Naomi Toyoda: The Human Cost of Uranium Weapons

The destructive US legacy of "regime change" in Iraq has been foremost in the minds of those who joined the global outcry against the Obama administration's call to bomb  Syria.  Images of white phosphorus bombings; prisoner torture at Abu Ghraib; millions of Iraqi refugees; stories of young widows and children forced to prostitute themselves to survive; and reports of perpetual violence in Iraq are now imprinted in our collective memory.

Many in Japan are especially sensitive to the suffering caused by depleted uranium (DU) to Iraqi hibakusha: children born with mutations and Iraqis of all ages suffering from cancer.

 Naomi Toyoda has covered the human cost and environmental devastion of the US invasion of Iraq, depleted uranium weapons, Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombing survivors, and the Fukushima nuclear disaster. He is co-editor of The Unending Iraq War: Questioning Anew from Fukushima.

Toyoda's exhibition, The Human Cost of Uranium Weapons, toured Europe in 2006. The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons has an online gallery of the Japanese photojournalist's compassionate photographs which reflect the profound suffering caused by radioactive weapons in Iraq.

Depleted uranium (DU) is a radioactive heavy metal waste product of the nuclear power and nuclear weapons industry. Their nanoparticle fallout has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, and enters the body through inhalation and ingestion, where they pass through cell walls..  DU can cause or accelerate cancer, mutate genes, and affect the kidneys, immune system, nervous system, respiratory system, and reproductive system.  The United Nations Human Rights Commission considers DU munitions to be "weapons of mass destruction or with indiscriminate effect" incompatible with international humanitarian law.

The US is the largest producer and user of DU weapons. The US military has produced DU weapons from nuclear waste since the 1970's.  The US  used uranium weapons in Iraq in 1991; in Bosnia from 1994 to 1995;  in Afghanistan from 2001; and in Iraq from 2003. NATO used depleted uranium weapons in Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro in 1999. The US tested depleted uranium in Puerto Rico and Okinawa; the UK tested it in Scotland.

The UN General Assembly has twice called for greater transparency over DU weapons use. In December 2012, 155 countries voted in favor, however the US, UK, France and Israel opposed the text, which also acknowledged public health risks from DU use.

On the 10th anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq, Democracy Now! interviewed  Al Jazeera reporter Dahr Jamail who described the legacy of the U.S. military’s use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus (a chemical weapon) in Iraq and the ongoing plight of refugees in an interview,  "Ten Years Later, U.S. Has Left Iraq with Mass Displacement and an Epidemic of Birth Defects, Cancers":

...in 2005 we saw 1,600 Iraqis with cancer out of 100,000, so a massive escalation that continues.

 And going on to Fallujah, because I wrote about this a year ago, and then I returned to the city again this trip, we are seeing an absolute crisis of congenital malformations of newborn. There is one doctor, a pediatrician named Dr. Samira Alani, working on this crisis in the city. She’s the only person there registering cases. And she’s seeing horrific birth defects. I mean, these are extremely hard to look at. They’re extremely hard to bear witness to. But it’s something that we all need to pay attention to, because of the amount of depleted uranium used by the U.S. military during both of their brutal attacks on the city of 2004, as well as other toxic munitions like white phosphorus, among other things.

 And so, what this has generated is, from 2004 up to this day, we are seeing a rate of congenital malformations in the city of Fallujah that has surpassed even that in the aftermath of—in the wake of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that were—that nuclear bombs were dropped on at the end of World War II. So, Dr. Samira Alani actually visited with doctors in Japan, comparing statistics, and found that the amount of congenital malformations in Fallujah is 14 times greater than the same rate measured in the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in the aftermath of the nuclear bombings.

These types of birth defects, she said—there are types of congenital malformations that she said they don’t even have medical terms for, that some of the things they’re seeing, they’ve never seen before. They’re not in any of the books or any of the scientific literature that they have access to. She said it’s common now in Fallujah for newborns to come out with massive multiple systemic defects, immune problems, massive central nervous system problems, massive heart problems, skeletal disorders, baby’s being born with two heads, babies being born with half of their internal organs outside of their bodies, cyclops babies literally with one eye—really, really, really horrific nightmarish types of birth defects. And it is ongoing...

Stunningly, as bad as things were under Saddam—and we have to keep in mind this perspective of Saddam in the wake of a brutal eight-year war with Iran and then the genocidal sanctions for 13 years, from 1991 up until the beginning of this invasion in March 2003—as bad as it was under Saddam, with the repression and the detentions and the torture and the killings, the overall feeling of Iraqis today, in Baghdad and other places in Iraq where I went this trip, was that things are much worse now...

Doug Rokke. who has a PhD in health physics, is one of the many people who have had direct experience with depleted uranium who advocate against it.  When the Gulf War started, he prepared soldiers to respond to nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare.  In "War Against Ourselves," a 2003 interview at YES! Magazine, he describes how DU caused deaths of his colleagues:

DU is an extremely effective weapon. Each tank round is 10 pounds of solid uranium-238 contaminated with plutonium, neptunium, americium. It is pyrophoric, generating intense heat on impact, penetrating a tank because of the heavy weight of its metal. When uranium munitions hit, it's like a firestorm inside any vehicle or structure, and so we saw tremendous burns, tremendous injuries. It was devastating.

The US military decided to blow up Saddam's chemical, biological, and radiological stockpiles in place, which released the contamination back on the US troops and on everybody in the whole region. The chemical agent detectors and radiological monitors were going off all over the place. We had all of the various nerve agents. We think there were biological agents, and there were destroyed nuclear reactor facilities. It was a toxic wasteland. And we had DU added to this whole mess...

The half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. And we left over 320 tons all over the place in Iraq...

 What I saw...led me to one conclusion: uranium munitions must be banned from the planet, for eternity, and medical care must be provided for everyone, not just the US...but for the American citizens of Vieques, for the residents of Iraq, of Okinawa, of Scotland, of Indiana, of Maryland, and now Afghanistan and Kosovo...

War has become obsolete, because we can't deal with the consequences on our warriors or the environment, but more important, on the noncombatants. When you reach a point in war when the contamination and the health effects of war can't be cleaned up because of the weapons you use, and medical care can't be given to the soldiers who participated in the war on either side or to the civilians affected, then it's time for peace.

---

More background:

Naomi Toyoda's website (The Asahi Shimbun)

"ICBUW-Japan commemorates 10th Anniversary - U.S. March 2003 Iraq Occupation"
(Int. Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW), May 9, 2013)

"A decade on and depleted uranium contamination still blights Iraq" ((Int. Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW), March 7, 2013)

"1/250th of a Second — Naomi Toyoda" (Peace Boat Voyage 62, June 7, 2008)

"Iraq – A Nuclear Polluted Land" (Naomi Toyoda, The Asia-Pacific Journal, 2003)

"A Speech by Naomi Toyoda at the EU Exhibition, The Human Cost of Uranium Weapons" (Int. Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons, Hiroshima Office, May 14-16, 2007)

JIM-NET - Japan Iraq Medical Network (Japan-based network of NGOs, private medical clinics and private companies that provide technical, efficient and continuous support for Iraqi children with cancer)

Save the War Children: Ban Uranium Weapons (Website of Japanese photojournalist Takashi Morizumi)

"Discounted Casualties — the human cost of depleted uranium" (Akira Toshiro, The Chugoku Shimbun)

Child Victims of War (UK-based NGO that exposes the impact of modern warfare on children)

-JD

Filmmaker Hitomi Kamanaka on the effects of nuclear weapons & nuclear energy plants

Interview with filmmaker Hitomi Kamanaka featured in "Atomic Mom" (a documentary about two mothers: a scientist who facilitated the US nuclear bomb program and a survivor of the Hiroshima bombing).

In this clip filmed shortly after 3/11,  prophetic filmmaker Hitomi Kamanaka talks about her trilogy of documentaries exploring the effects of nuclear weapons and energy industry on the lives of people worldwide.

They include Hibakusha at the End of the World (about victims of nuclear radiation exposure from Japan (nuclear bombings) to Iraq (depleted uranium) to the US (nuclear test bombings), also called Radiation: A Slow Death), Rokkasho-mura Rhapsody, about the decrepit nuclear reprocessing (plutonium) plant at the northeastern tip of Tohoku, and Ashes to Honey, about local residents' and environmentalists' 30-year resistance to the planned Kaminoseki nuclear plant in the Inland Sea National Park.

Kamanaka concludes by predicting the revival of active grassroots democratic participation in Japan. (The mass protests of the Hydrangea Revolution are not new to Japan. In the late 1950's and 1960's, millions of Japanese people from all walks of life demonstrated against the US-Japan Security Treaty (ANPO) which allowed the US to maintain nuclear weapons and military bases in the mainland Japan and Okinawa. The impetus behind this earlier movement was the same as today's: the desire to live a nuclear-free, peaceful life. Despite the protests from all sectors of Japanese society, Prime Minister Kishi rammed ANPO through parliament; it was during this same period that the first nuclear power plant in Japan (Tokai) was built in the 1960's in Ibaraki.)

Background: 

Hitomi Kamanaka's website: http://kamanaka.com/

 "Complicity and Victimhood: Director Kamanaka Hitomi's Nuclear Warnings" published at The Asia-Pacific Journal last year.

Peace Talk Between Japanese & Iraqi Students, April 17th, Keio University

It has been eight years since the war in Iraq began. These days, we do not even hear the word “Iraq” very much in the news.

The fact is, however, that people in Iraq continue to live with confusion and uncertainty about their futures. Depleted uranium used throughout the war has resulted in continuing cases of leukemia and other cancers, many people whose lives were threatened have become refugees, and life for Iraqis is becoming more and more difficult in general.

Insofar as Japan participated and contributed vast amounts of money to the war, our country in fact has a connection to this situation. At this event, our purpose will be to look at the present lives of Iraqi students—whose world was literally turned upside down by the war—as well as to hear their views toward Japan.

The event will provide an opportunity to hear views not available within the mainstream media, as well as to participate directly in discussions with Iraqi students. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn about creating true peace, not through weapons—but through dialogue!

Peace Talk: Iraqi and Japanese Students
Sunday, April 17th
16：00～18：00
Keio University, Mita Campus, South Building Rm. 2B42

Click here to see a map (Japanese only).

☆ Entry: Free!
☆ Interpretation will be provided
☆ No reservations required
☆ Please tell your friends!

Peace Talk Organizing Committee:
peacetalk.0417@gmail.com

For more information, see the blog of humanitarian aid worker Nahoko Takato (Japanese only).

Joseph Stiglitz on the failed risk analysis connection between the nuclear & global credit default swap meltdowns; wasteful military spending

In an interview, "Assault on Social Spending, Pro-Rich Tax Cuts Turning U.S. into Nation "Of the 1 Percent, by the 1 Percent, for the 1 Percent," with Democracy Now!, Joseph Stiglitz discusses the failed risk analysis connection between the Fukushima and credit default swap meltdowns.

The Nobel economist speaks of exorbitant, unaccounted for nuclear energy costs to the public via taxpayer subsidization and disaster clean-ups, adding that such corporate subsidization is "money stolen from the public."

Still on the subject of inefficient, wasteful government policies, Stiglitz discusses irrational, out-of-control military spending: "We are spending literally hundreds of billions of dollars for weapons that don’t work against enemies that don’t exist. The Cold War ended more than 20 years ago. And yet, if you look at our military, nobody seems to have told it that."

JUAN GONZALEZ: I wanted to ask you about another—something that you’ve written about: the connection, in terms of risk analysis, between the nuclear crisis in Japan and the meltdown of the reactors there and the credit default swaps. And I would even throw in perhaps the BP blowout, which was another example of a risk analysis that said it could never happen.

JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Yeah. Well, I just wrote an interesting article making a comparison between our ability to judge what are called small probability events, you know, rare—events that are supposed to be rare—those in the financial market said that the kind of collapse that we had should happen once in a thousand years, once in the history of the universe. But we had a collapse in the 1980s, we had a problem in the 1990s, we have them every 10 years. And that shows the models are very bad, our ability to judge rare events is very bad. Now, a lot of research in behavioral economics and psychology have explained why it is that these events that don’t happen very much, we don’t have a lot of experience.

But one of the points that I raised was that these people have an incentive not to see things accurately. You know, the nuclear power industry has an incentive to tell everybody, "Oh, don’t worry. Nothing—no risk there." The financial sector had an incentive to say, "Don’t worry about these derivatives, even if they’re already a quadrillion dollars. Don’t worry, because we can manage that risk. We have systems of diversifying the risk across the economy." Clearly wrong. So, you know, when there’s so much money at stake, people have a way of seeing—of discounting these risks, especially because those risks are borne by everybody else in our society.

And, you know, nuclear power is a really interesting case, because that industry has never been commercially viable. It has always existed on the back of a government-provided insurance, that we provide as taxpayers, that they don’t pay for. And we see now in Japan that, you know, they did the same thing, and we see the cost of that. The rest of society is paying an enormous price. There is no way that the slight savings in energy cost can make up for the loss to the Japanese economy that has resulted from the nuclear explosion. And the same thing could happen here in the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: I loved seeing on Meet the Press right after the tsunami and the earthquake and the terrible tragedy in Japan, they had on the head of the Nuclear Energy Institute, so, you know, they represent the nuclear industry, and the host of the show saying, "Thank you so much for running in at the last minute to be here with us." And I could only think about—I mean, here he is speaking to save the butts of the nuclear industry in this country and saying there’s nothing to worry about here, as we’re saying this—well, what is looking like a partial meltdown or more.

JOSEPH STIGLITZ: If the industry really believed it, let them make an unlimited liability and provide us with a guarantee that they would pick up for the financial cost of the kind of disaster that Japan is facing. And I can tell you that if you made them bear those costs, if we didn’t give them that free ride of limited liability, that industry would not exist in the United States today...

AMY GOODMAN: Joe Stiglitz...let’s end on the issue of war. You wrote with Linda Bilmes the book The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict. That’s not talking about Afghanistan, what, $2 billion a week, the longest ongoing conflict in U.S. history. What about the cost of this?

JOSEPH STIGLITZ: It’s enormous. And since we wrote that book, we did—new numbers came in, and things are worse than we said. The disability rates are higher. The cost of caring for the disabled are higher. Almost one out of two people coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan are disabled. This is an unfunded liability of—we calculate now to be almost a trillion dollars, over $900 billion. So, one of the big ways of reducing our deficit is a—is cut back some expenditures.

I believe we could have more security with much less spending. We are spending literally hundreds of billions of dollars for weapons that don’t work against enemies that don’t exist. The Cold War ended more than 20 years ago. And yet, if you look at our military, nobody seems to have told it that.

Another way of thinking about it, we spend more money now than all the rest of the countries of the world, or almost as much as all the rest of the countries put together.

And yet, when you have a case where you might arguably want some use of it—you know, to protect people who are being killed—we say we can’t do it, even in a small country of a few million people. We say, "Oh, no. Our military can’t do anything." So we’ve been spending all this money and getting actually very little security for it. So my own feeling is that we could reduce our money, our expenditures markedly—particularly, get out of Afghanistan—and improve our security.

8th Anniversary of Global Protest Against Iraq War—Relook at Phyllis Bennis' Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, & the UN Defy U.S.

Thousands in NYC protest the Bush administration's planned invasion of Iraq war on February 15, 2003. (Photo: REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton, via Common Dreams)

On February 15, 2003, tens of millions of people, on the streets of 600-800 cities worldwide, co-created the largest anti-war demonstration in history to protest the US/UK invasion of Iraq.

Among the people who marched for peace: 3 million in Rome • 750,000 in London • 50,000 in Glasgow, Scotland • Between 100-200,000 in Paris (total of 500,000 in 80 cities in France) •  Between 300-500,000 in Berlin (joined by Germans in 300 cities and towns, including trade unionists and church leaders •  100,000 in Brussels •  10,000 in Warsaw • 150,000 in Athens • 80,000 in Lisbon • 60,000 in Oslo • 60,000 in Stockholm & Gothenberg, Sweden • 100,000 in Montreal •  80,000 in Toronto • 40,000 in Vancover (& more in 67 other Canadian cities) • 300,000 to one million in NYC • 50,000 in LA • 4,000 in Colorado Springs (withstanding violence from police using tear gas, stun guns and batons) • 100-300,000 in Damascus • 10,000 in Beirut • 5,000 in Jordan • 25,000 in Tokyo, followed by another 5,000 the next day (including protests at some of the 100 US military bases located in Japan and Okinawa-- where the U.S. train and station troops before deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan) • 10,000 in India • 3,000 in Seoul • 20, 000 in Cape Town, South Africa • 200,000 throughout Australia • 10,000 in New Zealand.

As global mass protests shake up Empire as usual—on the 8th Anniversary of Global Protest Against Iraq War—we're taking a relook at Democracy Now!'s Feb. 15, 2005 "Look at Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, & the UN Defy U.S. Power" by Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, who advises we must work to stop upcoming wars before they start.

AMY GOODMAN: Phyllis Bennis has a new book, arguing the anti-war movement has evolved into a major force for global change. The book is called Challenging Empire: How People, Governments and the U.N. Defy U.S. Power...

PHYLLIS BENNIS:...We didn’t succeed at stopping the war. But I think that would be a very partial assessment. What was created—and it wasn’t only around February 15, but that emerged as the centerpiece of this extraordinary global mobilization—was an exemplar of what it’s going to take to challenge this global drive towards empire, this drive towards war that has been so characteristic, not only of the Bush administration, but in a far more blatant and aggressive way than we had ever seen before.

It was an amazing thing, because I think what was so important was not only that you had so many people in the streets in so many different cities mobilized under one slogan in so many different languages—"The world says no to war"—but it was powerful enough that governments around the world were forced, for a combination of reasons, the pressure of their own citizens being the most important, but for their own opportunist reasons, as well, to do the right thing, even if, for the wrong reasons sometimes, to stand up to the U.S., to refuse to give in to the pressure that not only the powerful countries like France and Germany, but smaller, weaker countries, those on the Security Council, the six so-called uncommitted six, that refused to give in to U.S. pressure, under enormous threats. Chile, Mexico, Angola, Cameroon, Guinea, Pakistan. These were not countries that could ordinarily go head to head with the U.S. When there were enough of them, it forced the U.N. to do what the U.N. is supposed to do, but so rarely does, which is to stand against what its own charter calls the "scourge of war."

AMY GOODMAN: Phyllis, I wanted to stop you for a second on the issue of the U.N. Security Council right before the invasion, which goes to another controversy that the Bush administration is trying to deal with right now, and that’s the issue of domestic spying, the idea of spying on Americans.

PHYLLIS BENNIS:: Right.

AMY GOODMAN:: But we saw this before the invasion, and that was on the U.N. Security Council members.

PHYLLIS BENNIS:: That’s correct.

AMY GOODMAN:Can you remind us what happened?

PHYLLIS BENNIS: That’s right. In the months leading up to what was hoped by the Bush administration to be a vote on a real resolution endorsing the war, a vote they were never able to get, they were spying—the way they’re spying on the American people now, they were spying on every major country in the United Nations. They were spying on U.N. missions, on U.N. ambassadors, on cars, perhaps on the U.N.’s own territory, something which is not new. We know there has been spying on U.N. delegates ever since 1948—sorry, 1945, when the U.N. was first created. But this was an extraordinary blatant effort to find out what delegations were thinking and figure out ways to pressure them.

But we know it didn’t work, and I think this is what’s important about that mobilization. It wasn’t able to succeed at making this war globally acceptable and legal. That was what the Bush administration desperately wanted, and that’s what they failed to get, because the U.N. refused to vote to endorse the war, because government stood against it, and crucially, because there was this global movement that brought millions of people, somewhere between 12 and 14 million people, what the Guinness Book of World Records said was the largest global mobilization in history. It brought those people into the streets to say no to war. And that meant that when they did launch the war, there was no question around the world that this was an aggressive, illegal war.

And the question of how to mobilize against it was put much more on the agenda. Now, of course, the challenge for us is to figure out how to make real, when the governmental opposition has collapsed, the U.N. opposition has collapsed—what we have left is the most important centerpiece, the global people’s movements against this war, how to remobilize them to take up the demand to end the U.S. occupation of Iraq, bring all of the troops home now at a time when we know there’s going to be troop withdrawals. They will probably be on a large scale but will not lead to an end to occupation, and at a time when we have to be mobilizing to prevent the expansion of the war into Iran in the face of these extraordinary threats that are going on.

AMY GOODMAN: Phyllis Bennis, you met with Kofi Annan, the U.N. Secretary General; Harry Belafonte; and South Africa’s, well, former Archbishop, Desmond Tutu?

PHYLLIS BENNIS: On the morning of February 15, before the demonstrations began, we had an extraordinary moment when that small group went to meet with Secretary General Kofi Annan on the 38th floor in his office at the United Nations, only moments before the rally was to begin downstairs on that freezing cold New York day. And Bishop Tutu opened the meeting, and he said to his old friend—the two Nobel Laureates, African statesmen, who had worked together for so many years—he looked at Kofi Annan across the table, and he said, "We are here today on behalf of the people that are marching in 665 cities around the world. And we’re here to tell you that those people marching in all of those cities, we claim the United Nations as our own. We claim it in the name of the global mobilization for peace."

It was an extraordinary moment. It was the last thing Kofi Annan wanted to hear, at a moment when he was under such enormous pressure from the United States to put the U.N. on the side of the U.S. war. But he refused and ultimately did say the U.S. invasion of Iraq was illegal. We have to reclaim that role for the United Nations. It didn’t last long. It was a blink in history. It was an eight-month moment, when we had the countries, the governments and the U.N. on the side of this popular mobilization, but it’s that three-part mobilization—people, governments, and the U.N.—that we’re going to have to rebuild to stop the war that’s going on now, to prevent the next war that’s emerging as we speak...

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 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.

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...

Richard Rhodes's The Twilight of the Bombs: Recent Challenges, New Dangers, and the Prospects for a World without Nuclear Weapons

Richard Rhode's latest book, The Twilight of the Bombs: Recent Challenges, New Dangers, and the Prospects for a World without Nuclear Weapons, was published today.

In time to provide hopeful background to the latest nuclear news: The UN is asking Israel for openness about its secretive nuclear weapons program. Iran began loading fuel in its first nuclear power plant (under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), an arm of the UN). Sudan has announced plans to build four nuclear power plants. The Obama administration is working to persuade reluctant Republican senators to ratify the US-Russia New START treaty. Japan admonished India over possible future nuclear test bombings, as the former competes with the U.S. France, and Russia for Indian nuclear plant contracts. The U.S. renamed the Nevada Test Site (the Rhode Island (or Okinawa-sized) tract of land where it detonated over 1,000 nuclear bombs) the Nevada National Security Site.

The Twilight of the Bombs is the last volume in Rhodes's quartet of histories about nuclear bombs:

The book examines the post-Cold War years after 1991, securing the former Soviet nuclear arsenal, the first Iraq War, nuclear proliferation, North Korea, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the run-up to the second Iraq War and the prospects for nuclear abolition. With the completion of this last volume, my quartet of nuclear histories, The Making of the Nuclear Age, will comprehend the story of the introduction of a historic new technology across more than one hundred years.

Arsenals of Folly, a third volume of nuclear history that follows my The Making of the Atomic Bomb (1986) and Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb (1995), was published by Alfred A. Knopf in October 2007. It carries the story of the superpower nuclear arms race and the dangers and challenges of the Cold War from 1949 up to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991, focusing especially on the Reagan-Gorbachev decade of the 1980s.

The Twilight of the Bombs charts the roller coaster movement towards nuclear weapons disarmament from the collapse of the Soviet Union to Obama's Prague speech on April 5, 2010 in which he promised U.S. commitment to a "world without nuclear weapons." His words energized nuclear abolitionists preparing for the NPT Review Conference held in New York in May.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is the center of international efforts to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Ireland and Finland first proposed the treaty which came into force in 1970. The treaty allows the use of nuclear production of energy in return for controls of the importation/exportation of nuclear technologies and materials and imposes a legal obligation upon member states to eliminate their nuclear weapons arsenals through negotiations. 189 nations are party to the treaty, including the five major nuclear weapon states: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council). Four nations that possess nuclear weapons are not NPT members: India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea. The last joined the treaty, but withdrew in 2003.

Related to the NPT are treaties prohibiting nuclear weapons testing. The Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963) outlaws atmospheric, space, and underwating testing. The Threshold Test Ban Treaty (1974) outlaws underground tests over 150 kilotans. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans all nuclear explosions in all environments, for both military or civilian purposes. The U.N. General Assembly endorsed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996. The U.S. and China have signed, but not ratified the CTBT. After these countries ratify, and North Korea, India, and Pakistan sign and ratify the CTBT—it will go into force.

George Bush, who spoke of "World War III," seemed determined to destroy decades of movement towards nuclear weapons nonproliferation. The militaristic president withdrew the U.S. from the U.S.-Russia Anti-Ballistic Missle (ABM) treaty, the NPT (the 2005 Review Conference ended without an agreement), and the CTBT. The neocon's 2006 deal with India initiating nuclear energy cooperation overlooked its nuclear weapons proliferation and damaged the NPT regime. The Bush administration also championed the "nuclear renaissance," resurrected Cold War threats, revived the idea of tactical nuclear weapons, and continued to use the same depleted uranium weapons deployed during his father's and Clinton's administrations, by which time the adverse health effects of depleted uranium on U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians were well known.

Despite initial promise, President Obama's nuclear weapons policies have turned out to be a mixed bag. He proposed massive spending ($80 billion) to "modernize" the U.S. nuclear arsenal, but is also working to reverse Bush's legacy by reducing the U.S. nuclear arsenal and supporting the U.S.-Russia New START treaty which the Senate will vote upon in September. While disappointing nuclear abolitionists when his policies failed to match his flights of rhetoric, Obama did participate in the 2010 NPT Review Conference.

Historian Lawrence Wittner, author of Confronting the Bomb: A Short History of the World Disarmament Movement covered the ups and downs of this event in "What's Next for the Nuclear Disarmament Movement," posted at Foreign Policy in Focus:

Reflecting on the contrast between the Obama administration's nuclear abolition rhetoric and its record, Kevin Martin, executive director of America's largest peace organization, Peace Action, concluded that supporters of a nuclear-free world needed to wake up to the reality that the administration's nuclear disarmament activities were going to be quite limited without very substantial movement pressure.

"Obama is in a way being held accountable to expectations he himself raised," Martin remarked, "when in fact it appears all he ever had in mind was a return to the modest, incremental arms reduction treaties of the 1980s and 1990s, not a serious push toward eliminating nuclear weapons."

In this context, peace and disarmament groups would have to take a more proactive role, endorsing incremental measures while, at the same time, keeping the idea of nuclear abolition at the forefront of public discussion...

In specific terms, this approach will probably mean that the nuclear disarmament movement will back U.S. Senate ratification of the New START Treaty and of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and oppose congressional funding of the administration's nuclear "modernization" plan, while steadfastly championing the opening of negotiations for a nuclear abolition treaty. If the conference on a Middle East nuclear-free zone gets off the ground — and it might not, given strong Israeli government resistance — the movement will almost certainly support that venture as well.

Can this mixture of somewhat mundane incremental steps and a dazzling long-range vision — the vision of a nuclear-free world — be sustained?  It will require activists willing to put significant efforts into securing immediate gains on the road to their long-term goal, and vigorously champion their long-term goal as they engage in immediate struggles. Over the course of history, this has always been a tricky balancing act for social change movements. But with wise leadership and a committed following, there is no reason that the nuclear disarmament movement — which, after all, has campaigned against the bomb, with some effectiveness, for 65 years — cannot manage it in the future.

Rhodes shares Wittner's measured optimism and explores successes in nuclear abolition in Twilight of the Bombs: The collapse of the Soviet Union transformed one single nuclear state into four: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan; however effective diplomacy resulted in the new nations surrendering their nuclear weapons to Russia. South Africa voluntarily gave up its nuclear arsenal.

Rhodes also examines failures, such as the Clinton's administration's inability to secure Senate ratification for the CTBT. The historian details the Clinton's and Bush's negotiations with North Korea that resulted in the isolated nation's withdrawal from the NPT in 2003, followed by its first nuclear test in 2006. (North Korea subsequently shut down plutonium production in 2007 and destroyed the cooling tower at its nuclear weapons plant in 2008.)

Rhodes explores how Iraq, initially a nonproliferation success story after U.N. inspectors and Saddam Hussein himself dismantled Iraq's uranium enrichment program, was followed by Bush's 2003 invasion based on false claims of Iraqi WMD.

Despite the glacial pace towards nuclear weapons disarmament; the gap between U.S. rhetoric and policies; the proliferation of nuclear power as a source of energy; and the stubborn refusal of several nations (including volatile Israel, Pakistan, North Korea) to join the NPT, Rhodes believes that the world is moving in the right direction.

In a recent interview, Rhodes explains the universal scale of his soul-searching:

I've always felt that these four books that I've written are kind of a tragic epic of the 20th century. In the epigraph of my book it says, "Mankind invents the means of its own destruction."

And where does the human race go from that? We're still mixed in with all of that…Nuclear weapons are vast destructive forces encompassed in this small, portable mechanism. They have no earthly use that I can see except to destroy whole cities full of human beings.

The chronicler of this macabre history points to the U.S., the creator of nuclear weapons and apocalyptic policies such as MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) that fueled the nuclear arms race, as the only nation able to change the tragic direction of history it unleashed:

We’ve led the way in nuclear weapons, and now we have to figure out a way to lead in the other direction.

NYC: The Hiroshima Panels & Pink Action on May 7 Urges Nuclear-Free World & U.S. Citizen Inquiry into Iraq War • Pink Peace/Code Pink event on May 8

Performance artists Kunihiko Ukai and Rena Masuyama in front of the Hiroshima A-Bomb Dome Memorial

In conjunction with the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) conference now taking place in New York City, grassroots Japanese anti-war art group Pink Action will hold a peace event in front of the United Nations Headquarters on May 7, 2010 from 11:00 AM to 4:00PM in collaboration with the Maruki Gallery for the Hiroshima Panels.

Tokyo-based painter and performance artist Rena Masuyama, who started Pink Action in 2003 following the launching of the Iraq War, will perform on Friday in front of the Hiroshima Panels—large-sized paintings that depict shocking images of the human suffering wrought by the atomic destruction of the city in 1945.

Also present at the event will be staff from the Maruki Gallery, as well as floral artist Hirokuni Ozawa and image scorer Michiko Motosugi. The group will distribute carnations to passersby, together with note cards bearing the following message:

"Toward a Nuclear-Free World”

In August, 1945, atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan by the hands of the United States of America.

At this time, mothers and children could be seen running away from the flames; others later embraced their children who were stricken with cancer from the radioactivity.

"The Hiroshima Panels" are images which Mr. and Mrs. Iri and Toshi Maruki began painting after witnessing the horrifying damage of this nuclear weapon. Their poignant body of work was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

In the United States, people seem to have little knowledge about the damage of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As a result of this lack of knowledge, damage from nuclear weapons continues to occur to this day.

For example, in addition to over 220,000 people being killed from the impact in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, more than 150,000 Iraqi people were killed in the recent Iraq war, in which the U.S. Army used depleted uranium ammunition. 4,394 American soldiers were also killed during this war, while others returned home after having been exposed to radiation from this depleted uranium.

Citizen-led inquiries are now being made in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Japan regarding the unjust launching of the Iraq War. It is now our sincere hope that the same thing will occur in the United States. There is no individual nor any country existing on earth that desires to see people suffering from nuclear weapons!

In dedication to all mothers who have given birth to us, we declare our hopes for creating a bright future without nukes. Our strong message is the following:

"Toward a Nuclear-Free World. No More War, No More Nuclear Weapons!"

Japan's citizen-led inquiry into the Iraq War was spearheaded by a group of activists, aid workers and other professionals including freelance journalist Shiva Rei, who recently spoke at Peace Not War Japan's Spring Love event (and who is also Rena Masuyama's partner). The text of the inquiry reads as follows:

What was the Iraq war!?
(The Network to Create an Iraq War Inquiry, Japan)

In March 2003, former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi—ignoring a poll which showed opposition to be as high as 80%—made a commitment to support the United States-led military campaign against Iraq. In addition to this attack not having been authorized by the United Nations Security Council, the reason used to justify it—that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction—also proved to be wrong, which was later admitted by U.S. President George W. Bush.

In spite of such circumstances, warfare kept escalating, with deaths of both Iraqi citizens and multi-national troops continuing to increase. While the Japanese government dispatched its Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to Iraq to render “humanitarian support,” according to reports disclosed to the public by the Defense Ministry in October 2009, the main mission of the Japan’s Air SDF was revealed to have been the transportation of military personnel and goods of the multi-national forces, including those of the United States.

The Iraq War has unleashed the worst kind of humanitarian crisis. The World Health Organization estimated that 150,000 civilians were killed, and another estimate from Johns Hopkins University estimated the number to be several hundred thousand.

Even now, used depleted uranium bullets and cluster bombs continue to damage Iraqi communities. The public peace is not maintained; to the contrary, the situation continues to worsen. While more than ten people lose their lives every day in army attacks or terrorist bombings, one out of six Iraqis live in shelters in and out of Iraq. Most of them suffer from overwhelming poverty.

Whether or not Japan makes a commitment to address such humanitarian crises is the looming question of the Japanese state, which claims to be a peace oriented, democratic nation. The British government has already launched an independent inquiry to verify the administration’s policy-making process to join the U.S.-led Iraq invasion, as well as the legitimacy thereof. It is also important for us to verify the propriety of Japan’s having supported and joined the U.S. military action. This is critical for the following reasons: so that in the forthcoming years, our right as Japanese citizens to live in peace will be respected; we will never again take part in warfare; and we might settle the resentment of the Iraqi civilians who were killed during the war.

In order to achieve these aims, we recommend the following:

1. The Japanese government should set up an “independent verification committee” to make a thorough review of the following three matters: the then administration’s decision to support the U.S.-led Iraq War; the decision to dispatch the SDF to Iraq; and the involvement of the Japanese government in the reconstruction mission of Iraq. The committee should make careful investigations concerning the above mentioned subjects, disclose the findings, and decide which bodies—including individuals—will take both moral and legal responsibility.

2. The procedure and the final report of inquiry/verification should be disclosed to the maximum extent, and should be available to anyone so requesting.

3. On receiving the final report submitted by the independent verification committee, the Japanese government should make an official statement on the findings to be released on both local and global levels, and should render the necessary humanitarian aid and support to the victims of the war.

Our website : http://isnn.tumblr.com/

Director: Mr. Rei Shiva ++81-(0)90-9328-9861 / mail@reishiva.jp

To date, Pink Action has held performances worldwide in places including China, Germany, Iraq, and Okinawa. More information about founder Rena Masuyama is available on her website, and her performance at a recent World Peace Now demonstration in Tokyo is profiled here.
In addition, the documentary film PINK Jeanne'd Arc , which is presently screening in Japan, depicts Rena Masuyama’s life as an artist, peace activist and mother of two. It explores her exchange with local artists in Iraq, art performance at the Maruki Museum, and protest against the Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Plant.

Masuyama asserts that while her flamboyant actions may appear to some as being radical, they all originate in her natural wishes for life—and in her fervent hope for all children everywhere to be able to live in peace.

Pink Action will also hold a joint peace event together with Code Pink NYC in Central Park (59th Street & Central Park West) on May 8, 2010 from 1:00~4:00 PM.

--Kimberly Hughes

More Crucial than Ever: 2004 Appeal from the Article 9 Association warning Japan not to revert to a "war-waging country"

2005 lecture at Ariake Coliseum, Tokyo

"An Appeal from the Article 9 Association", a group of Japanese intellectuals and writers (the most internationally renowned is Nobel Prize laureate Kenzaburo Oe) who support the Japanese Peace Constitution:

The Japanese constitution now faces a great challenge.

Through the use of weapons reaching the cruelty of the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Second World War claimed over fifty million lives. As a result, the citizens of the world learned the lesson that resorting to force should never be an option, even for the purpose of resolving international disputes.

Bearing an enormous responsibility for having continuously pursued a war of invasion, Japan decided to work towards realizing this global vision, and thus established a constitution including Article Nine which stipulated the renunciation of war and of military force.

Yet today, half a century later, the movement to “revise” the Japanese constitution, and Article Nine in particular, has risen to the forefront with an unprecedented scale and intensity. The proponents of that movement intend for Japan to follow the United States and change into a “war-waging country.” For that reason, they authorize the use of the right to collective self-defense, dispatch the Japanese Self Defense Forces overseas, allow their use of force, and commit other such actions that, for all intents and purposes, violate the restrictions of the constitution. Moreover, they are trying to do away with such important measures and policies as the three non-nuclear principles and the ban on arms exports. Finally, in order to raise children to become leaders of a “war-waging country,” they are trying to change the Fundamental Law of Education. This essentially alters the state of the nation that the Japanese constitution has aimed to achieve, threatening to convert Japan from a country that strives to resolve conflicts without military force to a nation that prioritizes military action above all else. We cannot allow that conversion to occur.

The United States’ attack on Iraq and the morass of the occupation that followed makes it clearer to us day by day that the resolution of conflict through force is unrealistic. The use of force only results in robbing a country and its people of their livelihood and of their happiness. Since the 1990s, armed interventions by major nations into regional conflicts have also failed to result in effective resolutions. That is why, in such places as Europe and Southeast Asia, efforts are being strengthened to create regional frameworks that can help to resolve conflicts through diplomacy and dialogue.

Today, as we question our path in the 21st century based on the lessons of the 20th, the importance of grounding diplomacy on Article Nine emerges with renewed clarity. To call the dispatch of Self Defense Forces into countries that do not welcome it an “international contribution” is nothing more than arrogance.

Based on Article Nine, Japan needs to develop ties of friendship and cooperation with the peoples of Asia and other regions, and change a diplomatic stance that only prioritizes a military alliance with the United States. Japan must play an active role in the tide of world history by exercising its autonomy and acting in a pragmatic manner. It is precisely because of Article Nine that Japan can engage its partner nations in peaceful diplomacy while respecting their various positions, and collaborate with them in the fields of economy, culture, science and technology.

In order to join hands with all peace-seeking citizens of the globe, we feel that we must strive to shine the light of Article Nine upon this turbulent world. To that end, each and every citizen, as sovereign members of this country, needs to personally adopt the Japanese constitution, with its Article Nine, and reaffirm their belief in it through their daily actions. This is a responsibility that the sovereign members share for the future state of their country. Thus, in the interest of a peaceful future for Japan and the world, we would like to appeal to each and every citizen to come together for the protection of the Japanese constitution: You must begin making every possible effort to thwart these attempts at “constitutional revision,” and you must begin today.

June 10, 2004

Kyoto Journal: "Power of the Ideal: Article 9 & the Imagination"

Many of the articles in last year's Kyoto Journal's beautiful issue, "The Power of an Ideal: Japan’s Article 9 and the Imagination," are available online:

In two short paragraphs, Article 9 of the post-WWII Japanese Constitution articulates the highest ideal in support of world peace — by actually outlawing war.

“Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.”

Since 1947, and in sharp contrast to its past as a fascist Axis empire-builder, Japan has not committed a single atrocity against the people of another nation, has not re-militarized, has not produced nuclear weapons, nor entered the lucrative arms industry. In part because of Article 9, Japan was able to transform itself into the second largest economy in the world. Moreover, its subsequent ODA expenditures, amounting to 10 to 15 billion dollars (U.S.) each year over the past 18 years — along with the growth of several hundred NGOs active in development, the environment, human rights, and peace — would never have been possible if Japan had remained a militarized nation.

Imagine then the worldwide benefits of taking Article 9 to the global level. The immense financial and human resources unleashed by disarmament could be immediately applied to developing practical solutions to the world’s most pressing problems, focusing on green technologies and green energy, education, solving poverty and health issues, implementing strategies against global warming and desertification, cleaning up toxic waste, converting weapons factories, and the disposal of nuclear weapons.

The seeds for this special issue were planted by the Global Article Nine Conference for Abolishing War, which was held for three days in Chiba in spring 2008, drawing an unprecedented 30,000 participants, including many from overseas. Widely diverse groups recognized common ground, and the positive repercussions that a Global Article 9 would have on their concerns, including nonproliferation and disarmament, expanding nuclear free zones, joint Asian security, reducing poverty, regional conflict resolution, gender equality, peace education, peace-building, human rights and environmental protection.

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire: "Around the world there are billions of people who say, 'WE WANT PEACE!'"

This partial transcript of a  2008 talk by Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire (with the thousands of people outside the May 4-5, 2008 "Global Article 9 Conference for the Abolition of War" who were unable to join the 30,000 already inside of the conference hall)—reminds us of the vast support in Japan for its Peace Constitution.

"Everyone, I am very happy to be here with you all.

"The Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution — we have to all get together to protect this. It's important for the whole world today.

"Article 9 says very clearly, 'We want no war, no nuclear weapons.'

"Yes, we have hurt each other in the past. But we can reconcile and we can solve our problems by talking to the other.

"I am not surprised that today everyone couldn't get into the conference hall and that the place is overflowing with people, because around our world, there are billions of people who are saying, 'We want peace!"

"There are people who will try to make us afraid of each other. They will try to say we are different. We say, 'We are not afraid. We are the human family. Yes, we have differences, but we are all human beings. We want to act in a dignified, civilized way by refusing to kill each other...

"Forgiveness is so important. We have all hurt the Other. We have all been hurt. But we must forgive one another.

"Here in Japan, you have hurt through your wars of aggression many people, in Korea and China. Please remember to say you're sorry and ask their forgiveness. Only when you forgive can you find genuine happiness in yourself and can you find real peace."

"By upholding your Article 9, and reaching out your hand to your Korean, your Chinese, your Russian, your immediate neighbors and friends, you will serving peace in Japan, and setting an example to the world.

"You need to say to the American government, their occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and their setting aside of the United Nations human rights and international law is not acceptable to the human family.

"You need to say to our friends in the Israeli government, lead the movement in the Middle East for a nuclear-free Middle East and end the occupation of Palestine where the people are suffering so much."

"We need our American friends – we need our Israeli friends – to adopt the Charter for a World Without Violence and Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution."

(Originally posted at the Kyoto Journal website on May 20, 2008)

The Earth Can't Afford Mo War Any More! World People's Conference on Climate Change & the Rights of Mother Earth • Carbon Footprint of War

On April 22, people from around the world will converge in Cochabamba, Bolivia on Earth Day to promote real solutions and a human rights approach to the climate crisis.

The World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth will push the world's leading carbon emitters, who promote unjust and false solutions such as carbon offsets, stricter binding carbon reductions and reparations for industrial-driven environmental destruction, to change course in preparation for the next round of UN Climate talks which will take place this December in Cancun, Mexico.

A major piece of the climate crisis that is not often discussed is the impact or carbon footprint of the US military. Did you know that the US military burns 3.5 million gallons of fuel every day on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? United for Peace and Justice member, the Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice , has put together a great little Earth Day flier connecting climate destruction and war.

Lets amplify the voices of the people in Bolivia and make the connection between war and climate crisis during this years Earth Day events. Please Download a UFPJ version of the flier here and distribute it at Earth Day events in your community!

For a good article on the Peoples Conference: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/14-3
Download UFPJ "Carbon Footprint Of War" flyer

Long-time UFPJ member group Global Justice Ecology Project will be providing media support for the North America the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance-Indigenous Environmental Network delegation is attending with the aim of amplifying the perspectives of frontline communities resisting the impacts of climate change. Information will be posted on the Climate Connections blog: climatevoices.wordpress.com

Nonviolent Pink Joan of Arc duo lead World Peace Now's commemoration of the 7th anniversary of the US/UK invasion of Iraq this Saturday in Tokyo

"Pink Jeanne d'Arc" performance artists Kunihiko Ukai and Rena Masuyama, a/k/a "Momo Iro Jean," promise to liven up the event with their special celebration event against war...(Photo: Renaart.exblog.jp)

At this time of record military spending; the push for military schools, and obstinate military empire-building by a few very rich people against the wishes of the billions of peace-loving people in our world—the world more than ever needs a Nonviolent Pink Joan of Arc.

Performance artists Kunihiko Ukai and Rena Masuyama subvert the dominant Western paradigm (embodied in the original Joan of Arc who wielded a sword and killed in the name of God—in quest of power and territory) that violent force is the best way to acquire resources, land, and resolve conflicts. Of course—on an unevolved and morally challenged level— it makes some sense that nations that have no legitimate claim to territories would resort to violence—knowing that their positions would not be honored in civilized forums.

Rena Masuyama is the wife of Shiva Rei, a freelance journalist who reported from Iraq. Rei will be one of the speakers at Peace Not War, Japan's upcoming "Spring Love" event. Masuyama used to be part of a performance art peace group called the "Momoiro (peach-colored, as in the color of buttocks) Guerillas"—another subversive inversion of the the concept of the macho mindset that emotionally fuels the war paradigm. The "Momoiro Guerillas" had nothing (no ill will, no violent intent) to hide in contrast to armored, armed, and camouflaged guerilla warriors.

Pink Jeanne D'Arc will be performing at the World Peace Now event commemorating the 7th anniversary of the ongoing U.S. war in Iraq.

Thanks for the head's up to Martin Frid at his Kurashi--the "Eco" Blog:

Peace groups are gathering at noon in Tokyo on Saturday for a big anti-war event on the 7th anniversary of the Iraq War.

The booths with information as well as rally speeches start at 13:00. Do join the parade, as they call the demonstration, starting at 15:00 from Shiba Koen.

There are events in the evening as well, with music and presentations.

Background on World Peace Now from Jennifer Chan's Another Japan is Possible: New Social Movements and Global Citizen Education (short excerpt of interview with Machiko Hanawa):

World Peace Now (WPN) came into being as an amorphous network when youth-centered groups centered around CHANCE!pono2 and many civic groups (dominated by relatively older people) taking action against the attack on Iraq got together and organized the first demonstration on October 26, 2002. In that first attempt, eight hundred people joined.

WPN started as a broad coalition of individuals in citizens' groups, religious groups, and international NGOs who have agreed on four principles: no more war, opposition to the war in Iraq, opposition to the Japanese government's support and cooperation for the attack on Iraq, and nonviolent action. There were some thirty organizations at the beginning, but currently the number has increased to fifty.

Until this kind of coalition came into being, many NGOs in Japan focused on a single theme and acted separately. In order to overcome this, we requested the participation and self-expression of NGOs in different fields, including Peace Boat and Greenpeace Japan. In this way, on Jan. 18, 2003, before the start of the attack on Iraq, seven thousand people participated in the demonstration in Tokyo, and fifty thousand people joined on March 21, 2003, right after the attack was started. After December 2003, when the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (SDF) joined the occupation of Iraq, opposition to the occupation of Iraq and immediate withdrawal of SDF became WPN's demands.

In March 2004, the first anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, WPN also joined the international antiwar action again. This time, 130,000 people in 120 places across Japan marched on the streets.

Amir Amirani: We Are Many--Feb. 15, 2003 global protest against the US War in Iraq--Reverberating Worldwide Soul Cry for Peace

"We Are Many" by film director Amir Amirani

On February 15, 2003, millions of people joined each other on the streets of 800 cities worldwide: the largest anti-war demonstration in history to protest the US/UK invasion of Iraq.

The demonstration (and related protests from January to March of the same year) resulted from the coordination of peace groups joined together in global networks.

Ordinary people (between 6-30 million) around the world included those from the entire range of the political spectrum; the entire range of the religious spectrum (Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics & atheists); all generations; from every socio-economic class. Except for the tiny minority who believed the Bush/Blair justification that the war was about (ultimately non-existent) WMD in Iraq--the majority of people around the world did not want this war just as the majority now do not want the war in Afghanistan, and continued US global military escalation.

Among the people who marched for peace: 3 million in Rome • 750,000 in London • 50,000 in Glasgow, Scotland • Between 100-200,000 in Paris (total of 500,000 in 80 cities in France) •  Between 300-500,000 in Berlin (joined by Germans in 300 cities and towns, including trade unionists and church leaders •  100,000 in Brussels (center of the EU government) •  10,000 in Warsaw • 150,000 in Athens • 80,000 in Lisbon • 60,000 in Oslo • 60,000 in Stockholm & Gothenberg, Sweden • 100,000 in Montreal •  80,000 in Toronto • 40,000 in Vancover (& 67 other Canadian cities) • 300,000 to one million in NYC • 50,000 in LA • 4,000 in Colorado Springs (who withstood violence from police using tear gas, stun guns and batons) • 100-300,000 in Damascus • 10,000 in Beirut • 5,000 in Jordan • 25,000 in Tokyo, followed by another 5,000 the next day (including smaller protests at some of the 100 US military bases located in Japan and Okinawa--used to train troops before deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan • 10,000 in India • 3,000 in Seoul • 20, 000 in Cape Town, South Africa • 200,000 throughout Australia • 10,000 in New Zealand.

Of course, these millions of people did not stop the US and UK invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003.

But their collective soul cry against unnecessary war and ever-increasing military expansion still reverberates.

In the global anti-base and demilitarization movement • In the transnational (US, Japan, global environmentalist) coalition challenging the construction of a US military base that would destroy a coral reef and the home of the critically endangered dugong in Henoko, Okinawa and bring war-training helipads into the nearby pristine Yanbaru Forest • In the Guahan refusal to accept without question a massive military expansion on their island (1/3 of which already covered with US military bases) that would destroy the world's largest mangrove forest and a coral reef •  In the Japanese decision to stop assisting in the refueling of warships to Afghanistan • In the recent Dutch decision to pull out of Afghanistan • In tangerine farmers' and other villagers' protest against the construction of a missile base that would destroy a coral reef at Jeju Island, Korea (a World Heritage site because of its unique biodiversity) •  In Vincenza, Italy (a World Heritage site because of its ancient history and culture) where residents have not ceased protesting against a new US military base • In the School of the Americas Watch coalition that works to heal the wounds of state terror and stop US miliary escalation in Latin America • In a new US coalition (spanning the political spectrum) to stop the Afghanistan war

These are just a few of the examples of people working across our planet now for a culture of positive peace, cooperation, justice, and sustainability. Martin Luther King called those who work to build zones of liberation, peace, and redemption in our world the "dedicated minority."

Live theater performers from Iraq and Tunisia bring deep emotion, human connection to Tokyo stage

While living in Tokyo for nearly the past decade as a community peace activist, I have had several opportunities to interact with people from Iraq (human rights journalists, pediatricians, and visual artists, to be precise) during their visits to Japan on grassroots-level exchanges organized by local peace groups. Each time, I came away from the experience with marvelous memories and new friendships.

Last week, a fellow member of the Iraq Hope Network alerted members to two short theater acts taking place at Tiny Alice, a cozy theater in Tokyo’s Shinjuku district. The only available information was a short blurb including the names of the performers and the titles of their pieces: “Abu Ghraib Prison” from the Mustaheel-Alice theater troupe in Baghdad, Iraq; and “Woman Sindyan” from SINDYANA in Tunisia. Knowing from experience that this could be an opportunity for another interesting encounter, I headed together with one of my most engaged university students to check out the shows.

As we entered the diminutive theater, three foreign men who I assumed to be the Iraqi actors were standing in the doorway—one of them bedecked in all camouflage and wearing an extremely stern expression on his face. Still unsure of what to expect, my student and I took a seat in the only available spots, which were on the floor directly in front of the stage.

We soon learned from a pre-show announcement that the three men were in fact the play’s writer, director and musical composer, and that the show was inspired by the story of one of the writer’s friends—a musician who was jailed in Abu Ghraib Prison during the reign of Saddam Hussein. The play began shortly thereafter, immediately shocking the full range of our senses. The camouflaged man, who was clearly acting the part of the guard, cast a brutal gaze as the two prisoners writhed around on the ground, enshrouded alternately inside white sheets and silver tubing material. Also taking center stage were several musical instruments encased in chains and plastic wrap, which all three men took turns reaching for—and then violently throwing aside—to the backdrop of a screaming cacophony of dissonant music.


While the abstract, chaotic nature of the short work (as well as the fact that the only fleeting dialogue was in Arabic) precluded any fast conclusions about what precisely it might have been trying to convey, the general themes were hard to miss by virtue of their universal resonance: the pain and confusion of imprisonment; the resilience of the human spirit even in instances of severe repression; the blurred borders between captive and capturer.

The second work began after a brief intermission, when we were still reeling from the dramatic effects of the first. As it turns out, the Tunisian performance was in fact a one-woman show, with the actor embodying several personas—male in addition to female—and French phrases occasionally mixed in with the mostly Arabic dialogue. While the Japanese subtitles beamed above the stage were somewhat sporadic, we were able to understand that her various characters were expressing anger and indignation at certain times toward colonialist repression, and at others toward gender-based objectification. With a fire and passion that literally seemed to engulf the entire tiny theater house, the full range of characters and emotions embodied by this actor may as well have been those of an entire theater troupe.


The limits of language and theatrical understanding were finally transcended after the final curtain call, when all four performers immediately reassembled onstage for a fully interpreted discussion with the audience. We learned that the Iraqi prison guard had indeed been in character when greeting us at the door, as his previously steely expression had melted away to reveal an entirely different personage of warmth and friendliness. We also learned—as I had begun to suspect—that the Tunisian woman, Zahira Ben Ammar, was a well-respected, world famous performer.

“As actors, we serve as mirrors of society, expressing what is often left unsaid,” she told the audience. “As a female actor, I have the privilege of being able to express myself in ways that are normally not possible for women in other Arab countries. In addition, my show also tries to give voice to the profound pain that has touched all colonized peoples—whether in Tunisia, Gaza or Iraq. I suspect that some of these themes may also resonate with Japanese people, due for example to your painful history in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

Anas Abdhul Sammad, the stage director for Mustaheel-Alice, continued, “The first time that I saw Zahira Ben Ammar perform, in Morocco, I was moved beyond words. I am not a person who cries much, but after seeing her I actually went back to my hotel room and wept. I knew that I wanted to bring her with me to Japan to share her work with audiences here, and I am so grateful that she took time out of her incredibly busy schedule to join us.

I would also add that at the same time as the theater allows us to express the deep pain of things like oppression and war, I also find it very disheartening that the television in other countries only shows things like bombs and violence. Of course this is happening and it’s real, but what the TV does not show is the reality of ordinary people living our day-to-day lives. We are one small acting company among countless others in Baghdad, and we try to use theatrical expression to portray various aspects of the human condition.”

Echoing Iraqi visual artist Qasim Sabti, he continued, “The profession of acting, which has been around since the age of Babylon, will long outlive technologies such as modern weaponry. It has always been there to provide support and comfort to people during difficult times—even though the historical contexts are different—and it will continue to do so into the future.”

“I would like to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for being here tonight, and for allowing me to express a part of myself,” Zahira Ben Ammar said at the close of the nearly hour-and-a-half long discussion session. “I felt a strong energy in this room tonight connecting me with all of you---and this is the reason why we continue to do what we do.”

Before leaving the theater, my student and I were able to have a friendly engaged conversation and e-mail exchange with all of the actors, which served to confirm what I already knew: that the real relationships which matter most are not the unhealthy and destructive ones perpetuated by governments and militaries—but the deep connections that take root in intimately engaged spaces such as the one we created in the theater that evening.

 

Zahira Ben Ammar and the Mustaheel Alice Theater Troupe

(Photo: Kimberly Hughes)

--Kimberly Hughes

Performance photos: Tsukasa Aoki