Climate talks drawing indigenous peoples, small farmers, & world leaders • RedRoadCancun.com • Via Campesina's Dec. 7 "Int. Day of Action

Similarly to COP10, the U.N. biodiversity conference, held in Nagoya earlier this fall, the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change is drawing indigenous peoples and small farmers to Cancun from Nov. 29 to Dec. 10. Terri Hansen corresponding for U.S.-based Indian Country Today reports from the indigenous perspective:

Nearly 200 world governments will meet Nov. 29 – Dec. 10 at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change conference in Cancun, Mexico to discuss future commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement linked to the UNFCCC.

The Protocol sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to an average of five percent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008 and 2012.

Although some world leaders have declared that no meaningful agreement will be produced, a senior U.N. official said the talks can produce significant progress on forest protection, aid for developing nations and technology sharing...

Last year’s summit produced the Copenhagen Accord, an agreement drawn up by the U.S., China, India, Brazil and South Africa that yielded few commitments to keep global greenhouse gasses from rising. The action by the five nations angered some of the countries that were excluded from the process, especially poorer nations experiencing the earliest and worst impacts of climatic changes yet who have contributed the least to its cause...

Four alternative climate summits will take place alongside the official proceedings; a summit of non-governmental organizations, one run by the Mexican government, Klima Forum, first held in Copenhagen in 2009, and La Via Campesina (the International Peasants’ Movement), an organization of over 148 organizations that advocate family-farm-based sustainable agriculture.

Via Campesina will accommodate thousands of people affected by environmental destruction – farmers, landless, indigenous peoples and activists from all sectors during the summit, to propose solutions to confront climate change.

Via Campesina will bring 4,000 Mexicans – indigenous peoples, farmers and their allies to Cancun, and a few hundred from the Global South. The Bolivian government is flying in 90 people, and Venezuela is flying in a similar number.

Caravans are en route to Cancun from the U.S. and Canada, and more people are coming in from Europe. The U.S.-based Indigenous Environmental Network is bringing in 23 people.

IEN, La Campesina and worldwide social movements want to show world leaders their opposition to what they are calling “false solutions to climate chaos discussed by the UNFCCC, such as market-based proposals on carbon trading and REDD, agrofuels and geo-engineering.”

La Campesina has issued a call out to social movements, organizations and people around the world to organize thousands of protests and actions during the summit to “reject false solutions and to support a people’s agenda for climate justice.” They’ve declared Dec. 7 an International Day of Action, calling for “Thousand of Cancuns” around the world, with a massive march and protest planned in Cancun.

NTEC and NARF also focus on indigenous rights. “We’re working to ensure indigenous peoples are not left out of the process,” Gruenig said. “As of now they are asked to give an opening and closing statement. That is not sufficient by any means, as a lot changes as the negotiations proceed. Indigenous people need to have direct participation and be allowed to speak on the floor.”

To affect that work Gruenig and Gottschalk will participate at the daily Indigenous Caucus, held concurrently with the talks.

In a recent development, the U.N. approved a draft resolution Nov. 16 that if finalized will organize a “World Conference on Indigenous Peoples.” In so doing the U.N. stated concerns about the “extreme social and economic disadvantages that indigenous peoples have faced,” and referenced the first World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth held in Cochabamba last April.

The high-level plenary meeting would take place at the end of the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People in 2014, and would share perspectives and best practices for the fulfillment of the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The resolution calls on member states and the international community to find solutions to problems faced by indigenous peoples in areas that include culture, education, health, human rights, the environment and socio-economic development. It would expand the U.N. Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations to include facilitating the participation of representatives of indigenous organizations in sessions of the U.N. Human Rights Council.

Read the entire article here.

See also the Indigenous Environmental Network's blog from Cancun at RedRoadCancun.com:

IEN Dispatches from Cancun at RedRoadCancun.com

WHAT: COP16 Live video and audio stream and daily 1 hour video/radio show

WHERE: RedRoadCancun.com

WHEN: Monday, Nov 29 to Friday, Dec. 10, 2010.

Daily shows air noon to 1pm CST, Monday through Friday, and will be rebroadcast at 5pm.

Follow IEN as we collaborate with other Indigenous groups and coalitions in Cancun.

Our organizations are banding together in Cancun to highlight the stories of local community activists and Indigenous Peoples from all over the world: Stories about dealing with the impacts from the climate crisis that are already being experienced by their communities;stories about the suffering from and resistance to the pollution from the fossil fuels industry; and stories about their communities standing up to threats from industries who want their forests to "offset" their pollution.

We will be highlighting stories from communities that are taking real and effective action to address the climate crisis. Communities that are protecting their forests from being logged; that are shutting down polluting industries in their own back yard, or that are creating small-scale renewable energy projects.

Emphasizing the tremendous power of sustainable, small farming in alleviating climate change, Via Campesina has issued its statement on COP16:

"Statement by the CLOC-Vía Campesina on the Climate Summit in Cancune"

As the Latin American Coordination of Rural Organizations - CLOC / Via Campesina -we appeal to women, men, youth, children and elderly people worldwide to join the great global movement called "Thousands of Cancuns for Climate Justice" which is a clear demonstration not only that the peoples and social movements are engaged in the debate, construction and positioning of the discussion around climate change but also, that we are denouncing and resisting the model of development that has deepened the climate crisis.

In this regard, we affirm that the Peoples' Accord emitted at the Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, held in Cochabamba, Bolivia, is one of the most interesting proposals. We therefore demand that it be debated and further developed within COP 16, along the same approach that it was built on, that is, within the framework of the discussions and proposals of the peoples, social movements and organizations. As CLOC / Via Campesina we believe that the capitalist model based on the exploitation of natural resources, with the idea of unlimited progress, is primarily responsible for the environmental disaster that we are now experiencing.

The impact of the climate crisis that affects all of humanity is the result of the implementation of this perverse model that prioritizes market policies at the expense of life itself. For farmers and peasants of the world, climate change has a direct impact on both rural and urban areas, with floods, droughts, disruption of natural rain cycles and the emergence of new pests, that are destroying small-scale agriculture and livestock that contribute substantially to feeding the majority of human beings, when hunger remains a major challenge for the world.

Faced with this situation, as the CLOC / Via Campesina, a historical movement that interconnects struggles at the continental level:

1. We bring our energies as La Via Campesina International, chanting our slogan "Peasant agriculture cools the planet", as our banner of struggle and resistance. We believe this is a way to support a de-privatization struggle for life as a viable, existing and really possible alternative.

2. We declare the failure of the Cancun Climate Summit in wanting to impose an illegitimate "agreement", since the prior negotiating tables are managed by a handful of countries outside the genuine process of multilateral negotiations. We consider that blackmail is being used to try to bring off this imposition.

3. We support the demonstrations, forums, debates, meetings and activities conducted by social organizations and networks worldwide, this December 7, as a form of resistance to the decisions of the COP 16 in Cancun.

4. We reject strategies of profit-making, lobbying and commoditization by transnational corporations, banks and financial interests, the governments of industrialized countries and their international institutions, aimed at continuing to shirk their historic responsibilities.

5. We will unmask the false solutions of "green capitalism" with proposals like those of Monsanto in response to the climate crisis. There is concrete evidence of the negative impacts of global carbon markets, GM seeds, agro-fuels, geo-engineering, dams, mining, nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, the "Clean Development Mechanisms" and current REDD projects which are being promoted without addressing the real needs of people. These options are intended to generate windfall profits for these big corporations.

6. We reject any World Bank involvement in the creation of funds and policies related to climate change.

7. We promote the urgency of a process of preparation and discussion for the implementation of a Global Consultation on policies addressing climate change. It is necessary to do justice, to free those struggling for land and prosecute those who pollute and destroy.

8. Since Mexico is home to the Climate Summit, we take on the responsibility of reporting the environmental catastrophe caused to fishermen and women and for humankind in general, for the tragedy of the spill in the Gulf of Mexico caused by the British Petroleum Company - BP. We consider it a crime to humanity and an illustration of corporate disregard for human life and of the hypocrisy of governments

9. Finally, we underline the need to abolish the criminalization of struggles and of those who defend life. In this context, we urgently demand adoption of the Declaration of the Rights of Peasants.

We peasant farmers cool the planet! Globalize the struggle, globalize hope!

November 29, 2010

Follow La Via Campesina's 1000 Cancuns for Climate Justice. Posts from India & Indonesia are already up.

More background:

"Cancún Opens for GREEN Business But REDD Will Destroy Indigenous Forest Cultures" by Subhankar Banerjee, posted at Climatestorytellers.org

"The United States cannot be the only country opposing indigenous rights"

On November 12, Canada reversed its prior opposition, and endorsed the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Will the U.S. follow?

If so, what might this mean for indigenous peoples affected by U.S. colonialism in the Asia-Pacific, including Okinawans, the Chamorro, ethnic Hawaiians, and the Chagossians of Diego Garcia?

Indian Country Today published Valerie Taliman's letter to President Obama to "The United States cannot be the only country opposing indigenous rights"on Nov. 26:

When Canada endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recently, it created a groundswell of hope in Indian country, and put more pressure on the United States to step up soon.

The Declaration is an international human rights mechanism that recognizes the individual and collective rights of the world’s 370 million indigenous peoples, including the right to self-determination, and the right to give or withhold our free, prior and informed consent when it comes to the exploitation of our lands, territories and resources.

After 30 years of negotiations, the Declaration was finally adopted in 2007 by a vote of 143 nations in favor, and four opposing. Australia, New Zealand and now Canada, have reversed their positions in the last three years and voted to endorse it.

It’s time to acknowledge that indigenous peoples worldwide deserve the same rights as other citizens of the world.

That means the United States is now the only country left opposing the rights of indigenous peoples.

Native leaders who did the early work on the U.N. Declaration widely praised Canada’s action, and predict that the United States will soon follow.

“I welcome Canada’s endorsement as a positive step moving forward in real partnership with indigenous peoples,” said Tonya Gonnella Frichner, North American regional representative to the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. “The Declaration is the result of 30 years of concentrated effort and sacrifice by indigenous peoples to lift us from racism, discrimination and domination from colonial powers.

“Although Canada’s endorsement includes the caveat that the Declaration will not be allowed to override Canada’s own legal framework, it’s incumbent upon Canada to fully endorse and implement the Declaration in a manner consistent with international standards of human rights, and in keeping with the recognition of the individual, group and collective rights of indigenous peoples.”

Chief Wilton Littlechild, a respected Cree lawyer from Alberta who forged early negotiations on the Declaration, said he was highly encouraged that soon all nations will implement it...

Bill Means, an Oglala Lakota activist who chairs the International Indian Treaty Council, recalled a 1974 historic meeting of more than 90 indigenous nations that gave IITC a mandate to work with the United Nations on treaty rights.

“Treaties with indigenous peoples worldwide became the foundation of our work in fighting for the recognition of our human rights. After over 30 years of struggle, we witnessed a turning point in history when the General Assembly adopted the Declaration. This is a new beginning, however, and indigenous peoples will not rest until we take our rightful place in the family of nations...”

It’s time to change the long history of discrimination and oppression in the United States, and to acknowledge that indigenous peoples worldwide deserve the same rights as other citizens of the world.

President Obama, be the change you want to see. We urge you to quickly adopt the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Read Ms. Tiliman's letter in its entirety here.

Valerie Taliman, Navajo, is an award-winning journalist, media strategist and indigenous rights advocate. She is based in Albuquerque, NM. Contact her at valerietaliman@yahoo.com.

Some A-P background: 70% of the world's indigenous people live in Asia: over 51 million in S. Asia; over 1 million throughout Siberia; over 67 million in East Asia; over 30 million in Southeast Asia and 1.5 million in the Pacific.

Yoshio Shimoji: Comment on Japan Today's "DPJ relieved after Okinawa vote"

Yoshio Shimoji regards Governor Nakaima's reelection (in conjunction with almost 50% of the votes for opponent Yoichi Iha, mayor of Ginowan City) as a referendum by Okinawans against the construction of another U.S. mega-military "replacement" base in Henoko.

His comment on Japan Today's Nov. 28 article "DPJ relieved after Okinawa vote” reflects his reasoning:

In yesterday's gubernatorial election in Okinawa, candidate Hirokazu Nakaima, an incumbent Governor, garnered 335,708 votes (52%), candidate Yoichi Iha 297,082 votes (46%) and candidate Tatsuro Kinjo 13,116 votes (2%), of the total 645,906 valid votes.

Nakaima and Iha campaigned on an almost identical platform that the 2006 Futenma relocation plan agreed to between Japan and the U.S. should be scrapped while Kinjo ran on a "Futenma to Henoko" platform. Of the three candidates, then, it's only Kinjo who precisely represented both (Washington & Tokyo) governments' stance regarding the Futenma issue. But his vote count was only 13,116 or a meager 2 percent.

U.S. policymakers should recognize this hard fact and, if they consider the U.S. as a great democracy, never attempt to force their failed plan on Okinawa -- an undemocratic and immoral action on the part of the U.S.

Yoshio Shimoji
Naha, Okinawa
Japan

Yoshio Shimoji was born in Miyako Island, Okinawa. He received his M.S. from Georgetown University, and taught English and English linguistics at the University of the Ryukyus from April 1966 until his retirement in March 2003.

Mr. Shimoji's "The Futenma Base and the U.S.-Japan Controversy: An Okinawan Perspective" was published at The Asia Pacific Journal earlier this year.

See also his letter letter, "How dare Obama ask Hatoyama to act without regard to democratic process in Okinawa?" published at the The New York Times on May 28, and "'Thanks' Doesn't Allay Okinawans" published on July 11 at The Japan Times.

(Human chain demanding the removal of U.S. Marine Base Futenma & no further base construction in Okinawa. Photos: Yoshio Shimoji )

Martin Frid: "Okinawa Election Results"

Many thanks to Martin Frid for his excellent post on the Okinawa election results.

(Banner: "We do not need U.S. military bases in Okinawa." Image: Kurashi)

Kurashi - The "Eco-Blog" - by Martin J Frid
Monday, November 29, 2010
Okinawa Election Results

The results of the election on Sunday in Okinawa are as follows, according to Ryukyu Shimpo, the local newspaper. NHK also notes that the LDP-backed candidate, Nakaima, 71 years old has won.

３３５７０８　仲井真弘多 Nakaima Hirokazu
２９７０８２　伊波　洋一 Iha Yoichi

Both said they want Futenma, the US military base, moved out of Okinawa. Peace activists, however, doubt that Nakaima Hirokazu will follow up on this pledge. To NHK (video) he notes on Sunday night that the US military bases are not there just for the sake of Okinawa, but for the sake of the entire country. He also says, again, that the base should be relocated outside of the prefecture of Okinawa.

However...

While Iha Yoichi unequivocally opposes a new base in Okinawa, there has been some confusion by incumbent governor Nakaima's expression of his intent to call for relocation of MCAS Futenma "outside of Okinawa." However, throughout the campaign, he has avoided the question of whether he really opposed the government's plan to build a new base in Henoko. "It appears that Nakaima wants to gain Okinawans' support but wants to avoid confrontation with the Japanese government at the same time," the newspaper's editorial suspects. Iha, on the contrary, "will not accept any negotiation based on the current US-Japan plan and challenge the both governments to give up the plan."

(Quote and translation by Vancouver-based Satoko Norimatsu of Peace Philosophy Centre: To stop the Henoko base plan, IHA must win. 沖縄に基地を作らせないためには伊波候補が勝たなければいけない)

Read more about the peaceful protests at the Tent Village, Henoko, Okinawa at The Asia-Pacific Journal: "Henoko, Okinawa: Inside the Sit-In" by Yumiko Kikuno:

On December 25, 2009, I visited “Henoko Tent Village” in Okinawa, with Satoko Norimatsu, Director of the Peace Philosophy Centre, a peace education centre in Canada. The “village” has acted as a base for the 13-year long nonviolent anti-base movement. On the day we visited it was raining, which made Henoko beach look like it was crying. We were welcomed by Toyama Sakae, the “mayor” of Henoko Tent Village, and by other activists, including Nakazato Tomoharu, “Yasu-san,” and “Na-chan.” Mr. Toyama invited us to have a seat and proceeded to explain the history of the movement to save Henoko.

And Japanese bloggers of course are also covering this important election: Chura umi o maore (Protect our ocean) and Henokohama Tsushin (Reports from Henoko Beach) and Michisan (a blog to help you know what local Okinawan newspapers are saying) and Sumichi and Takae and News for the People of Japan...


(Above photo from Rimpeace, stating without a doubt that the Okinawan people do not want (a new mega-military base destroying the beautiful Henoko coast or) US Osprey helicopters on their soil.)

Satoko Norimatsu: Tokyo refused meeting with Nago Mayor Susumu Inamine

Earlier this month, Satoko Norimatsu of the Peace Philosophy Centre posted on Tokyo's refusal to meet wtih Nago Mayor Susumu Inamine:

On the early morning of November 4, Inamine Susumu, Mayor of Nago City of Okinawa, where Japanese and U.S. are planning to build a "replacement" base of MCAS Futenma, and Higa Yuichi, Chair of Nago City Assembly, went to Tokyo. Since a week before, they had requested to meet with the "top-three" politicians (Minister, Vice Minister, and Parliamentary Secretary) at the Prime Minister's Residence, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defense, and Cabinet Office Okinawa Affairs. They spent the whole day of November 4 waiting for a reply. Tamaki Denny and Shimoji Mikio, Okinawan representatives of the Parliament helped negotiate with the government to set up a meeting.

The answer was "NO."

Edano Yukio, DPJ's Acting Secretary-General refused to facilitate any meeting. Inamine and Higa were only met with administrative staff members of each ministry. "We will not respond to such 'political performance,'" Edano said. Inamine and Higa went to Tokyo to submit the recent resolution by Nago City Assembly, demanding the government to rescind the US-Japan agreement to build a base in Henoko. (See HERE for the English version of the resolution.) Okinawan newspaper Ryukyu Shimpo (November 6) responded,

The resolution is the expression of Nago's democratic will, and the government calls it a "political performance".... The government keeps stressing, "We will explain carefully so the local residents will understand (the base plan)," but refuses to listen to the democratic voice of Nago.

On the morning of November 5, upon hearing a final "no," Inamine and Higa held a press conference within the Parliament building. Inamine said

I find no sincerity in how the government handled our request. Okinawans' anger will increase exponentially, because of this.

Inamine and Higa cut short their trip and went back to Okinawa.

What a change in the DPJ government.

Last year when I met with Iha Yoichi, then mayor of Ginowan (host of MCAS Futenma and vocal base opponent) and now candidate for the upcoming Okinawa gubernatorial election, he told me, "Under the LDP administration, we could only meet with the administrative staff of those ministries, but now we have DPJ government and Prime Minister Hatoyama, I have been able to meet with Foreign Minister, Defense Minister, and Prime Minister himself."

Now, still with DPJ government but now one that supports the new base plan in Nago, we are back to the LDP era, or even worse. Back in August, then Transportation Minister Maehara Seiji met with Shimabukuro Yoshikazu, former pro-base mayor of Nago, to sustain the government's influence on the pro-base forces within Nago. A Nago city's official said, "If it were a pro-base mayor who came to Tokyo, the Ministers would be begging to meet him."

Urashima Etsuko, a Nago activist and author of The Choice of Nago and many other books said

It is Japanese government's discrimination against Okinawa. We citizens of Nago are very angry.

Nago's hope was betrayed by the DPJ, and the betrayal is now reinforced in such a humiliating way.

For sure, this is going to be the exact treatment that the central government's politicians will get when they go to Okinawa to "explain carefully" to the people of Nago.

Action Alert: Online Demonstration for PEACE IN KOREA

A call to support peace in the Korean peninsula from Bruce Gagnon of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space:

http://www.endthekoreanwar.org/index.php

Action Alert – ONLINE DEMONSTRATION for Peace in Korea - Sun, 11/28, and Wed, 12/1

President Obama is sending the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington (carrying 75 warplanes and a crew of over 6000) and other warships for additional war-games with the South Korean military beginning this Sunday, November 28.

This only escalates the already tense situation on the Korean peninsula and brings us dangerously closer to an all-out war.

And the blogosphere is already full of hate-mongering rhetoric calling for “retaliation” after the tragic incident on Yeonpyong Island earlier this week.

Two civilians and two South Korean soldiers have died. We say "NO MORE LOST LIVES."

We need all those who stand for peace to call for de-escalation on the Korean peninsula and an immediate end to the U.S.-South Korean war games.

On Sunday, November 28, from 12 noon to 3 pm EST (9 am to 12 noon PST) and Wednesday, December 1 from 7 pm to 10 pm EST (4pm to 7 pm PST)

Join the National Campaign to End the Korean War (www.endthekoreanwar.org) in a coordinated "online demonstration" -

1. Barrage the White House and State Department with emails and urge President Obama and State Secretary Clinton to immediately stop the joint U.S.-South Korean war maneuvers, and sign a peace treaty to end the state of war that has existed for sixty years on the Korean peninsula- http://www.whitehouse.gov/contacthttp://contact-us.state.gov/

2. Post replies on online media sites and blogs where they are discussing the issue and beat back the war-mongering rhetoric with calls for de-escalation and a peaceful resolution. Refer to the attached factsheet for talking points. Some suggested sites are:

www.cnn.com
www.nytimes.com
www.washingtonpost.com
www.huffingtonpost.com
www.npr.org
www.bbc.co.uk
www.news.yahoo.com
www.voanews.com
www.abcnews.go.com
www.foreignpolicy.com

3. Post links to the following articles calling for diplomacy on listserves, blogs, Facebook, Twitter:

• "North Korea's Consistent Message to the U.S." By former President Jimmy Carter in the Washington Post, November 24, 2010: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/23/AR2010112305808.html

• “Retaliation, Retaliation" by Paul Liem of the Korea Policy Institute, Nov 25, 2010 http://www.kpolicy.org/

• "Crisis in Korea?" by John Feffer, Co-director of Foreign Policy in Focus, in the Huffington Post, Nov 23,2010: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-feffer/crisis-in-korea_b_787639.html

• Tim Shorrock, posted at the Daily Beast: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-11-24/korea-standoff-barack-obama-only-has-one-choice/?cid=hp%3Amainpromo1

• Tim Shorrock interview at Democracy Now: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/11/24/tim_shorrock_direct_talks_with_north

• “A Return Trip to North Korea’s Yongbyon Nuclear Complex” By Siegfried S. Hecke: rhttp://www.nautilus.org/publications/essays/napsnet/reports/a-return-trip-to-north-korea2019s-yongbyon-nuclear-complex

• “Review U.S. Policy toward North Korea” Bob Carlin and John Lewis published in the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/21/AR2010112102276.html

Tim Shorrock: "Direct Talks With North Korea Are the Only Answer to End Korean War"

(Amy Goodman's interview with investigative journalist Tim Shorrock, who has covered the Korean peninsula for over thirty years)

AMY GOODMAN: The fighting came just days after was revealed North Korea had made rapid advances in enriching uranium at a previously undisclosed plant. For more, I’m joined by Tim Shorrock, an investigative journalist who has covered Korea for more than 30 years and grew up partly in South Korea. Tim, welcome to "Democracy Now!" First, explain exactly what happened.

TIM SHORROCK: Over the last couple of days, the South Korean military, which is part of a joint command with the U.S. military, held massive exercises in a disputed area, near the disputed maritime zone area on the west coast of Korea. These exercises had been planned months in advance and North Korea of course knew about then. They involved tens of thousands of South Korean soldiers, many warships and air force planes as well as personnel from the U.S. Marines and Air Force. And these exercises, as you said, they are live fire exercises. North Korea, shortly before, in the days leading up to these exercises, warned they would react in shells fell in their line of this maritime line, demarcation line, which they dispute and have disputed for years. Apparently, some shells did land on their side of this line and they retaliated by shelling this island and causing many, you know, some casualties. It was a very serious and grave incident that deserves the very serious and sober analysis, which we have not seen in the U.S. media in the past 24 hours. That is what happened...

Read the entire interview transcript here.

South Korea admits to firing the 1st shot (during live-fire U.S.-S. Korea military exercises)

Most of the U.S. media is framing the tragic latest from the Korean peninsula as if N. Korea fired upon S. Korea out-of-the-blue. Few reports, if any, mention the important fact that this year, the U.S. and South Korea have been holding frequent (almost monthly since July) joint military exercises directed at North Korea.

Here's crucial context from Tim Shorrock in a recent Democracy Now interview:

AMY GOODMAN: The fighting came just days after was revealed North Korea had made rapid advances in enriching uranium at a previously undisclosed plant. For more, I’m joined by Tim Shorrock, an investigative journalist who has covered Korea for more than 30 years and grew up partly in South Korea. Tim, welcome to "Democracy Now!" First, explain exactly what happened.

TIM SHORROCK: Over the last couple of days, the South Korean military, which is part of a joint command with the U.S. military, held massive exercises in a disputed area, near the disputed maritime zone area on the west coast of Korea. These exercises had been planned months in advance and North Korea of course knew about then. They involved tens of thousands of South Korean soldiers, many warships and air force planes as well as personnel from the U.S. Marines and Air Force. And these exercises, as you said, they are live fire exercises.

North Korea, shortly before, in the days leading up to these exercises, warned they would react in shells fell in their line of this maritime line, demarcation line, which they dispute and have disputed for years. Apparently, some shells did land on their side of this line and they retaliated by shelling this island and causing many, you know, some casualties. It was a very serious and grave incident that deserves the very serious and sober analysis, which we have not seen in the U.S. media in the past 24 hours. That is what happened.

AMY GOODMAN: Were you surprised by what has taken place? The media is making a great deal of the North Korean leader taking his young son, heir apparent on a tour of a soy sauce factory while this was going on.

TIM SHORROCK: You’re always kind of surprised when these things happen.

But in the context of the last 50 years, it is not really that surprising, particularly if you look at the maritime zone and particularly if you look at the history of U.S.-South Korean military and its standoff with the North Korean regime.

First of all, over the last few years, there has increasing tensions over this zone. As I said, this border area in the sea, this border line was imposed unilaterally by the U.S. Navy in 1953 right after the Korean war. That line has never been recognized by North Korea, nor by the international community.

A few years ago, under the former presidency of Roh Moo-Hyun, there was actually a meeting, a summit meeting, between the president of South Korea and Kim Jong Il, the dictator of North Korea. They sat down and worked out sort of a set of agreements to try to decrease tensions in that maritime area, including the making of free fishing zones and having discussions to alleviate the attention to make sure there were no incidents like this.

This new president Lee is very conservative man who has rejected the former sunshine policies of Kim Dae-Jung and his predecessor, who were much more open and tried to cement closer relationships and end the enmity between North and South Korea. Lee unilaterally pulled away from this agreement.

And over the last few years, our listeners and watchers will remember, there have been quite a few incidents. Earlier this year, in March 2010, a South Korean naval ship was blown up allegedly by North Korea by a torpedo and sank, killing about 33 sailors. This was also a very serious incident. And many people who watch North Korea believe that that particular attack, if North Korea did it, was in retaliation for an incident that took place last year when South Korea fired on a North Korean ship that had crossed the line and many North Korean sailors were killed in that attack. And so you know this has been going on.

I think the first thing that needs to be done is it would be important to restore some kind of discussion, some kind of negotiation so they can reduce tensions in that specific area.

Read the rest of the interview here.

More important context (via Tim Shorrock's blog) by staff writer Son Won-je of the South Korean newspaper, The Hankyoreh:

North Korea’s artillery attack Tuesday on Yeonpyeong Island was a high-intensity military provocation without precedent since the armistice that ended the Korean War. Unlike previous military clashes over the year, private South Korean homes and civilians were subjected to an indiscriminate attack.

For the time being, North Korea is using South Korea’s military defense exercises as its rationale for the attack. On Tuesday morning, Pyongyang sent a message to South Korea criticizing the exercises as “effectively an attack on North Korea.”

The Hoguk Exercise in question involve 70 thousand South Korean armed forces troops, 600 tracked vehicles, 90 helicopters, 50 warships, and 500 aircraft. The U.S. military is contributing the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit and 7th Air Force to the land and air training exercises, respectively. Pyongyang regards the exercises as training for an attack on North Korea, citing the fact that it is a large-scale joint South Korea-U.S. exercise encompassing naval fleets, air forces, and land exercises.

A former [South Korean] Navy admiral with experience as a squadron leader around the West Sea Northern Limit Line (NLL) said that Yeonpyeong Island “was probably chosen as the site for the attack because it is closest to the North Korea coast, allowing for easy firing and high precision.”

The former admiral added, “Given that civilian homes were also targeted, it is too deliberate to be viewed simply as a response to the defense exercises.”

Analysts have suggested that the different form of military behavior seen this time stemmed from an urgent situation within North Korea.

Korea National Defense University Professor Kim Yeon-su said, “There is a possibility that the reason North Korea has shown this pattern of provocation, ratcheting up the crisis index on the Korean Peninsula, has to do with some problem that arose in the establishment process for the leadership succession system.”

In other words, North Korea may have sensed a need to deal a high-intensity international and domestic shock in order to surmount the immense challenges presented in the succession system establishment process.

Observers predict that this attack will have the effect of increasing solidarity behind the Kim Jong-un system, which emphasizes songun, military first, domestic policy. This analysis suggests that North Korea may have been attempting to foment the belief that amid a situation of military confrontation with South Korea, there is no alternative to a response centered on the Kim Jong-un succession system, which has inherited Kim Jong-il’s songun policy.

Another possibility mentioned by analysts is that the attack was ultimately intended to promote and strengthen Kim Jong-un’s leadership by effecting changes in Washington and Seoul’s North Korea policy through hardline military measures.

The prevailing analysis is that the decision to wage an attack on the area near the West Sea NLL, coming on the heels of the sudden disclosure of a uranium enrichment facility recently to a U.S. expert visiting North Korea, carried the political message of “highlighting the seriousness of the political situation on the peninsula.”

An expert who requested anonymity said, “North Korea’s recent actions may in some respects be aimed at forming an environment favorable for negotiations in the long term, but at least in the short term they strongly suggest a show of force to indicate that Pyongyang is not going to be dwelling on negotiations.”

Another possibility mentioned by observers was that the move was based on the calculation that if North Korea ratcheted up the peninsula’s crisis index, the United States would inevitably be compelled to pursue negotiations with Pyongyang in order to manage the situation. In spite of North Korea’s recent “dialogue offensive,” Seoul has maintained the position that the resumption of large-scale aid and Mt. Kumgang tourism is an impossibility.

“Since the recent conciliation offensive spearheaded by the United Front Department did not work out, it may be the case that North Korea is trying to spark conflict within South Korea by using shock treatment methods to shake up South Korean society, thus pressuring Seoul into taking part in dialogue,” said an expert at one state-run think tank.

With this latest incident, the situation on the Korean Peninsula has plunged into a murky crisis where it is impossible to see what lies ahead. While the sudden revelation of North Korea’s uranium enrichment facility is likely to have more of a negative impact on the Northeast Asia situation in general than on inter-Korean relations, Tuesday’s artillery battle around Yeonpyeong Island is a major disaster that will deal a fatal blow to already strained inter-Korean relations. Depending on the way in which the situation unfolds, it could go beyond this to have a major impact on the political situation surrounding the peninsula.

Read the rest here.

Peace Carnival Part II: NO BASE! MORE MUSIC! Friday 11/26 @ Chikyuya (Kunitachi, Tokyo)

Friday, November 26th
8:00 PM (Doors open at 7:30)

Please join the second installment of the Peace Carnival event series, which will feature a discussion on the U.S. military base situation in Okinawa led by Professor Satoshi Ukai from Hitotsubashi University, as well as several incredible (and activist-minded!) acts from the Tokyo music scene:

☆Jintara Brothers

Special unit featuring Wataru Oguma (powerful performer from the Tokyo underground chindon group Cixla Muta) together with solo artist Hiroshi Kawamura (previously of Soul Flower Union)

☆ Singer/guitarist Pak Poe together with Satchan (Hana & Phenomenon)

☆ Anbassa (roots reggae unit)

Chikyuya Live House (Kunitachi, Tokyo)
1-16-13 B1 Kunitachi Higashi

(Head down Daigaku-dori (University road) from the North exit of Kunitachi station for about 5 minutes. Chikyuya is in the basement on the left side, just before a shop on the corner with a neon yellow sign.)

Entry: 2000 yen (plus one drink)
* 1500 yen entry is available by making advance reservations at Chikyuya 042-572-585 (between 7PM and 1AM).

Event organizer: Peace Carnival Committee (peacecarnival@gmail.com)
Additional support: Peace Not War Japan (info@pnwj.org)

For more information, see the event blog (Japanese only).

In danger: Takae, a village in Okinawa's Yanbaru Forest, a place flourishing with biodiversity

In this humanizing article, "When the Pentagon "Kill Machines" Came to an Okinawan Paradise: Undermining of Democracy in Japan" published at Counterpunch earlier this month, UNC-Chapel Hill East Asian history scholar Mark Driscoll tells the story of an ecologically conscious, peaceful community struggling against U.S. military violence (enabled by the Japanese government) for decades:

When I arrived at the small village of Takae in the northernmost part of the main island of Okinawa to spend 5 days at a sit-in protest there in mid-July, my first image of the place was the unusual municipal charter that greeted me as I got off the bus. Codified in 1996, the residents pledge to:

1.. Love nature and strive to create a beautiful environment resplendent with flowers and water;

2. Value our traditional culture, while always striving to learn new things; and

3. Create a municipality in which people can interact in a spirit of vitality and joy.

The charter mentions no human founding fathers of Takae, rather it followed with lavish descriptions of the village flower (azalea) and bird (sea woodpecker) in addition to details about the gorgeous waterfalls and the rare combination of seacoast and mountains that creates a strong impression of a tropical paradise; UNESCO has identified the ecological diversity of this area as among the richest in the world.

The sense of paradise is what brought Ashimine Genji to Takae ten years ago. Ashimine, a native of Okinawa who moved to the Japanese mainland during the economic bubble period in the mid-1980s, moved back to Okinawa when he got tired of the frenetic Tokyo life and exhausting wage labor. With his lover he bought some land in the mountains amidst waterfalls, animals and birds and started raising their 3 kids, while constructing a small organic restaurant. During my interview with him he insisted that the family was committed to living as simply, slowly, and sustainably as possible, and they deliberately spent the first two years in Takae without electricity, reluctantly attaching to a grid only when their oldest kid’s complaints wouldn’t stop.

It’s hard to avoid the descriptive mantra of Okinawan life as “simple and slow” in Japanese lifestyle magazines (with, in the last two years, “sustainable” [saiseisan] commonly appended) and perusal of these magazines convinced Naoko and Kôji Morioka to relocate to Takae four years ago. Amateur organic farmers and part-time artists raised in Tokyo, they had lived in Africa, India and Nepal before relocating with their two small kids to Takae to start full-time organic rice farming. Also refusing electricity, they built a small house from scratch just 30 yards north of a gorgeous waterfall and 300 yards from the sea, determined both to pioneer a new path of zero growth against Japanese postmodern capitalism and to enjoy the close community of Takae, consisting of farmers, fisherfolk and several convivial story-tellers...

While about a fourth of Takae’s 160 residents are eco-conscious transplants from Tokyo and their kids, several claim descendants going back a millennium who have enjoyed the fruits (mango) and vegetables that grow wild in the area. Right smack in the middle of this sustainable paradise is where a large part of the newest US military base is about to be built.

Takae residents were kept in the dark about the base until just before construction was to begin. Leaks, reported in the Okinawa Times in late 2006, forced the Japanese Defense Ministry to hold an information session in early 2007. It was only here that the Ashimines and Moriokas were informed that the main helicopter base for the US military in Japan was about to be built in their backyard, including facilities for 3 Osprey heli-planes. When the Defense Ministry showed the people of Takae a Power Point slide of the projected base area, they realized that two of their homes would be within 400 meters of the proposed new base.

Ashimine recalled how he felt after the session. “One minute I was living a life of harmony with nature with my family and friends, and the next minute I was being told that these killing machines (kiru- mashin) were coming to within a few hundred meters of my house; the disconnect (iwakan) was overwhelming” (Ku-yon June 2010; 101).

Within a few months, Takae locals obtained a fuller picture of what was going on: based on a secret agreement between the Japanese Foreign Ministry and the US Pentagon made in 1996—finally signed into a dubious kind of legality in February 2009—the large, but increasingly obsolete US military base Futenma in central Okinawa was to be relocated with completely new infrastructure to northern Okinawa. The plan was to transfer the infrastructure of Futenma to the smaller US base Camp Schwab located 20 miles from Takae. But airport and helicopter facilities were necessary to fill out Futenma’s capacity and this is where Takae and the equally pristine fishing village of Henoko, 30 minutes southeast of Takae, would come into play. The old airport at Futenma would be replaced with a new V-shaped one carved out of the beach in Henoko, while Takae would get all the CH-47 and CH-54 helicopters together with the behemoth Ospreys.     

Henoko’s proximity to Camp Schwab has created a palpable anti-base sentiment there, and local activists started mobilizing opposition to the proposed airport construction in 2004. With help from the all-women anti-base group Naha Broccoli, situated in the Okinawan capital of Naha, activist information sessions and bus tours of the proposed base areas began in June 2007 which jumpstarted regular contact among Takae, Henoko and Naha.

Encouraged by activist friends in Tokyo to go Okinawa to look around, in July 2007, with about 40 others, I participated in the second Broccoli bus tour and was stunned—but I should have known better. The lack of transparency on the side of the Pentagon and the deafness to local Japanese concerns were standard neocolonial postures of US base presence in Asia going back to just after World War II.

But witnessing the sustained protest in Henoko by anti-war activists spanning 3 generations inspired all of us on the tour. The required environmental assessment for new base construction had been underway for over a year and Henoko activists were doing their best to disrupt it, including a blockade of Japanese Navy vessels with cordons of local fishing boats and, with air tanks and wet suits, conducting underwater direction action against young Japanese Navy divers trying to complete the seabed assessment. In November 2007 a Henoko activist almost died when the breathing line to his airtank was severed. Just after our bus tour, protest signs and colorful anti-base paintings started to show up around the two main gates to the newly fenced-in Takae helicopter facility. By August 2007, Rie Ishihara, a Takae mother of two started daily sit-ins in front of the main entrance by herself; soon she was joined by other locals and then by Naha activists.

Quickly, anti-base Japanese started coming from the mainland, often devoting one day of their Okinawa vacation week sitting in at Takae. The mushrooming anti-base movement in Takae caught the Japanese Defense Ministry in Okinawa off-guard and when the environment assessment group started its two-year survey at the Takae site a year later, the Okinawan office of the Japanese Defense Ministry—the local defender of the US bases— preemptively took the whole town to court, serving 15 Takae residents a summons for “disrupting traffic” on Dec. 16, 2008.

Ishihara told me that when she got the summons she thought it was a practical joke as everyone knows there is no traffic in Takae and a few local residents even refuse to drive cars because of the impact on the environment. But this was no joke, as the drawn-out legal hearings lasted a year and forced the Takae farmers to spend money on lawyers and court fees. On December 11, the provincial court in Naha ruled in favor of 13 defendants, although it ruled against Ashimine and the head of the Takae residents anti-base group Toshio Isa. Isa and Ashimine can now be forced to stand trial in Tokyo at any point the Japanese government decides.

While the events were unfolding in Okinawa, politics on Japan’s mainland were revealing similar anti-US patterns. During the campaigning for the crucial Lower House elections in July 2009, the upstart Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) promised in their manifesto to establish a “different policy with respect to the US-Japan alliance,” one central aspect of which would be a “significant re-thinking (minaoshi) of the US military in Japan including the situation of all the US bases”.  

Soon to be Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama refined his critique of the US-Japan security framework by focusing on the unfair “burden” placed on Okinawa by having some 24,000 US troops stationed there, including 18,000 Marines—65% of the US military presence in Japan installed on a land mass less than 1% of Japan’s total. The party in power for all but one year since the end of the US Occupation of Japan, the right-wing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) had been losing support since it ordered Japanese soldiers to deploy to war-zones in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2002-03 in the face of Japanese public opposition polling at 80-90%.

The historic victory of the DPJ over the LDP in August 2009 should be seen as the culmination of multiple forms of opposition to the LDP’s blind allegiance to the US, together with a pragmatic understanding that Japan’s economic future lies more closely entwined with China. In addition to pledging to reform aspects of Japan’s military-security framework with the US, the DPJ Secretary General Ichiro Ozawa promised to enhance ties to China beyond the economic sphere, where China is now Japan’s largest trading partner. The double whammy of a confirmation that closer ties with China are beneficial together with a groundswell of resistance to the US military swept the DPJ into power.

Right away, new Prime Minister Hatoyama went to work on his party’s campaign promise and started exploring ways to reform the US-Japan alliance; in a flush of post-victory confidence he wondered out loud what a future security framework would look like with “zero US troops stationed in Japan” (chûryû naki ampô). Several months earlier, Ozawa insisted that, “the [US Navy] 7th Fleet alone is sufficient,” meaning that as far as the DPJ leaders were concerned, the remaining 35,000 US troops should begin packing up their things to leave Japan permanently.

Although the US media underplayed this challenge, the Pentagon understood exactly what was at stake and wasn’t liking it. Despite President Obama’s cautious wait and see approach to the democratic regime change in Japan, the Pentagon immediately starting sparring with the Japanese Ambassador to the US Ichiro Fujisaki in Washington over issues like the Guam Treaty signed by the weakened LDP in early 2009, which dictated the terms of the new base construction in Henoko/Takae and the planned move of somewhere between 3000 to 9000 of the 18,000 Marines in Okinawa to new facilities in Guam—with Japanese taxpayers forced to pay 65-70% of the costs for both the move and the new base in Guam.

During the July 2009 campaign several DPJ candidates echoed the argument made by Okinawan critics that the Guam Treaty was clearly unequal because it obliged the Japanese to construct one new base in Okinawa and to contribute most of the money toward building another in Guam, while the American side merely offered an ambiguous pledge to withdraw some troops while reserving the right to change its commitments when it wanted. Furthermore, critics argued that the Guam Treaty was illegal as it violated Article 95 of Japan’s constitution, which stipulates that any law applicable only to one locale requires the consent of the majority of the voters of that province, and support for the construction of the new base among Okinawans had been almost completely absent.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates traveled to Tokyo for two days of meetings in late October 2009 clearly intending to muzzle the critiques of the US presence in Japan and to remind the new DPJ leaders of the post-WW II status quo, where senior (US) and junior (Japan) partners would continue to work together to contain China and North Korea. “It is time to move on,” Gates scolded the new Japanese leaders on October 22, calling DPJ proposals to reopen the base issues “counterproductive.” Then, deliberately insulting the DPJ in the eyes of almost all Japanese commentators Gates refused to attend the welcoming ceremony and formal dinner organized for him at the Defense Ministry in Tokyo on October 23.

In enumerating the insults and behind the scenes threats made by Gates in Tokyo a few days after his departure, the Okinawan newspaper the Ryukyu Shimpo lambasted the “diplomacy of intimidation” practiced by the US in its editorial of October 26...

Read the rest of Driscoll's report here. His informed (he is a scholar in Japanese colonial history) analysis is a rare example of on-the-ground reporting from Okinawa in the English-language media.

Most U.S. & other English-language media reports on Okinawa are written by reporters who are not only not based in Okinawa or Japan but who also have not visited Okinawa. That's why these reports routinely refer to Henoko and Takae, sanctuaries of Okinawa's rich and beautiful biodiversity, simply as a "less populated area in the north." This over-used and misleading description from Washington's and Tokyo's points-of-view obscures what is at stake in Okinawa. Driscoll's democratic take provides a full, authentic picture, from multiple POVs, including those of Okinawans.

John Feffer: "It's a Shame Chalmers Johnson Did Not Live to See the U.S. Air Base on Okinawa Closed"

John Feffer's tribute to Chalmers Johnson at Foreign Policy in Focus:

I contacted Chalmers Johnson last spring when we were putting together a coalition to oppose the relocation of the Futenma air base in Okinawa. Johnson, who died over the weekend, was best known for his book-length critiques of U.S. foreign policy (Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire, Nemesis, and this year's Dismantling the Empire). But he began his career of scholarship with books on China and Japan, and in 1999 published an edited collection called Okinawa: Cold War Island.

Johnson graciously arranged to send a signed copy of the book on Okinawa to a congressman heading to Japan. And he agreed to pen an op-ed to coincide with the massive protest against the base relocation that took place in Okinawa on April 25. In the piece that my colleague Emily Schwartz Greco ultimately placed with The Los Angeles Times, he wrote (in "Another Battle for Okinawa: Despite protests, the U.S. insists on going ahead with plans for a new military base on the island."):

The U.S. has become obsessed with maintaining our empire of military bases, which we cannot afford and which an increasing number of so-called host countries no longer want. I would strongly suggest that the United States climb off its high horse, move the Futenma Marines back to a base in the United States (such as Camp Pendleton, near where I live) and thank the Okinawans for their 65 years of forbearance. 

Johnson was a realist. "Unfortunately, I'm not very optimistic that either the Obama administration or the Japanese will do anything about closing Futenma," he wrote to me at the time. As it turned out, he was right. The Obama administration put maximum pressure on the Japanese government to abide by an earlier agreement to build a replacement facility on Okinawa. As a result, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama reversed his initial skeptical position on building a new base and then promptly resigned.

Two trends, however, may force both the United States and Japan to change their policy...

Chalmers Johnson explained the how and why of U.S. empire, and for that we all owe him an enormous debt of gratitude. It is a shame that he did not live long enough to see that empire dismantled. But in the work we do toward that goal, we honor his name and his work.

Read the entire article at FPIF.

Standing Army has Japan premiere in Tokyo Sat., Nov. 20; also available on DVD

Standing Army will have its Japan premiere in Tokyo this Saturday, Nov. 20, at the Tama Cinema Forum.

Standing Army is a new documentary film from Enrico Parenti and Thomas Fazi that connects the dots between planned and ongoing U.S. military expansion around the world.

The Obama administration (dashing global hope that it would bring change) has only accelerated and deepened Bush's global military expansion agenda. Washington is pushing to open several new bases in Columbia and Panama. The US military base expansion into the last green space in Vicenza—a World Heritage site—was opposed by over 95% of the residents, still protesting what they see as an invasion into their landscape, history, and culture. In Okinawa, Japan, Guam, Korea, Hawai'i, and the rest of the A-P, we see related ongoing incredible level of expansion in the works.

Why is Washington borrowing record amounts of money from China to spend record sums on worldwide military expansion unwanted by "host" populations (while Americans are experiencing increasing homelessness, hunger, cuts in social welfare nets)?

From the film's website:

Over the course of the last century, the US has silently encircled the world with a web of military bases unlike any other in history. Today, they amount to more than 700, in at least 100 countries. No continent is spared. They are one the most powerful forces at play in the world today, yet one of the less talked-about. They have shaped the lives of millions, yet remain a mystery to most.

Why do countries like Germany, Italy and Japan – more than 60 years after the end of World War II and almost 20 years after the end of the Cold War – still host hundreds of US military bases and tens of thousands of US soldiers?

• What role do the bases play in maintaining US hegemony in the world?

• How will they shape our future?

•  Is a global military presence the last resource of an economically-, politically- and culturally-declining empire?

•  How do the bases impact the lives of local populations and how do these interact with their uniformed neighbours?

We will answer these and other crucial questions both through the words of prominent intellectuals, experts on the subject, political and military leaders, ex-government and CIA officials, philosophers and political activists – some of whom we have already interviewed: Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal, Chalmers Johnson and others – and through the shocking but often inspiring stories of those directly affected by US bases:

The citizens of Vicenza, struggling to stop the construction of yet another military base in their hometown; the Diego Garcia islanders, violently expelled from their island in the Indian Ocean to make space for a US military base, and who have been fighting for years to return to their birthplace; the many Japanese women brutalized by US soldiers in Okinawa; the various grassroots movements in Europe and Asia struggling for a base-free world; as well as those living inside the bases: the men and women who are often sent to faraway lands with little or no preparation for what they’ll find there.

Standing Army is now available on DVD according to the filmmakers:

We are delighted to announce that we are finally ready to start selling the English version of our film to all four corners of the world.

Well, three corners: unfortunately we have to ask our Japanese fans to be patient a little while more. We have to remind everyone in Japan that in light of the distribution contract recently signed in the country we're not allowed to directly sell copies of the film there.

In the meantime - sorry, Japan - everyone else is free to go mad and buy as many copies as they want at the Standing Army website. Or you can just send us an email with the number of copies you want and we will send you a PayPal money request via e-mail, which you will just have to click on to proceed straight to the payment (you are not required to have a PayPal account).

Some latest news you won’t find on the website:

We’re delighted to announce that Standing Army has been selected for screening at many international festivals.

To name a few: SiciliAmbiente Film Festival (winner “Best Documentary”); Tekfestival (special mention: “Best Photography”); São Paulo Intl  Film Festival; Buenos Aires Intl Film Festival; Espoo Ciné Intl Film Festival; DOK Leipzig; IDFA Docs for Sale; Jihlava Intl Documentary Film Festival; Romania Intl Film Festival; DOCSDF (Intl Documentary Film Festival of Mexico City); Istanbul International 1001 Documentary Film Festival; and Festival des Libertés.

Here's an article and interview, "Italian Film Captures Anger at US Bases" by Kelly Vlahos posted at Antiwar.com in August.

(Outdoor statue of Kannon (Japanese), Guanyin (Chinese), or Avalokitesvara (Sanskrit), Bodhisattva of Compassion, at a subtemple of one of Kyoto's large Zen temples, Daitoku-ji, during late autumn)

Speakers contemplate Palestinian human rights, urge action at Tokyo event

May Shigenobu and Anna Baltzer

“Imagine, just for a moment, that in order to come to today’s lecture, you had to leave your house at 6AM instead of 1PM—and that you were stopped by authorities multiple times along the way in order to show identification and answer questions.”

“If you can envision what this might feel like, you will have had only the slightest glimpse of what life is like every single day for people living in the Palestinian Occupied Territories.”

And so began the lecture of Jewish-American human rights activist Anna Baltzer, who spoke to a group of around 100 people in a Tokyo university auditorium this past Saturday afternoon. Currently visiting six Japanese cities as part of her international speaking tour, titled "Life in Occupied Palestine: Eyewitness Stories & Photos", Anna was also joined on Saturday by journalist and Palestinian rights activist May Shigenobu.

Through Anna’s slideshow presentation and heartfelt commentary, audience members learned of the daily injustices suffered by a people who have been marginalized in their own homeland for decades. Many of her stories were heartbreaking, such as that of her friend’s six month old son, who died of a treatable asthma attack after Israeli soldiers refused to let the family pass through a checkpoint station to reach a local hospital—the type of incident that sadly occurs on a regular basis. She also pointed out the absurdity of the fact that as a Jewish American, she could easily go live in the home and farm the land of displaced Palestinians—and that the Israeli government would actually pay her a significant sum of money in order to do so.

“The media presents us with images of Palestinians as violent, but the fact is that they are practicing nonviolent resistance every single day just by virtue of going about their daily lives,” Anna pointed out. She then highlighted several types of creative civil disobedience acts, such as murals being painted on the separation Wall (which was erected by the Israeli government as a further means of control over Palestinians’ movements), as well as billboards bearing messages of resistance, and other artistic means of protest such as concerts and theater.

"Taste the Revolution" (from Anna Baltzer's website, Witness in Palestine)

“When children who refuse to allow their education to be disturbed wake up at 3:30 every morning to pass through the checkpoints and reach school on time, this is also a form of nonviolent resistance,” she emphasized.

Anna’s presentation was followed by a talk from May Shigenobu, a Palestinian-Japanese who was born in Beirut, Lebanon and is now a journalist, doctoral candidate and activist based in Japan.

“Within the political climate following September 11th, 2001, any and all resistance has tended to be characterized as terrorism—including even nonviolent means of protest that are completely within the law,” she noted. “While nonviolent resistance is obviously the ideal under any circumstance, there does come a point when the limits of human endurance are reached, and people tire of seeing their families exploited from generation to generation. And it is important to note here that international law actually provides a right of defense within its frameworks.

“For example, Article 51 of the United Nations Charter says that ‘a state which forcibly subjugates a people to colonial or alien domination is committing an unlawful act as defined by international law, and the subject people, in the exercise of its inherent right of self-defense, may fight to defend and attain its right to self-determination"—a perspective that is outlined further in this thought-provoking piece.

May went on to explain the different categories of Palestinians, who all face varying hardships depending upon their situation: those living within the occupied territories (West Bank and Gaza) who face an apartheid-like situation characterized by no legal rights; those living as refugees in neighboring countries such as Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and Iraq, whose living conditions and rights are completely dependent upon the host country; and those living within Israel itself, where Palestinians comprise 20% of the population but are treated as third-class citizens. She also discussed the difficulty of being stateless as a Palestinian refugee (a situation that she herself faced prior to obtaining Japanese citizenship in 2001).

Both speakers emphasized that the present conflict is one of human rights and justice—and most certainly not one of Islam vs. Judaism. They also both encouraged everyone attending the event to take action on the issue, whether by joining an organization, visiting the region, or just sharing knowledge with others.

Personally speaking, I found the event to be extremely inspiring and healing insofar as both speakers were coming from different backgrounds and ideological perspectives in order to passionately embrace the same goal. Numerous attendees voiced similar comments during the lively Q&A session, where students, grassroots activists, and local community members thanked the speakers for their gracious presentations and shared their own anecdotes.

Anna finished the session by reminding the audience: “Israel today is afraid. By coming together and taking action, we can most definitely succeed in restoring rights to the Palestinians.” She urged attendees to become involved with Japan-based campaigns to help make this happen, such as the current effort by the Palestine Forum organization to hold a boycott of the popular MUJI home goods store if it proceeds with plans to build a store in Israel—part of the Global BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) initiative. The BDS movement is discussed at length in this fascinating interview with Jewish-Canadian journalist Naomi Klein, who devised a creative plan to publicize the Hebrew version of her best-selling book The Shock Doctrine using a grassroots-level anti-occupation Israeli publisher, and launched her book tour at a Palestinian-Israeli theater house.

For more inspirational stories of Jewish and Palestinian people coming together to launch joint projects for peace and social justice, see Anna Baltzer's website A Witness in Palestine, as well as The Parents Circle, Combatants for Peace, Jewish-Palestinian Living Room Dialogue Group, and the Seiichi no kodomo youth exchange project (last website in Japanese only).

Young, Jewish and Proud, affiliated with Jewish Voice for Peace, also has an inspiring video of their recent disruption of Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech at the Jewish General Assembly by broadcasting messages against the Palestinian occupation, and its website features a rousing message for a new generation of young activists.



Speakers together with event organizers and graduate students at Daito Bunka University (Photo by Eric Baudelaire)

--Kimberly Hughes

Peace and Human Rights in Palestine - the Occupation as witnessed by Anna Baltzer @ Kyoto, Tues, Nov 16

Palestinian peace activists
(Photo Courtesy of Annainthemiddleeast.com)

Anna Baltzer serves as the voice of the voiceless. The granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, and a Jewish-American human rights activist, she speaks on behalf of the Palestinians and Israelis alike searching for a peaceful solution to the war and aggression confronting the people living in Occupied Palestine and Israel. As part of a speaking tour throughout Japan, this Tuesday, November 16th, Anna will address an audience at Kyoto University about the occupation of Palestine and the search for peace and respect for human rights in the region.

Anna writes on her blog about how she first learned of the Palestinian Occupation:

Like many Americans and many Jews, I grew up with a positive view of Israel as a peace-seeking democracy. Israel symbolized to me the one protection that Jews had against the type of persecution that had plagued families like mine throughout history. I saw the Jewish state as a tiny and victimized country that simply wanted to live in peace but couldn’t because of its aggressive, Jew-hating Arab neighbors.

In 2003, during a backpacking trip through the Middle East, I began to meet Palestinian refugees from 1948. I didn’t know who the Palestinians were, or where Palestine was, and through my new acquaintances I began to hear a narrative about the history and present of Israel/Palestine that was entirely different from the one I had learned growing up in the United States.

My first reaction was disbelief, and anger. Families told me stories of past and present military attacks, house demolitions, land confiscation, imprisonment without trial, and torture. It seemed that these actions were not carried out for the protection of Jewish people, but rather for the creation and expansion of a Jewish state at the expense of the rights, lives, and dignity of the non-Jewish people living in the region. It was hard for me to believe that Israel could act so unjustly.

Not believing what I heard, I decided to do some research to prove myself right. Immediately, I was shocked to find how much I didn’t know about the situation on the ground. Not knowing who or what to believe anymore, I decided to go to see the situation with my own eyes. Since I returned, I’ve dedicated my life to informing fellow Americans and others about what I found, and what they can do to support a just peace for all peoples in Israel/Palestine.

After spending eight months as a volunteer with the International Women's Peace Service* in the West Bank, she has written countless articles about the Palestinian experience in Israel, and has detailed her experiences in her critically acclaimed photo reportage, Witness in Palestine (available for screening). She also supports the work of a the Palestinian group, Slingshot Hip Hop, who utilizes hip hop as a "tool to surmount divisions imposed by occupation and poverty."

Anna is not alone in her struggle for peace in Palestine. In fact, she is just one of many Palestinians, Israelis, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Americans, and other people from diverse backgrounds working for a peaceful solution. By working side-by-side with Palestinians and speaking out against the occupation, Anna gives us hope that there will one day arise a non-violent, peaceful solution that will allow the people in Israel and Palestine to live in peace with one another once again. She also gives us hope that the voices of the countless numbers of Jews and Christians and Muslims and peoples of all faiths working together to overcome the painful violence that characterizes the lives of people in Palestine and Israel, will be heard.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Anna Baltzer & Mustafa Barghouti Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes	Political Humor	Rally to Restore Sanity

"Israelis will never be free unless the Palestinians are also free"- Mustafa Barghouti in a joint interview with Anna Balzer on the Daily Show

Event information--------------------------------------------------

[Date] Tuesday, November 16, 2010, from 18:30 to 21:30 (doors open at 18:00)
[Venue] Graduate School of Human and Environmental Studies,
Kyoto University, Yoshida Minami campus, Basement Lecture Hall (Map)

Registration - Advance registration is required at: anna.in.kyoto [at] gmail.com

★Please register in advance so handouts and brochures can be prepared
Brochure fee: 1000 yen

[Languages of event] English and Japanese (Japanese translation is provided)

For all enquiries, contact: anna.in.kyoto [at] gmail.com

ACCESS:

★ Yoshida Minami campus is the south campus, on the opposite side of the road from the main campus with the famous clock tower. The closest entry point to the site is from the west gate of Higashiooji Street. Enter the west gate, go straight and then turn right towards the venue: a modern five-storey building. The venue is in the eastern side with glass facade on the first storey. The building houses the Graduate School of Human and Environmental Studies. Please check the map before visiting. An image of the building can be found here and here (the photograph of the building is on the right).

*The International Women's Peace Service welcomes human rights volunteers. Click here for more info.

-Posted by Jen Teeter

Special Premiere Screening of Hiroshima Nagasaki Download in NYC tomorrow, Nov. 14

From Yumi Tanaka of the New York Peace Film Festival:

Greetings!

I'd proud to announce NY Premiere screening of "Hiroshima Nagasaki Download" directed by Shinpei Takeda. This film was screened at 1st Nagasaki International Peace Film Forum that spread out my New York Peace Film Festival. The film is to be released in nation-wide theaters next summer.

Mr. Takashi Thomas Tanemori, a Hiroshima survivor living in San Francisco, will be present at the screening to answer Q&A after the screening with the director.

Synopsis:

Upon the end of the World War II, some people who survived the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki immigrated to the USA, bearing both physical and psychological wounds. These survivors have lived quietly in a country formerly considered their "state enemy."

Sixty-four years later, two former high school friends journey to seek "Hiroshima" and "Nagasaki" as they are ingrained in the collective psyche of modern Japan. They drove down America's West Coast to visit eighteen other survivors who shared memories that changed the lives of the friends forever.

Director: Shinpei Takeda

The first feature film by Shinpei Takeda, a director based in Mexico who has followed the atomic bomb survivors in North and South America for the last 5 years.

When & Where:

■　Sunday, Nov. 14, 2010 at 2:30pm ~ (Door opens at 2:00pm)

■　Anthology Film Archives：32 Second Avenue (at 2nd St), New York, NY 10003

■　Q&A session after the screening with a director and one of the survivors who appeared in the film

■　Admission:　$9

■　Advance Ticket: http://hndownload.eventbrite.com/

■　Website:　www.hndownload.com

■　Follow us on twitter:　http://twitter.com/HNDownload

In Japanese:

ドキュメンタリー映画『ヒロシマナガサキダウンロード』NYプレミア上映会のお知らせ

朝晩冷え込み紅葉も始まって来ましたが、皆様いかがお過ごしでしょうか？

この夏、主宰するニューヨーク平和映画祭から広がった第1回長崎国際平和映画フォーラムで上映されたドキュメンタリー映画『ヒロシマナガサキダウンロード』の特別上映会のお手伝いをしています。来夏ロードショーに先駆けたNYプレミア上映会を来る11月14日（日）午後2時半より開催します。等身大の青年たちが向き合う「自分」、そして「在米被爆者」、そして「継承」とは−。

上映会には本作品に出演されている胤森貴士（たねもりたかし）さんをサンフランシスコよりご招待予定です。
是非、ご家族、お友達とお誘い合わせの上、お越しください。

会場でお会いするのを楽しみにしています。

また、来年夏日本ロードショーに向けてのファンドレイザーパーティー、胤森貴士さんの証言トークも別途企画予定しています。詳細が決まり次第ご連絡します。


《あらすじ》
終戦後、かつての「敵国」アメリカに移住した被爆者たちがいた。原爆の記憶に苦しみ、後遺症への恐怖に怯えながらも、アメリカの大地で反省を過ごしてきた人々。あの日の出来事を、誰にも語ることなく時は過ぎようとしていた。

2009年、春。「自分」を模索し続ける青年2人が、日本人の記憶の奥底に刻まれているヒロシマ、ナガサキを巡る旅に出た。原爆を体験していない世代が、頭だけではなく心で感じることは、可能なのか。残された世代は、被爆者から何を受け継ぎ、継承していくべきなのか。アメリカ西海岸を南下しながら在米被爆者と共に笑い、共に泣いた彼等が、最終的に到達した答えとは−−。

過去5年間、南北米大陸へ渡った被爆者を収録し続けているメキシコ在住の竹田信平監督初の長編ドキュメンタリー映画。広大なアメリカ西海岸を背景に、在米被爆者の魂に迫るロードムービー。

■　ドキュメンタリー映画『ヒロシマナガサキダウンロード』（上映時間73分）

■　11月14日（日）午後2時半〜4時半　（開場午後2時）

■　Anthology Film Archives：　32 Second Avenue (at 2nd St), New York, NY 10003 MAP

■　上映後、竹田監督および出演の在米被爆者とのQ＆Aセッション

■　入場料：　$9

■　前売り：http://hndownload.eventbrite.com/

■　ウェブサイト　www.hndownload.com

■　ツイッター　http://twitter.com/HNDownload

監督：竹田信平（たけだしんぺい）：1978年京都市生まれ。幼少時代は家族と共にドイツ、米国に滞在。2001年、米国デューク大学卒業後にサン・ディエゴで渡米難民の子供への絵画・写真技術を指導するNPOを立ち上げる。2004年、ロバート・リクター監督、キャサリーン・サリバン監督の「最後の原子爆弾（The Last Atomic Bomb）」の製作にアシスタントとして携わる。その後、北米・南米在住の被爆者の体験談の収録し始める。ブラジルやメキシコで展示会やメディアキャンペーン等を催すと同時に、国立長崎原爆死没者追悼平和祈念館に在外被爆者の体験談の映像を歴史的資料として寄贈する。2008年には、戦前にメキシコに移住した日本人写真家の一生を描いた「メキシコに最も近い日本（和訳）」を自主製作・監督。本作品で長編映像デビュー。

Vandana Shiva on industrial agriculture's use of war chemicals and food sovereignty versus the new colonialism

This is an excerpt of Vandana Shiva's eye-opening talk about the role of war chemicals (pesticides, fertilizers) in industrial agriculture's new colonization in her talk on food and seed sovereignty at the International Meeting on Resisting Hegemony held 2-5 August 2010 in Penang, Malaysia. The complete presentation and others from the meeting are available at the TV Multiversity channel on Vimeo:

I'm going to talk about the work I've been doing for the last 30 years on issues of biodiversity, food, and agriculture, largely because of the recognition this is the cutting edge of the new colonization and the new imperialism...

For me, 1984 was significant because of two major events, both very tragic. One was June 4, when the Sikh shrine, the Golden Temple, was invaded by the Indian Army, largely because of the unrest and the extremism that had built up in Punjab, and the extremists were hiding in the Golden Temple. And, later that year, we had the Bhopal tragedy where the pesticide plant leaked and killed 3,000 people in one night. 25,000 since then...

Bhopal is historically a watershed in terms of the structures. Part of it involves "shedding," First shedding hazards and then shedding liabilities related to hazards. Bhopal is a watershed where sacrificing the rights of people in the time of industrial genocide starts...

Someone mentioned Lawrence Summers who is currently Obama's chief economic advisor. But I first came across Lawrence Summers in 1992 when he was the chief economist of the World Bank because he wrote a memo saying it makes good economic sense to move pollution and hazards to developing countries. First because it's cheaper to find labor and therefore costs come down. And when people fall ill, it's cheaper. And when people die, it's cheaper, because their lives are worth less. So that's 3/5 of a human being on a scale issue. This continues in the contemporary calculus of what is a life worth.

Because of this series of violent episodes, I decided to start looking at what is really happening to agriculture....

Because of this series of these very violent episodes, I decided to start looking at what is really happening to agriculture. And in those days, I was associated with the peace and global transformation program that the CSDS that used to have...I decided to study what happened to Punjab...I was young, an innocent physicist with no idea of what was going on in agriculture...

A series of things I learned during that study. First, that agriculture had become the place to extend the war economy. Every input in agriculture is a war chemical. Every agrichemical is a war chemical. Herbicides were used in Vietnam. Pesticides were used to kill people which is why Bhopal killed people. Fertilizers came out of explosives factories...

The other day I was at some gathering and there was someone who is very close to the U.S. security establishment and they said Iraq was easy because the weapons were very evident. The weapons had been bought on global markets. Afghanistan is tough because the weapons are fertilizer bombs made from the fertilizer the U.S. distributed. So this is, in fact, the fertilizer coming back to its original purpose. And of course, it's not just that these are just war chemicals extending into agriculture.

But bringing them into agriculture is very much part of the new imperialism. The common narrative of the Green Revolution is India chose it. The reality of it is that the defense labs of the U.S. started to work in the '40's on how do you retool these chemicals for agriculture...So you had to change the plants to adapt to the chemicals...

Rather than calling them varieties bred for chemicals, they were now called "high-yielding" varieties. In fact, they were even called "miracle seeds." And the first 12 people they trained were called...the "wheat apostles" introducing these new seeds...

In the colonization through agriculture, land was emptied of its biodiversity...

This whole structure only worked because when these varieties were ready, the U.S. government was waiting for an opportunity to push them. And it was a drought that took place in 1965 that provided that opportunity because the need for additional imports became the time for imposing conditionalities: "We won't send you wheat unless you change our agriculture." Our prime minister at that time said "no." He died soon after, in Tashkent, under very mysterious conditions. And the conditions continued. The two foundations, the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford and the World Bank joined hands to create this package of conditionalities...

You couldn't borrow unless you proved you had taken money and subsidies for chemicals. You couldn't get any benefits from any government program unless you showed you were planting the new seeds. The Green Revolution didn't spread because of the choice farmers were making, but because of conditionalities...

A lot of my work in the Punjab study showed that actually food production went down. Rice and wheat production went up, but only because you displaced all the other crops. In an Indian diet, you need your pulses, your oil seeds, lots of vegetables. All of that disappeared. Now you had a monoculture...

We had a huge decline in pulses, the basic protein for a vegetarian diet. Quite clearly, the West never understood because they never had pulses in their diet...