Archives: Articles

By Thomas Gaist

The US is legally obliged to prosecute all high-level government officials involved in organizing the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) torture programs, top UN human rights officials said Wednesday. The torture programs violated international law, UN special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights Ben Emmerson said.

Responding to the release of the Senate report on CIA torture, Emmerson said in an official statement Wednesday that the report left no doubt that systematic torture programs set up by the US government led to massive violations of the 1994 UN Convention Against Torture.

Emmerson called on the US Attorney General to “bring criminal charges against those responsible” for torture. There is “no excuse for shielding the perpetrators from justice any longer,” he said.

“As a matter of international law, the US is legally obliged to bring those responsible to justice,” said Emmerson. “The UN Convention Against Torture and the UN Convention on Enforced Disappearances require States to prosecute acts of torture and enforced disappearance where there is sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction. States are not free to maintain or permit impunity for these grave crimes.”

Bush administration policies, “orchestrated at a high level,” led to “systematic crimes and gross violations of international human rights law,” he added.

The involvement of officials at the highest levels only makes criminal prosecutions all the more necessary, the UN official said.

“The fact that the policies revealed in this report were authorized at a high level within the US government provides no excuse whatsoever,” Emmerson said. “Indeed, it reinforces the need for criminal accountability.”

Individuals involved in torture at all levels must be held accountable. “It is no defense for a public official to claim that they were acting on superior orders,” he said.

“However, the heaviest penalties should be reserved for those most seriously implicated in the planning and purported authorization of these crimes, Emmerson said. “Former Bush administration officials who have admitted their involvement in the programme should also face criminal prosecution for their acts.”

In a separate statement, UN high commissioner for human rights Zeid Raad al-Hussein similarly called for US government officials involved in torture to be prosecuted. Top US officials “cannot simply be granted impunity because of political expediency,” al-Hussein said.

“The Convention lets no one off the hook – neither the torturers themselves, nor the policy-makers, nor the public officials who define the policy or give the orders.”

An opinion piece published in the Los Angeles Times Tuesday, “Prosecute the torturers: It’s the Law,” by Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor and dean at the UC Irvine School of Law, similar argued that the CIA’s torture programs violate US and international law.

“Torture is a federal crime, and those who authorized it and engaged in it must be criminally prosecuted.” Chemerinsky writes, citing the Federal Torture Act (FTA). The Senate report “leaves no doubt” that the torture programs also violate the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Chemerinsky wrote.
The FTA states that even if the acts are committed “outside the United States,” anyone who commits torture should receive a 20-year prison sentence at minimum, and possibly the death penalty, Chemerinsky notes.

In light of the new report, President Obama’s decision not to prosecute officials from the Bush administration is now “clearly unacceptable,” he wrote.

“The debate should not be about whether the torture worked. The federal criminal law and the treaty have no exception for effective torture,” Chemerinsky wrote. “Those responsible should be held accountable, and President Obama should announce that criminal investigations and prosecutions are beginning immediately.”

These reports, coming from pillars of the political and academic establishment, confirm that the entire US ruling elite, including both big business parties and their representatives in Congress, is implicated in historic and unspeakable crimes.

Within the US official political and media circles, such demands for criminal prosecutions against US government torturers are nowhere to be found. Neither Senator Feinstein nor any other member of the Senate Intelligence Committee saw fit to demand criminal prosecutions against officials they know to have organized torture. The 528-page executive summary proposes not a single action or punishment for the crimes it documents exhaustively.

The Obama administration has extended and deepened the open repudiation of international law by the Bush administration. The failure of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Obama administration to hold accountable torturers who acted on behalf of the US government is itself a violation of international law.

By shielding officials who have admitted to setting up torture programs, including then-President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and adamantly refusing to carry out any investigations of officials involved in torture, the Obama administration and leading senators now act as direct accomplices of torture.

11 December, 2014
WSWS.org

 

By Countercurrents

California’s suffering with deadly drought is now old news. The news now is: The drought is the worst in 1,200 years. California is the world’s 8th largest economy and the source of a substantial amount of US produces. Surface water supply shortages in California have impacts well beyond the state’s borders.

Daniel Griffin and Kevin Anchukaitis, two climate scientists from the University of Minnesota and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution have shown that the California drought of 2012-2014 has been the worst in 1,200 years.

As soon as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released climate data for the summer of 2014, the two scientists sprang into action.

Using their blue oak data, they reconstructed rainfall back to the 13 th century and, calculated the severity of the drought by combining NOAA’s estimates of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI), an index of soil moisture variability, with the existing North American Drought Atlas, a spatial tree-ring based reconstruction of drought developed by scientists at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. These resources together provided complementary data on rainfall and soil moisture over the past millennium.

Griffin and Anchukaitis found that while the current period of low precipitation is not unusual in California’s history, these rainfall deficits combined with sustained record high temperatures created the current multiyear severe water shortages. “While it is precipitation that sets the rhythm of California drought, temperature weighs in on the pitch,” says Anchukaitis.

Griffin, an assistant professor in the Department of Geography, Environment and Society at the University of Minnesota, and Anchukaitis, an assistant scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, asked the question, “How unusual is the ongoing California drought?”

Watching the severity of the California drought intensify since last autumn, they wondered how it would eventually compare to other extreme droughts throughout the state’s history.

To answer those questions, Griffin and Anchukaitis collected new tree-ring samples from blue oak trees in southern and central California. “California’s old blue oaks are as close to nature’s rain gauges as we get,” says Griffin. “They thrive in some of California’s driest environments.” These trees are particularly sensitive to moisture changes and their tree rings display moisture fluctuations vividly.

“We were genuinely surprised at the result,” says Griffin, a NOAA Climate & Global Change Fellow and former WHOI postdoctoral scholar. “This is California–drought happens. Time and again, the most common result in tree-ring studies is that drought episodes in the past were more extreme than those of more recent eras. This time, however, the result was different.” While there is good evidence of past sustained, multi-decadal droughts or so-called “megadroughts”‘ in California, the authors say those past episodes were probably punctuated by occasional wet years, even if the cumulative effect over decades was one of overall drying. The current short-term drought appears to be worse than any previous span of consecutive years of drought without reprieve.

Tree rings are a valuable data source when tracking historical climate, weather and natural disaster trends. Floods, fires, drought and other elements that can affect growing conditions are reflected in the development of tree rings, and since each ring represents one year the samples collected from centuries-old trees are a virtual timeline that extend beyond the historical record in North America.

So what are the implications? The research indicates that natural climate system variability is compounded by human-caused climate change and that “hot” droughts such as the current one are likely to occur again in the future. With an exceptionally wet winter, parts of California might emerge from the drought this year. “But there is no doubt,” cautions Anchukaitis, “that we are entering a new era where human-wrought changes to the climate system will become important for determining the severity of droughts and their consequences for coupled human and natural systems.”

Story Source:

The story is based on materials provided by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

Journal Reference :

Daniel Griffin, Kevin J Anchukaitis. How unusual is the 2012-2014 California drought? Geophysical Research Letters , 2014; DOI: 10.1002/2014GL062433

Source:

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. “California’s drought is the worst in 1,200 years, evidence suggests.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 5 December 2014. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141205124357.htm>.

09 December, 2014
Countercurrents.org

By Countercurrents.org

Globally, an estimated 230 million children now live in countries and areas affected by armed conflicts, said the UNICEF.

As many as 15 million children are caught up in violent conflicts in the Central African Republic, Iraq, South Sudan, the State of Palestine, Syria and Ukraine – including those internally displaced or living as refugees, informed UNICEF. “Never in recent memory have so many children been subjected to such unspeakable brutality”, said Anthony Lake, UNICEF Executive Director.

A New York/Geneva, December 8, 2014 datelined UNICEF press release said:

The year 2014 has been one of horror, fear and despair for millions of children, as worsening conflicts across the world saw them exposed to extreme violence and its consequences, forcibly recruited and deliberately targeted by warring groups.

Yet many crises no longer capture the world’s attention, warned the global organization.

“This has been a devastating year for millions of children,” said Lake. “Children have been killed while studying in the classroom and while sleeping in their beds; they have been orphaned, kidnapped, tortured, recruited, raped and even sold as slaves.”

In 2014, hundreds of children have been kidnapped from their schools or on their way to school. Tens of thousands have been recruited or used by armed forces and groups. Attacks on education and health facilities and use of schools for military purposes have increased in many places.

Facts

A few of the facts provided by the UNICEF include:

# In the Central African Republic, 2.3 million children are affected by the conflict, up to 10,000 children are believed to have been recruited by armed groups over the last year, and more than 430 children have been killed and maimed – three times as many as in 2013

# In Gaza, 54,000 children were left homeless as a result of the 50-day conflict during the summer that also saw 538 children killed, and more than 3,370 injured.
# In Syria, with more than 7.3 million children affected by the conflict including 1.7 million child refugees, the UN verified at least 35 attacks on schools in the first nine months of the year, which killed 105 children and injured nearly 300 others.

# In Iraq, where an estimated 2.7 million children are affected by conflict, at least 700 children are believed to have been maimed, killed or even executed this year. Women and girls have suffered physical and sexual assault, sexual slavery, trafficking and forced marriage. Some have been sold in open markets. Children have been tortured by ISIL and many have been forced to watch and take part in executions and torture.

# In Syria and Iraq, children have been victims of, witnesses to and even perpetrators of increasingly brutal and extreme violence.

# In South Sudan, an estimated 235,000 children under five are suffering from severe acute malnutrition. An estimated 1.7 million children are internally displaced mainly as a result of conflict and more than 320,000 are living as refugees. According to UN verified data, more than 600 children have been killed and over 200 maimed this year, and around 12,000 children are now being used by armed forces and groups. According to UN verified data, nearly 100 were subjected to sexual violence and 311 were abducted.

# In Ukraine, the number of internally displaced children is estimated at 128,000. At least 36 children were killed and more than 100 were injured in Donetsk and Luhansk regions between mid-April and end of October.

Adding further suffering of the children, in countries stricken by Ebola, at least 5 million children aged 3-17 are unable to go back to school because of the outbreak. Thousands of children have lost one or two parents to the disease

Forgotten

The UN organization said:

The sheer number of crises in 2014 meant that many were quickly forgotten or captured little attention. Protracted crises in countries like Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, continued to claim even more young lives and futures.
This year has also posed significant new threats to children’s health and well-being, most notably the Ebola outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, which has left thousands of children orphaned and an estimated 5 million out of school.

Hope

The world is still struggling to save the children. There is still hope.

The UNICEF SAID:

Despite the tremendous challenges children have faced in 2014, there has been hope for millions of children affected by conflict and crisis. In the face of access restrictions, insecurity, and funding challenges, humanitarian organizations including UNICEF have worked together to provide life-saving assistance and other critical services like education and emotional support to help children growing up in some of the most dangerous places in the world.

In Central African Republic, a campaign is under way to get 662,000 children back to school as the security situation permits.

Nearly 68 million doses of the oral polio vaccine were delivered to countries in the Middle East to stem a polio outbreak in Iraq and Syria.

In South Sudan, more than 70,000 children were treated for severe malnutrition.

In Ebola-hit countries, work continues to combat the virus in local communities through support for community care centers and Ebola treatment Units; through training of health workers and awareness-raising campaigns to reduce the risks of transmission; and through supporting children orphaned by Ebola.

“It is sadly ironic that in this, the 25th anniversary year of the Convention on the Rights of the Child when we have been able to celebrate so much progress for children globally, the rights of so many millions of other children have been so brutally violated,” said Lake. “Violence and trauma do more than harm individual children – they undermine the strength of societies. The world can and must do more to make 2015 a much better year for every child. For every child who grows up strong, safe, healthy and educated is a child who can go on to contribute to her own, her family’s, her community’s, her nation’s and, indeed, to our common future.”
The New York Times report by Rick Gladstone said:

“The report was basically a summation of the well-documented afflictions that affected children in 2014. But taken in their entirety, they presented what Unicef called a devastating picture.”

Citing the UNICEF report the NYT report added:

“The nearly four-year-old war in Syria, which spilled into Iraq this year with the ascendance of the militant group the Islamic State, was a leading contributor of trauma to children.”

09 December, 2014
Countercurrents.org

 

By Bill Van Auken

Israeli air strikes conducted against Syria on Sunday constitute a provocative and criminal act of military aggression that poses the threat of widening the ongoing war in Iraq and Syria across the region.

The Syrian government accused Israel of sending warplanes to bomb targets near the Damascus international airport as well as the Dimas area near the Lebanese border.

State-owned Al Ikhbariya television charged “the Israeli enemy committed a heinous attack by targeting two peaceful areas in the Damascus countryside.” It said that there were no casualties in the air strikes.

The Syrian foreign ministry called upon the United Nations Security Council to condemn the attacks and to impose immediate sanctions against Israel, actions which Washington, with its veto power on the council, is certain to block.

The government of President Bashar al-Assad charged that the Israeli strikes represented direct support for the Islamist militias in Syria such as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and the Al Qaeda-affiliated Al Nusra Front.

“Syria calls for imposing deterrent measures against Israel, which didn’t hide its pro-terrorism policies and its premeditated intentions against Syria,” the ministry’s letter to the UN stated.

Israel, following its standard policy, refused to comment on “foreign reports,” neither confirming nor denying the attacks. The bombing raids represented at least the eighth time that Israeli warplanes have struck inside Syrian territory since the Western-backed war for regime change began in 2011.

These attacks have been justified by Israeli officials in the name of destroying missiles and other weaponry supposedly bound for Hezbollah, the Shia-based movement in Lebanon, or in retaliation for shells fired across the disputed Syrian-Israeli border in the Golan Heights. While this fire has generally come from the Islamist anti-government militias, Israel has invariably directed its own fire at government troops.

Israel occupied Syria’s Golan Heights in the 1967 Middle East war, and in 1981 illegally annexed the area.

There have been varying accounts of what the Israeli strikes were targeting. Pro-Israeli and Syrian “rebel” sources have claimed that it was Iranian missiles and other weaponry destined for Hezbollah. Lebanese television, however, said that one of the facilities struck was a Syrian intelligence facility that was being used by Iran.

Syrian state media said that the strikes were aimed at Russian anti-aircraft weaponry. Tel Aviv had previously warned that it would prevent Syria from deploying Russia’s advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. While Moscow agreed to sell the systems to Syria in 2007, earlier this year it announced that it was canceling further delivery of the weapons.

The DEBKA web site, which has close ties to the Israeli military intelligence complex, cited “Middle East military and intelligence sources” as describing the raids as “Israel’s first overt military clash with Russia in the course of the more than three-year Syrian war.”

“Those sources assert that the strikes demolished components of Russian SA-25 or other types of top-line anti-air missile systems that Moscow had destined for Syria and” Hezbollah, the report stated. “Russian transport planes are said to have shipped these consignments in the last few days to the military section of Damascus international airport.”

The Russian government sharply condemned the attacks, denouncing Israel’s “aggressive action” in a letter to the United Nations and insisting that such attacks should not be reported.

“Moscow is deeply worried by this dangerous development, the circumstances of which demand an explanation,” Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said.

Iran’s and Syria’s foreign ministers met in Tehran Monday and publicly denounced the attacks. “This move is [aimed at] boosting the morale of terrorist groups which are suffering very serious blows from the resistance of the Syrian and Iraqi people,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said.

He warned that the entire Middle East is confronting a “big regional and global crisis.”

Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem charged that Israel was attempting to offset defeats on the ground suffered by the Western-backed “rebels.”

Israel is clearly banking on the ongoing conflict within Syria preventing Damascus from striking back over the attacks. It nonetheless has placed its forces on Israel’s borders with Syria and Lebanon on a state of alert.

In a comment published in the Israeli daily Haaretz, Amos Harel wrote that the latest raid was “exceptional from at least three aspects: It is done after Hezbollah had made effort to define new game rules opposite Israel in the northern front, it takes place after the international community had changed its order of priorities in relation to the war in Syria (from toppling Assad first to defeating his opponents from ISIS now) and this is the first time that Israel seemingly acts in Syria since Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu declared his intention to go for elections.”

Syrian officials have charged that Netanyahu launched the attack in part to boost his prospects for reelection in the vote scheduled for March.

The Syrian and Iranian charges that Israel is actively seeking to aid the ISIS and Al Nusra Front forces inside Syria have received substantiation from the United Nations, which made public reports issued by the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), which patrols the cease-fire line in the Golan Heights, indicating continuous Israeli contact with and aid to the so-called rebels.

A report issued by UNDOF in June 2014, for example, cited 59 incidents at a Syrian-Israeli crossing point known as Position 85 in which the UN forces “observed armed members of the opposition transferring 89 wounded persons from the Bravo [Syrian] side across the ceasefire line to IDF and IDF on the Alpha [Israeli] side handing over 19 treated and 2 deceased individuals to the armed members of the opposition on the Bravo side.”

Nor is the contact limited to medical aid. The report added that “on one occasion, UNDOF observed IDF on the Alpha side handing over two boxes to armed members of the opposition on the Bravo side.”

Israel’s i24news web site cited records from the country’s Ministry of Health revealing that at least 1,000 Syrians have been treated at four hospitals in the north of Israel, many of them fighters.

The news network added that last month Israel’s Druze minority carried out a public protest against the country’s aid to ISIS and the Al Nusra Front fighters, which are viewed as a mortal threat to Druze communities in both Syria and Lebanon.

The Israeli action could have other motives as well. Tel Aviv is strongly opposed to the negotiations to reach a nuclear settlement with Iran and can only be further agitated over the fact that US and Iranian warplanes are simultaneously attacking the Islamist forces inside Syria. The latest intervention may well be aimed at provoking a conflict that could disrupt any rapprochement between Washington and Tehran.

It is certain that the raids have been watched closely by the Pentagon, serving as a means of gauging Syria’s air defense systems in advance of any move to impose a much-debated no-fly buffer zone in northern Syria on the Turkish border.

09 December, 2014
WSWS.org

 

By David Swanson

Imagine a letter co-signed by former presidents, former representatives from both sides of the aisle, House speakers, former governors, attorneys general, cabinet members, ambassadors, CEOs, movie stars and directors, writers, astronauts, religious leaders, mayors, academics, mainstream media correspondents, and more — all united in stating “Nobody wants war.” Imagine the New York Times publishing this letter. The equivalent happened in Germany just a few days ago.

On December 5, the renowned weekly newspaper Die Zeit published the letter “Another War in Europe? Not in our name!” The more than 60 personalities from politics, business, culture and media certainly do not sound like the typical voices for peace, and indeed they are not. Nevertheless they came together to demand de-escalatory politics between the United States and the European Union, on one side, and Russia. They appeal to the German federal government, its representatives and the media to assume their responsibility for peace in Europe. The desire for a world without war is one shared far beyond the peace movement choir.

Such a letter might have been written in the United States in the 1920s or 1930s. Is it imaginable today? Should we ask ourselves why not? Here is the German letter and the names of its signers:

Nobody wants war. But North America, the European Union and Russia are inevitably drifting towards war if they do not finally halt the disastrous spiral of threat and counter-threat. All Europeans, Russia included, jointly hold responsibility for peace and security. Only those who do not lose sight of this goal are avoiding irrational turns.

The Ukraine-conflict shows that the addiction to power and domination has not been overcome. In 1990 at the end of the Cold War, we were all hoping for that. But the successes of the policy of detente and the peaceful revolutions have made us sleepy and careless, in the East and the West alike. For US-Americans, Europeans and Russians the guiding principle to banish war permanently from their relations has been lost. Otherwise, the perceived threatening of Russia with expansion of the West to the East, without simultaneously deepening cooperation with Moscow, as well as the illegal annexation of the Crimea by Putin, cannot be explained.

In this moment of great danger for the continent, Germany has a special responsibility for the maintenance of peace. Without the will for reconciliation from the Russian people, without the foresight of Mikhail Gorbachev, without the support of our Western allies and without the prudent action by the then Federal Government, the division of Europe would not have been overcome. To allow German unification to peacefully evolve was a great gesture, shaped by reason from the victorious powers. It was a decision of historic proportions.

From overcoming the division in Europe a solid European peace and security order from Vancouver to Vladivostok should have developed, as it had been agreed to by all 35 Heads of State and Government of the CSCE Member States in November 1990 in the “Charter of Paris for a New Europe.” On the basis of agreed established principles and through first concrete measures a “Common European Home” was supposed to be established, in which all the States concerned should have equal security. This post-war policy goal has to this day not been redeemed. The people of Europe have to live again in fear.

We, the undersigned, appeal to the federal government of Germany to assume its responsibility for peace in Europe. We need a new policy of détente in Europe. This is only possible on the basis of equal security for all with equal and mutually respected partners. The German government is not following a “unique German path”, if they continue to call, in this stalemated situation, for calm and dialogue with Russia. The Russians’ security requirements are as legitimate and just as important as those of the Germans, the Poles, the Baltic States and Ukraine.

We should not look to push Russia out of Europe. That would be unhistorical, unreasonable and dangerous for peace. Ever since the Congress of Vienna in 1814 Russia has been recognized as one of the global players in Europe. All who have tried to violently change that have failed bloodily – the last time it was the megalomaniac Hitler’s Germany that set about a murderous campaign to conquer Russia in 1941.

We call upon the Members of the German Bundestag, delegated by the people to deal appropriately with the seriousness of the situation, to attentively preside over the peace obligation of their government. He who props up a bogeyman ascribing blame to one side alone, exacerbates tensions at a time when the signals should call for de-escalation. Inclusion instead of exclusion should be the leitmotif for German politicians.

We appeal to the media to comply with their obligations for nonbiased reporting, more convincingly than they have thus far done. Editorialists and commentators demonize whole nations, without crediting their history. Every able foreign policy journalist will understand the fear of the Russians, since NATO members in 2008 invited Georgia and Ukraine to become members of the alliance. It’s not about Putin. State leaders come and go. What is at stake is Europe. It’s about taking away the people’s fear of war. Towards this purpose, a responsible media coverage based on solid research can help a lot.

On October 3, 1990, on the Day to Commemorate German Reunification, German President Richard von Weizsäcker said: “The Cold War is overcome; freedom and democracy will soon be put in place in all countries … Now they can conduct their relationships within a compact and secure institutional framework, from which a common life and peace order can arise. For the people of Europe a completely new chapter in their history begins. The goal is a Pan-European project. This is a huge challenge. We can archive it, but we can also fail. We face the clear alternative to unite Europe, or in line with painful historical examples, to fall back again into nationalist conflicts in Europe.”

Until the Ukraine conflict we thought we here in Europe were on the right track. Today, a quarter of a century later, Richard von Weizsäcker’s words are more relevant than ever.

Signatories

Mario Adorf, Actor
Robert Antretter (Former Member of German Parliament)
Prof. Dr. Wilfried Bergmann (Vice-President Alma Mater Europaea)
Luitpold Prinz von Bayern (Königliche Holding und Lizenz KG)
Achim von Borries (Regisseur und Drehbuchautor)
Klaus Maria Brandauer (Schauspieler, Regisseur)
Dr. Eckhard Cordes (Chair of Ost-Ausschuss der Deutschen Wirtschaft)
Prof. Dr. Herta Däubler-Gmelin (Former Federal Minister of Justice)
Eberhard Diepgen (Former Mayor of Berlin)
Dr. Klaus von Dohnanyi (First Mayor der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg)
Alexander van Dülmen (Vorstand A-Company Filmed Entertainment AG)
Stefan Du¨rr (Geschäftsfu¨hrender Gesellschafter und CEO Ekosem-Agrar GmbH)
Dr. Erhard Eppler ( Former Federal Minister for Development)
Prof. Dr. Dr. Heino Falcke (Propst i.R.)
Prof. Hans-Joachim Frey (Vorstandsvorsitzender Semper Opernball Dresden)
Pater Anselm Gru¨n (Pater)
Sibylle Havemann (Berlin)
Dr. Roman Herzog (Former President of Federal Republic Germany)
Christoph Hein (author)
Dr. Dr. h.c. Burkhard Hirsch (Former Vice-President of Federal Parliament)
Volker Hörner (Akademiedirektor i.R.)
Josef Jacobi (Biobauer)
Dr. Sigmund Jähn (Former Astronaut)
Uli Jörges (Journalist)
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Margot Käßmann (ehemalige EKD Ratsvorsitzende und Bischöfin)
Dr. Andrea von Knoop (Moskau)
Prof. Dr. Gabriele Krone-Schmalz (Former Correspondent ARD in Moskau)
Friedrich Ku¨ppersbusch (Journalist)
Vera Gräfin von Lehndorff (artist)
Irina Liebmann (author)
Dr. h.c. Lothar de Maizière (Former Minister-President)
Stephan Märki (Intendant des Theaters Bern)
Prof. Dr. Klaus Mangold (Chairman Mangold Consulting GmbH)
Reinhard und Hella Mey (Liedermacher)
Ruth Misselwitz (evangelische Pfarrerin Pankow)
Klaus Prömpers (Journalist)
Prof. Dr. Konrad Raiser (eh. Generalsekretär des Ökumenischen Weltrates der Kirchen)
Jim Rakete (Fotograf)
Gerhard Rein (Journalist)
Michael Röskau (Ministerialdirigent a.D.)
Eugen Ruge (Schriftsteller)
Dr. h.c. Otto Schily (Former Federal Minister of the Interior)
Dr. h.c. Friedrich Schorlemmer (ev. Theologe, Bu¨rgerrechtler)
Georg Schramm (Kabarettist)
Gerhard Schröder (Former Head of Government, Bundeskanzler a.D.)
Philipp von Schulthess (Schauspieler)
Ingo Schulze (author)
Hanna Schygulla (actor, singer)
Dr. Dieter Spöri (Former Federal Minister of Economy)
Prof. Dr. Fulbert Steffensky (kath. Theologe)
Dr. Wolf-D. Stelzner (geschäftsfu¨hrender Gesellschafter: WDS-Institut fu¨r Analysen in Kulturen mbH)
Dr. Manfred Stolpe (Former Minister-President)
Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz (Former Ambassador)
Prof. Dr. Walther Stu¨tzle (Staatssekretär der Verteidigung a.D.)
Prof. Dr. Christian R. Supthut (Vorstandsmitglied a.D. )
Prof. Dr. h.c. Horst Teltschik (Former Chancellor advisor for Security and Foreign Policy)
Andres Veiel (Regisseur)
Dr. Hans-Jochen Vogel (Former Federal Minister of Justice)
Dr. Antje Vollmer (Former Vice President of the Bunderstag)
Bärbel Wartenberg-Potter (Bischöfin Lu¨beck a.D.)
Dr. Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker (scientist)
Wim Wenders (Regisseur)
Hans-Eckardt Wenzel (songwriter)
Gerhard Wolf (Schriftsteller, Verleger)
David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org .

10 December, 2014
Worldbeyondwar.org

By Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese

The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has been negotiated in secret throughout the Obama administration. They continue to keep the text secret and classified. This week TPP trade negotiators are in Washington, DC. The 12 countries have been unable to reach agreement as the United States demands extreme corporate power undermining the sovereignty of nations.

The Obama administration has also been stalled on trade on the homefront as Congress has refused to give the administration fast track trade promotion authority. Fast track would allow the President to sign the agreement before it went to Congress and would restrict Congress’ power to review it. It would ensure Congress plays virtually no role in regulating trade as is its constitutional mandate under the Commerce Clause.

On Sunday night Popular Resistance began the week of negotiations with a Light Brigade putting messages on the US Trade Representative’s office in Washington, DC.

On Monday morning members of Popular Resistance held a ‘Sit-in to End the Secrecy’ on the front steps of the USTR office . As Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiators and USTR staff arrived for their first day of meetings this week, demonstrators demanded that they stop hiding the text of the trade agreement and instead make it available to the public telling them “secret negotiations are anti-democratic.”

Several activists tried twice to deliver an open letter signed by more than 1,000 people to the trade ambassador but were met with an aggressive removal from the lobby by security personnel. Richard Ochs, a 76 year old former steelworker from Baltimore, was pulled down the stairs and ejected from the building. Ochs exclaimed “I thought that as citizens we had the right to petition the government. This shows how afraid they are of transparency.”

Cassidy Regan, trade organizer for Popular Resistance, remarked that after public pressure the European Union recently agreed to release its negotiating proposals for the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership to the public. The EU wanted to release the full text of the agreement but was blocked by the United States. “The trade agreements being drafted in secret threaten everything from worker rights and wages to public health and access to medicines. The negotiators keep texts hidden because these agreements aren’t made with the public in mind — instead, they serve to give transnational corporations further power to exploit people and the planet for the sake of profit. The unprecedented lack of transparency denies communities’ right to know policies that could impact so many aspects of our lives, for generations to come.”

After several hours of blocking the front entrance and disrupting business by chanting, singing and banging on a cow bell, pots and blowing whistles, the protesters were joined by close to 200 more people from Public Citizen, Citizens Trade Campaign, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club, National Family Farm Coalition, Friends Committee on National Legislation and labor unions such as the Teamsters, Communication Workers of America, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and United Students Against Sweatshops.

The crowd sang and chanted. They had a spirited march around the block carrying banners, signs and big red balloons that said “There will be no fast track.” They let the negotiators know that the American people were united in their opposition to fast track and predicted Congress would not pass fast track legislation. .

This is the first of several days of negotiations. More actions are expected throughout the week. Online actions are being organized through ReleasetheText.com.

The movement of movements bringing together people concerned about the environment, labor, food and water, Internet freedom, energy policy, banking regulation and so many other issues has been able to stop the rigged corporate trade agreement being pushed by the Obama administration. A critical test will come in the coming months when the new Congress is put in place. We are confident that we continue to work in unity to stop these corporate trade agreements that we can stop fast track and prevent these treaties from becoming law.

Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese are organizers with Popular Resistance , which provides daily movement news and resources.

10 December, 2014
PopularResistance.org

 

By Countercurrents.org

The CIA carried out “brutal” interrogations of al-Qaeda suspects in the years after the 9/11 attacks on the US, a US Senate report has said. The CIA used sexual threats, waterboarding and other brutal methods to interrogate terrorism suspects and all were ineffective at eliciting critical information, according to a US Senate report released on Tuesday. The report also shows dissent and disarray within the CIA. The summary of the report, compiled by Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that the CIA misled Americans about what it was doing.

The report took years to produce, charts the history of the CIA’s “Rendition, Detention and Interrogation” program, which US president Bush authorized after the Sept. 11 attacks.

A Reuters report said:

“The [Senate] report on government-sanctioned interrogation at sites around the world for questioning captured al Qaeda and other militants prompted the United States to warn its facilities abroad to shore up security in case of violent reactions.

“Sources familiar with the document said it includes graphic details about techniques the Central Intelligence Agency used in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

“The sources said tactics meant to force detainees to divulge information on terrorist plots and cells went beyond the techniques authorized by White House, CIA and lawyers working for President George W. Bush’s Justice Department.”

The more than 500-page report that the Intelligence Committee has prepared is a summary of a much more detailed, 6,000-page narrative which will remain secret. The report includes a 200-page narrative of the interrogation program’s history and 20 case studies of the interrogations of specific detainees.

In a statement, the CIA insisted that the interrogations did help save lives.

“The intelligence gained from the program was critical to our understanding of al-Qaeda and continues to inform our counterterrorism efforts to this day,” Director John Brennan said in a statement.

However, the CIA said it acknowledged that there were mistakes in the program, especially early on when it was unprepared for the scale of the operation to detain and interrogate prisoners.

A few of the main points included in the Senate report are the following:

# At least 26 of 119 known detainees in custody during the life of the program were wrongfully held, and many held for months longer than they should have been.

# Aggressive techniques were used on suspects from the start, despite CIA claims that interrogations would begin with less coercive methods.

# Methods included sleep deprivation for up to 180 hours, often standing or in painful positions.

# Waterboarding was physically harmful to prisoners, causing convulsions and vomiting.

# The CIA misled politicians and public, giving inaccurate information to obtain approval for using techniques.

# At no time did coercive interrogation techniques lead of collection of intelligence on imminent threats.

# None of 20 cases of counterterrorism “successes” attributed to the techniques led to unique or otherwise unavailable intelligence.

# The CIA claimed falsely that no senators had objected to the program.

# Management of the program was deeply flawed, for example the operation of the second detention facility, known as COBALT.

The Washington datelined Reuters report said:

“Cases in which CIA interrogators threatened one or more detainees with mock executions, a practice never authorized by Bush administration lawyers, are documented in the report, the sources said.”

The Reuters report added:

“The report describes how al Qaeda operative Abdel Rahman al Nashiri, suspected mastermind of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, was threatened with a buzzing power drill, the sources said. The drill was never actually used on him.”

Citing sources the report documents the way at least one detainee was sexually threatened with a broomstick.

The report on CIA concludes that “harsh interrogations did not produce a single critical intelligence nugget that could not have been obtained by non-coercive means. Former CIA and government leaders, including former U.S. vice president Dick Cheney, dispute that conclusion.”

The Reuters report observed:

“It was unclear whether the report would lead to further attempts to hold those involved accountable. The legal statute of limitations has passed for many of the actions.”

Introducing the report to the Senate, Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein described the CIA’s actions as a stain on US history.

“The release of this 500-page summary cannot remove that stain, but it can and does say to our people and the world that America is big enough to admit when it’s wrong and confident enough to learn from its mistakes,” she said.

Earlier, on Monday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the US president Barack Obama supported making the document public “so that people around the world and people here at home understand exactly what transpired.”

The Reuters report cited the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, Anthony Romero. Anthony said in an opinion piece in The New York Times that Obama should issue formal pardons to senior officials and others to make clear that these actions were crimes and help ensure that “the American government never tortures again.”

Bush ended many aspects of the program before leaving office, and Obama swiftly banned “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which critics say are torture, after his 2009 inauguration.

Two Republican lawmakers issued a statement calling the release of the report “reckless and irresponsible.” Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Intelligence Committee, is due to make the report public in a Senate floor speech.

“We are concerned that this release could endanger the lives of Americans overseas, jeopardize U.S. relations with foreign partners, potentially incite violence, create political problems for our allies, and be used as a recruitment tool for our enemies,” senators Marco Rubio and Jim Risch said.

Senator Angus King, an independent, told CNN releasing the report was important because it could persuade a future president not to use these techniques.

“We did things that we tried Japanese soldiers for war crimes for after World War Two. This is not America. This is not who we are. What was done has diminished our stature and inflamed terrorists around the world.”

“Did we torture people? Yes. Did it work. No,” King said.

09 December, 2014
Countercurrents.org

 

From Seoul and Okinawa to Tokyo

December 5, 2014

YMCA Asia Youth Center

Article 9 of Japan’s Peace Constitution

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 a 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.

All religions are universal, transcending races and nations. Today, however, there are cases where religions are used to instigate and justify violence. Religions should be purified to their original inspiration, and their followers should faithfully translate these truths and realities about life in word and deed in their respective contexts. Each religion should be an expression of the universal truths like peace, and lead to collectively proclaim and live these rather than insist on differences that may lead to disunity or even hostility.

The 4th Global Inter-religious Conference on Article 9 of the Japanese Peace Constitution gathered 120 participants from Japan, South Korea, China, Hong Kong/PRC, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, Myanmar, Australia, Congo, Norway, Switzerland, Germany, Canada and the USA. The conference was held at the YMCA Asia Youth Center and its participants hereby issue this Statement. This Conference follows upon the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Asia Inter-religious Conference on Article 9, which were held in 2007 (Tokyo), 2009 (Seoul) and 2011 (Okinawa), but the name was changed to the Global Inter-religious Conference on Article 9, to
reflect the broadened base of participation from abroad.

1) We reaffirm our commitment and call the followers of all religions to be accountable to the values of justice, peace and care for all life, nationally, regionally and globally.

2) In the statements issued on the occasions of the 2nd and the 3rd Asia Inter-religious Conference on Article 9 of the Japanese Peace Constitution, we affirmed that Article 9 is more than ever relevant, not only for Japan, but for regional and international relations, and that it is forward-looking. It can be seen as an essential step toward preventing and ending all war, and as a unique expression of the core value of a just, peaceful, and sustainable future for all communities around the world.

3) Together with our Japanese hosts and partners, we are deeply concerned that the Abe/Liberal Democratic Party administration has reinterpreted and further intends to revise and amend Article 9, which is Japan’s pledge for peace and to desist from war. Revising the peace constitution of Japan will bring about serious instability in the region of Asia and beyond. Japan should never be a threat to neighboring countries, nor become a destabilizing factor. This constitutional reinterpretation and proposed revision by the Abe administration is contrary to the wishes and desires of the people in this region, and a threat to constitutional democracy.

4) The Abe administration should squarely reflect upon Japan’s modern history of invasion and colonialism, and express this reflection clearly before the world. Not only should the government of Japan protect the Constitution, which is also the Japanese people’s promise of non-belligerence, but it should uphold previously-made official Government statements that reflect upon Japan’s past invasions and colonialism, such as the (Chief Cabinet Secretary) Kōno Statement 2 , the (Prime Minister) Murayama Statement 3 and the (Prime Minister) Kan Statement4. Members of the administration should also not pay official homage visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, which can be perceived as aprovocative act of endorsing war crimes. Genuine acknowledgement and apology for Japan’s invasions, atrocities and colonial rule by the Japanese government forms a foundation for peace in the Asia region.

 

1 Excerpt from Our Mission: Inter-Religious Conference on Article 9 and Peace in Asia. Seoul, 2009.
2 Statement by the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yōhei Kōno, on the result of the study on the issue of”comfort women.” 1993.08.04
3 Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the war’s end. 1995.08.15
4 Statement by Prime Minister Naoto Kan, on the occasion of 100 years since the Japan-Korea
Annexation Treaty. 2010.08.10

 

5) We demand that the government of Japan strive to resolve regional territorial disputes in accordance with the letter and spirit of Article 9, through dialogue and diplomatic negotiations. We call upon each country to refrain from the use, or threatened use, of armed force as a means of settling such disputes.

6) The government of Japan should take action, without delay, to mitigate the crushing burden of U.S. military bases placed upon the people of Okinawa and other Japanese communities. We are witnessing the pain of the people and ecological destruction around military bases. We demand of the Japanese and US governments the immediate closing of Camp Futenma and the immediate halt of construction of the new base in Henoko. We demand that the United States government recall its military forces to the U.S., not only from Japan but from other countries in the region.

7) Remilitarization brings not more security, but more vulnerability, to a nation and a region. The cynical manipulation of the idea of collective self-defense through the Abe regime’s reinterpretation of Art 9 will, we fear, lead to a dangerous arms race that will destabilize the entire region. It is obvious that this remilitarization of Japan is linked to and supported by a US desire to strengthen its hegemony in Asia. We call upon all nations to abstain from and reject military solutions to political conflicts and diplomatic challenges. We encourage the Japanese government to show leadership that is true to the letter and spirit of Article-9, and to resist pressure from other states to accept a remilitarization of their country. We are grateful to the efforts of people in peace movements in the US and other countries, and encourage them to continue their work for true peace.

8) We are hopeful that all people around the world will overcome narrow nationalism and, following the spirit of Article 9, will construct relationships based on the principles of no-war, reconciliation, equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit. As consequence of the commitment to non-violence as expressed in Article 9, and as persons of faith committed to life, we plead to respect the human right of conscientious objection to military service.

9) In addition to the points raised in the text above, we petition the government of Japan in the spirit of Article 9 to address the growing problem of hate speech, which is being directed against Korean and other minority groups, as well as peace advocates, in communities across Japan. We urge the government of Japan to institute laws that would protect residents from fear-inducing taunts and threats, and to end the practice of lending police protection to those who deliver hate speeches under the cynical guise of “protecting freedom of expression.”

10) We believe that ultimate security can be guaranteed only by no weapons and no military forces. Acting on this belief, Conference participants pledge to communicate to their communities the importance of Article 9, and to support the reaffirmation of Article 9 by correspondingly addressing their governments. Our prayer is that Article 9 will inspire people of all nations.

Recommendations for Action

Religious Communities

•  We call upon faith communities in Japan, Korea and other Asian nations to form country working groups in East Asia, to implement Article 9 activities.
•  We call upon faith communities to engage youth in the promotion of the cause of Article 9, by use of creative media and by the creation of education materials.
•  We call upon faith communities to include a prayer for the spread of the spirit of Article 9 on September 21st, the International Day for Peace.
• We call upon faith communities and advocates of peace in other lands to remember Japan and Article 9 on May 3, Constitution Day, when the people of Japan commemorate the promulgation of the Constitution.
•  We call upon the World Council of Churches to consider the possibility of hosting an international interfaith Article 9 conference, as part of its Pilgrimage of Justice and Peace.
•  We call upon our Muslim friends in peace across Asia to consider the possibility of hosting an interfaith Article 9 conference in a majority Muslim country in Asia.
•  We call upon the Christian Conference of Asia to help organize a solidarity visit by article 9 leaders to North and South Korea, to promote peace, reunification and Article 9.
•  We call upon the Asia Pacific Forum of North America to organize an Article 9 solidarity visit to the United States.

Civil Society

•  In order to actualize the spirit of peace in article 9, we will make efforts to strengthen our solidarity with those who advocate for peace in civil society.
•  We will work with those who advocate for peace in civil society to make Article 9 and the commitments arising from it a subject of instruction in school.
•  We will support the ongoing efforts of peace advocates to seek nomination and award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Japanese people who conserve Article 9.

 
Participants of the 4th Global Inter-religious Conference on Article 9

 

click here for PDF format.

Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit
World Council of Churches General Secretary
Address to the 4th Global Inter-Religious Conference on Article Nine of the Japanese Constitution
December 3, 2014

INTRODUCTION AND TRIBUTE TO INTER-RELIGIOUS ACTION

I bring greetings to you all from the World Council of Churches. It is a distinct privilege to be here in Tokyo for this 4th Global Inter-Religious Conference on Article Nine. The World
Council of Churches is pleased to have also taken part in the three previous conferences, in Tokyo, Seoul and Okinawa.

These conferences are timely and of singular importance. Seventy years after World War II, they breathe new life into Article Nine. They concentrate the hearts and minds of different faiths and
different cultures on an issue that brings peace and reconciliation onto the agenda of religious communities in Asia and other parts of the world.

In July this year, the Central Committee of the WCC adopted a policy position on Article 9. The WCC noted that Article Nine has contributed to the image of post-war Japan as a peace-loving
nation, has become a diplomatic asset for Japan, has helped Japan to re-develop relationships with neighbouring states and make non-military contributions in crises overseas.

The WCC statement names the tragic history of women forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese military during World War II as a “constant reminder of the abhorrence of war and its
destructive impact on the lives of innocent and vulnerable people”.

The Central Committee expressed its grave concern at the Japanese government’s initiative to reinterpret or change Article Nine. The WCC warned that to weaken this constitutional prohibition would undermine regional security. It called for the Japanese government to respect both the letter and the spirit of Article 9. It urges the government of Japan to live up to its “Peace Constitution”, building non-military collective security agreements with all neighbouring states in Northeast Asia. It encourages the Japanese government not to surrender to external 2 pressures to weaken Article 9. The WCC statement says that Article Nine is Japan’s oath to not repeat its war-time mistakes.

The statement praises Japanese churches and organizations for “upholding the Peace Constitution in hope that Japan would become a truly peaceful nation”. And on August 4th 2014 a church delegation led by WCC President Rev Dr CHANG Sang of South Korea, including a Buddhist leader, met the Chief Cabinet Secretary of the Japanese government. They presented him with the Article Nine statement and the new WCC Statement Towards a Nuclear-Free World.

The Chief Cabinet Secretary engaged in an exchange of views. He thanked the churches of Japan and the WCC for assistance in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster. He said that significant changes in global conditions had brought the Japanese government to consider the right of collective self-defence within the framework of Article Nine, and that self-defence would only be exercised in a limited way. Japan’s regard for world peace and for post-war freedom and democracy has not changed in any way, he said.

CURRENT TRENDS
Trends in Northeast Asia would certainly indicate that robust government action for peacebuilding and collective security is greatly needed. Nation by nation, the picture is troubling.

There are extensive and expensive programs to build-up military capacities. The United States’ “pivot” to Asia is a troubling long-term shift in the global deployment of military forces. Japan’s profile in Northeast Asia is taking on a more military character.

The footprint of the US military on Japanese territory has been heavy since World War Two. It is now being up-graded, as the 2012 Article Nine Conference could see in Okinawa. One analyst at that conference called new missile defense systems the “Trojan Horse” that is destroying the Peace Constitution. If missile defense is a Trojan Horse, then the naval base being built on Korea’s Jeju Island is its newest stable. Church and civil society resistance to the new base there was brought to the attention of the WCC Assembly in Busan.

Endemic hostility with North Korea and mutual suspicions with China can be readily used to justify militarization. However, such tensions should in fact be used as opportunities tonormalize relations. People of goodwill must call for greater regional commitment to confidence-building measures, equitable commercial contacts, and negotiations to settle old disputes. Instead, we are witnessing a relaxation of Japan’s arms export controls, a weakening of 3 civilian authority over the Japanese military, and pressure for Japan to join one-sided schemes of self-defense. In the event of crisis, the so-called Self-Defense Force is tasked with a broad variety of military operations alongside the US.

These are Article Nine issues. They must be analysed and understood regionally as well as nationally. The Big Power rivalry behind them is evident along the DMZ, in the Philippines and the South China Sea. Its impact is seen in basing agreements, regional arms sales and intensifying territorial disputes.

Article Nine’s peace provisions are historic. The current pressure to weaken them is deeply concerning. If actions speak louder than words, the actions of the state that imposed Article Nine are already rewriting Article Nine. In the mind of an average citizen, the message seems to be:

Yes, Japan, you are still not supposed to use war as in instrument of foreign policy. However, we want you to see our wars as your wars. You must be prepared to do your part. Meanwhile, we will continue to protect you with our nuclear weapons and we will continue to use your land and other allies’ lands for our military bases.  In effect, you will use force as an instrument of foreign policy but it will be mostly our foreign policy.

AN UNFINISHED PILLAR
In places where people build great buildings out of stone, pillars are an essential element. At the site or in a quarry, one sometimes sees a half-finished pillar. A block of rock lies on the ground with one end still rough and the other end neatly sculpted into a pillar. Sometimes, the capitol or top of the pillar is already carved with decorations.

There is a parable of Article Nine in this image. The adoption of Article Nine in 1947 was like sculpting a pillar of stone for a remarkable living monument, a Peace Constitution. Article Nine was a constructive achievement after a vastly destructive war. The pillar stands upright, but the work is not finished. The base of Article Nine, and its foundation, still have to be finished. These Inter-Religious Conferences demonstrate the conviction which will be needed to complete the peace pillar that is Article Nine.

Religious communities here and abroad do not look to the Japanese government to weaken its Peace Constitution. We do not accept that Japan can move away from Article Nine. Rather, we expect Japan to follow Article Nine as a pillar for peace in this region, and far beyond. 4 There is nothing in Article 9 that a responsible government can ignore. The UN Charter – written in the same epoch as Article 9 – does not grant states an absolute right to wage war. It obliges all states to settle international disputes without the use of force. It also calls them to minimize the diversion of resources from public welfare and the common good to armed forces and the waging of war.

We expect Japan to follow Article Nine. We are convinced of the power of Japan’s positive example to influence the conduct of other states.
PILLAR FOR PEACE, HEALING THE PAST Article Nine serves as a pillar for peace in Northeast Asia because it helps to heal the past, to guide the present and to shape the future.

Much of the past remains unhealed in a region which has endured the traumatic effects of war, rape, pillage and occupation. Article Nine exists in a difficult context. This unfinished pillar can be seen from different angles—as an example of victor’s justice, as a penalty for defeat, or as a historic bid to bring healing.

What kind of message does it send, though, to wage total war on a country, even using atomic bombs, and then make that country promise never to do what was done to it? Certainly, a very mixed message at best. The most likely outcome might be for the defeated nation to learn the opposite lesson from the one intended: Adopt the strategy of your conqueror; wait till the time is right; seek revenge.

However, it is not hard to understand the healing power of Article Nine for the countries that Japan conquered in World War II. In addition, it is important to note that Article Nine has wide support in Japan too. Many citizens have recognized the wisdom of breaking the cycle of violence, of refusing the reflex of revenge, of rejecting the destructive dynamics of narrow nationalism. Let us give thanks for the role that religious beliefs and public witness play in this shared commitment to peace.

Those who resent Article Nine, who see it as a stain on their national honour, and who look forward to its demise, are doing what one would expect of human nature. A population that has lived through a violent past is fertile soil for the cultivation of future violence. An embittered society is poor soil in which to grow the seeds of peace.

The Cold War froze out a proper recovery from World War II for Northeast Asia. The Cold War lasted for a long time, but it is over. Article Nine may have been ahead of its time, but it has survived. Today, with East Asia emerging as a world center, is surely the time for Article Nine to come into its own as a central pillar for peace.

The WCC Assembly Statement On the Way of Just Peace addresses alternatives to war which are consistent with Article Nine. It says that: “For peace among the nations, churches must work together to strengthen international human rights and humanitarian law, promote multilateral negotiations to resolve conflicts, hold governments responsible for ensuring treaty protections, help eliminate weapons of mass destruction and press for reallocation of unnecessary military budgets to civilian need. We must join other communities of faith and people of goodwill to reduce national military capacities and delegitimize the institution of war.”

These words evoke the spirit of Article Nine. No matter its origins in the politics of occupation and new schemes for hegemony, Article Nine is a pillar for helping a war-torn region recover from its terrible past.

GUIDING THE PRESENT
If there is one place where Article Nine must serve as a guide for current affairs in Northeast Asia, it is the Korean peninsula. The Korean peninsula has endured more than a century of occupation and division. The Korean people have earned themselves wide international recognition for their perseverance, hard work and ingenuity, yet their tireless dedication to progress and modernity has not been rewarded with peace.

At the WCC Assembly in Busan we recognized the long history of ecumenical and inter-religious engagement for peace in the Assembly Statement On Peace and Reunification of the Korean Peninsula.

We recommended more such initiatives to continue, involving North and South Korean church leaders, other churches from Asia, North America and Europe, and including Christian-Buddhist cooperation. Such initiatives show civil society in harmony with the spirit of Article Nine. “On the Korean peninsula, shared human security and human rights must become a greater priority than divisive, competitive and militarized national security,” the Assembly declared.

It called for “fresh and decisive action” on a peace treaty agreed by the countries related to the Armistice Agreement. It reminded participants in the Six-Party Talks of their promise to hold peace forums. It called China to act as a facilitator for reaching long-pending agreements. The statement denounced military build-ups in the region including the stockpiling of nuclear weapons. We “strongly urged” the US and Japan to stop blockades and sanctions against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, to halt all military exercises on the Korean peninsula and to reduce military expenditures in the region.

We called for a “truly Demilitarized Zone” in Korea that, with international cooperation, would transform the peninsula into a zone of peace. This is the geography of Article Nine. Much has happened since Busan. Church leaders from North and South Korea came to Geneva in June for an international consultation on peace, reconciliation and reunification. New relationships were begun. Doors were re-opened. A key follow-up step also took place in October – a WCC visit to the Korean Christian Federation in Pyongyang.

SHAPING THE FUTURE
Finally, the obligations enshrined in Article Nine also help to shape the future, in Northeast Asia and beyond. Let us look at one concrete opportunity to build a safer future, specifically, so that no one in the world will ever again suffer what Hiroshima and Nagasaki have suffered. These inter-faith conferences have all denounced nuclear dangers. Let us say here with conviction that Article Nine is inherently incompatible with nuclear weapons. First, it is clearly unacceptable under Article Nine for Japan to possess nuclear weapons. Indeed, a more flagrant violation of the constitution is hard to imagine. Second, it is antithetical under Article Nine for Japan to accept that the monstrous weapons used against it should ever be used on its behalf against others. Yet this is what Japan accepts in the US strategy of extended nuclear deterrence policy. Third, it is hypocritical under Article Nine for the US to co-opt Japan into its own war plans and doctrines.

The Asia we hope for – an Asia where Article Nine is working properly – must be an Asia that is free of nuclear weapons. A Japan threatened by nuclear weapons is not a Japan at peace. A Japan dependent on nuclear weapons is a Japan living in fear and at constant risk. This is true for Japan, and true for its neighbours.

We are an inter-religious conference. Let us listen to some words of faith on this topic from the Busan Assembly: The WCC Assembly stated that to use the energy of the atom in ways that threaten and destroy life is a sinful misuse of God’s creation. Christians are to understand God as a generous Creator who calls life into being from atoms and molecules and endows creation with life in abundance.

We believe that humanity is called to live in ways that protect life instead of putting it at risk – neither living fearfully, defended by nuclear weapons, nor living wastefully, dependent on nuclear energy. Our task is to build communities and economies in harmony with God’s manifold gifts of life, the Assembly said.

In the 1990s, when the Sahtu-Dene people of northern Canada learned that uranium from their lands had been used in the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, they sent a delegation of elders to Japan to apologize.

We must listen to all who suffer nuclear harm. The voices of the hibakusha, the pi-pok-ja, and the test site victims in the Pacific and central Asia cry out for an exodus from the nuclear age. And now these are joined by the victims of nuclear disaster in another form, Fukushima.

“We must refuse to accept that the mass destruction of other peoples can be a legitimate form of protection for ourselves. God sets before us life and death, blessings and curses. God implores us, ‘Now choose life’, so that we and our children may live.”

The Assembly quoted a recent faith declaration of a group of Korean Christians: “We urgently proclaim the need not for the security of the status quo of nuclear-armed states but for the securing of life for all humanity and creation,” they said.

Let us all pray and work together for that “securing of life”. Progress is possible. The WCC is blessed with a network of churches which take a step-by-step approach to protecting life and building peace. This ecumenical network is helping to unite more and more governments behind a joint statement at the United Nations which says in part: “It is in the very interests of the survival of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again under any circumstances”. 155 governments have now joined. Japan’s “yes” vote is widely appreciated. These joint actions are part of a groundswell of support for delegitimizing nuclear weapons and ultimately banning them for their catastrophic humanitarian impact.

The WCC is grateful for member church representatives in Japan and Korea who help lobby their governments in this way, and for collaboration with Buddhist partners pursuing the same results.

Next week in Vienna, Japan will join some 150 governments in the latest of a series of groundbreaking conferences on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons. Because these conferences are fact-based and multi-disciplinary, they challenge the dominant paradigm of nuclear deterrence and are giving rise to healthy concern among the nuclear armed states.

It is important that Japan continues to take part in these conferences and helps them succeed. If Article Nine is incompatible with nuclear weapons, it is also incompatible with the collective failure to abolish nuclear weapons, a failure in which Japan shares.

Ecumenical progress along this path of peace affirms and validates Article Nine. After the 1983 WCC Assembly in Vancouver, Canada, churches played key roles in a successful campaign to make the South Pacific a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. Following a WCC recommendation at the 2006 Assembly in Brazil, WCC churches helped make Africa a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. Now the Busan Assembly has called on the churches to “Ensure the complete, verifiable and irreversible elimination of all nuclear weapons in North East Asia”. As many of you know, this is the goal of long-standing proposals for a Northeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. It is a difficult proposition, but it is not a dream. A just and sustainable peace in the region will be a
peace where neighbouring states no longer threaten each other with mass destruction, as they have for the past 60 years.

It is our conviction that Article Nine must be reaffirmed, not reinterpreted. It must be repositioned in the center of Japan’s international relations, not relegated to the margins of national life. Article Nine is Japan’s heritage and more. It is a lesson for all nations scarred by war, a corrective for all governments that indulge in confrontation. Article Nine is a healthy challenge for America, China, Korea and Russia as well as for Japan. More and more religious leaders must rally around this pillar for peace, in Asia and beyond.

Members in US Government who hold dual US/Israeli citizenship
AS RECEIVED FROM LA/CAL.

This is a serious infiltration of Israeli citizens and Israeli lobbyists in the US government……
This is a serious US National Security issue with dual citizenships resulting in possible conflicts of interest and allegiance.
How can the US Government pursue a Middle East policy in the best US National interest?
Who is naïve enough to believe the US government is not influenced by Israel
Those holding U.S./Israeli citizenship in our Government number about 100 top officials.
Of course these are the officially declared names….. !!!

Members in US Government who hold dual US/Israeli citizenship.

1. Attorney General – Michael Mukasey
2. Head of Homeland Security – Michael Chertoff
3. Chairman Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Richard Perle
4. Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz
5. Under Secretary of Defense – Douglas Feith
6. National Security Council Advisor – Elliott Abrams
7. Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff (Former) – “Scooter” Libby
8. White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten
9. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs – Marc Grossman
10. Director of Policy Planning at the State Department – Richard Haass
11. U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level Position) – Robert Zoellick
12. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – James Schlesinger
13. UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton
14. Under Secretary for Arms Control – David Wurmser
15. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Eliot Cohen
16. Senior Advisor to the President – Steve Goldsmith
17. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – Christopher Gersten
18. Assistant Secretary of State – Lincoln Bloomfield
19. Deputy Assistant to the President – Jay Lefkowitz
20. White House Political Director – Ken Melman
21. National Security Study Group – Edward Luttwak
22. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Kenneth Adelman
23. Defense Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) – Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
24. National Security Council Advisor – Robert Satloff
25. President Export-Import Bank U.S. – Mel Sembler
26. Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families – Christopher Gersten
27. Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs – Mark Weinberger
28. White House Speechwriter – David Frum
29. White House Spokesman (Former) – Ari Fleischer
30. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Henry Kissinger
31. Deputy Secretary of Commerce – Samuel Bodman
32. Under Secretary of State for Management – Bonnie Cohen
33. Director of Foreign Service Institute – Ruth Davis

Current members of the US Senate:

• Senator Barbara Boxer (California)
• Senator Benjamin Cardin (Maryland)
• Senator Russ Feingold (Wisconsin)
• Senator Al Franken (Minnesota)
• Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
• Senator Herb Kohl (Wisconsin)
• Senator Frank Lautenberg (New Jersey)
• Senator Joe Lieberman (Connecticut) (Independent)
• Senator Carl Levin (Michigan)
• Senator Bernard Sanders (Vermont) (Independent)
• Senator Charles Schumer (New York)
• Senator Ron Wyden (Oregon)

House of Representatives:

• Representative Gary Ackerman (New York)
• Representative John H. Adler (New Jersey)
• Representative Shelley Berkley (Nevada)
• Representative Howard Berman (California)
• Representative Steve Cohen (Tennessee)
• Representative Susan Davis (California)
• Representative Eliot Engel (New York)
• Representative Bob Filner (California)
• Representative Barney Frank (Massachusetts)
• Representative Gabrielle Giffords (Arizona)
• Representative Alan Grayson (Florida)
• Representative Jane Harman (California)
• Representative Paul Hodes (New Hampshire)
• Representative Steve Israel (New York)
• Representative Steve Kagen (Wisconsin)
• Representative Ronald Klein (Florida)
• Representative Sander Levin (Michigan)
• Representative Nita Lowey (New York)
• Representative Jerry Nadler (New York)
• Representative Jared Polis (Colorado)
• Representative Steve Rothman (New Jersey)
• Representative Jan Schakowsky (Illinois)
• Representative Adam Schiff (California)
• Representative Allyson Schwartz (Pennsylvania)
• Representative Brad Sherman (California)
• Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Florida)
• Representative Henry Waxman (California)
• Representative Anthony Weiner (New York)
• Representative John Yarmuth (Kentucky)