you would expect.

I'm a little curious, however, about where the power is going to come from to bring about the digital revolution in Africa.  A report on the WEF Africa 2016 website ("Africa’s digital revolution: a look at the technologies, trends and people driving it") provides this graphic:

AFRICA: Share of population without access to electricity
(Image: International Energy Agency)

Forget about electricity to power digital devices. How is it possible to talk seriously about a stable society and reversing the forces that bring about civil conflict when over 75% of a population has no access to electricity? According to the graphic, that means 60 million people in Congo, and 70 million people in Ethiopia.  In Nigeria, where somewhere between 25% and 50% of the people have access to electricity, there are still 93 million people without it.

There is a session on infrastructure at WEF Africa 2016, and I intend to watch it. I hope that it will not feature suggestions that nuclear energy is what Africa needs. (Stay tuned.)

What WEF Africa 2016 should be advocating is a massive solar energy program for Africa.

SolarGIS solar irradiation map, showing areas of highest exposure in Africa.

Trade, aid, lending, and investment between Africa and China have been growing rapidly. China is a massive supplier of solar panels. A project called Akon Lighting Africa (ALA) initiative aims to bring solar power to 600 million people in Africa -- with the help, it should be noted, of a $1 billion credit line from a Chinese solar system provider.

To get deeper into some of the underlying issues, check out this 2009 study on "China in the African Solar Energy Sector" based on the experience in Kenya.

Of course, solar power in Africa would have winners and losers. The winners would include companies in China supplying solar panels. Of course, Chinese companies could be counted on to start producing solar panels in Africa before long, so Africans would also be winners. Of course, thousands -- perhaps millions -- of local people in Africa would find employment installing and maintaining solar systems. And everyone in Africa would win from the absence of pollution.

Of course, there would be losers, too. Giant corporations like GE-Hitachi -- did I mention GE and Hitachi are sponsors of WEF Africa 2016? -- and Western engineering companies and banks will lose out if they do not get contracts to build nuclear plants in Africa.

I wonder if, when Peace Day 2016 rolls around in September, we'll be celebrating the continued progress of peaceful solar in Africa, or worrying about the creep of nuclear power across Africa?



Related posts

It will benefit us antiwar activists in the US to attend to and reflect upon the importance of these Sustainable Development Goals to achieving the goal of ending war.

(See PEACE DAY 2016: What comes first? Demilitarization? or Development?)












There's no question in my mind that Climate Action (Sustainable Development Goals #13) goes hand in hand with antiwar activity.

(See Peace Day 2016: 3 Ways Climate Action is Vital)













The U.S. could take a lesson from the "command economy" in China about government setting a bold new direction in using alternative energy.

(See #chinaEARTHusa -- Solar Panels at the Crux)








The enormous irony is that now one country -- India -- is responding to its past subjugation by the Western imperial program with this hugely self-damaging program, and another country that has struggled with its relationship to the Western imperial program -- Japan -- is doing everything it can to aid and abet.

(See INDIA: Lured into playing the "Great Power" Nuclear Game)