U.S. Public to Politicians — We’re Not All That Jingoistic!

One would never know with all the America-first chest-pounding one hears from politicans (especially most Republican presidential candidates!), but Americans are much more internationalist than one would think. National Peace Action board member and author/professor Larry Wittner’s op-ed on History News Network makes a compelling, well-documented case that progressive policy-makers, if they would have the courage of their convictions to promote less militaristic and unilateral, more diplomatic and international policies and solutions, could garner strong public support. Certainly this could play out in some of the core issues Peace Action works on these days, especially military budget cuts and non-military solutions to the problem of Iran’s nuclear (NOT “nuclear weapons”) program. And of course, through our Peace Voter 2012 campaign, we’ll raise the voices of the pro-peace voters.

Powerful Op-Ed on the Iraq War in the Kansas City Star by Peace Action national board Co-Chair Dave Pack

Posted on Tue, Jan. 03, 2012

 

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/01/03/v-print/3350801/the-iraq-war-was-our-greatest.html

Iraq War Was the United States’ Greatest Foreign Policy Disaster 

By DAVID J. PACK
Special to The Star

We should all stop to take solemn note that the last U.S. combat troops left Iraq on Dec. 17, 2011, nominally ending a war that was started by President George W. Bush in March 2003, almost 9 years ago.

I say “nominally” because the war continues in many very real ways for all Iraqis, but especially for some 3.5 million who are either internally displaced within Iraq or refugees in another country. It also continues for many of the 1,500,000 Americans who have served in Iraq and suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder and other physical and mental health problems that have contributed to more of our troops committing suicide than dying in combat in recent years.

I view the Iraq War as the greatest foreign policy disaster in the history of the United States to this point in time (though the War in Afghanistan is running a good race here). It was an unprovoked act of military aggression against a nation that had not attacked us and posed no meaningful threat to us.

We were lied to about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction. We were told it was about democracy and saving Iraqis from Saddham Hussein.

Tell that to the 100,000 or more Iraqis who have died during the war. Tell that to the Texans whose congressional districts were gerrymandered to elect more Republicans to Congress in 2004, or to voters in Ohio who saw voting machines placed abundantly in conservative areas but sparingly in liberal areas by a GOP state administration.

If we care about democracy, we need to look to the home front because our own democracy is increasingly an empty sham.

What is the reality of present day Iraq after our expenditure to date of over $800 billion, some 4,500 U.S. combat deaths, over 1,000 U.S. troop suicides and over 30,000 injured? The war has left a ruined country that was formerly one of the most advanced in the Middle East in terms of health and education:

Up to 70 percent lack access to clean water.

Up to 80 lack access to sanitation.

Half of the doctors are either dead or have emigrated.

Average electricity availability is 14.6 hours per day.

The $800 billion will grow substantially despite the war’s nominal end because as a nation we must keep our commitment to care for the veterans of this war.

To understand the magnitude of the potential costs, note that the Department of Veteran’s Affairs has a proposed budget of $132 billion for 2012.

Sadly, the number of suicides will also grow with passing years.

While damning this war as a moral, humanitarian, financial, and foreign policy disaster for this country, let us affirm the sacrifices of the 1,500,000 who have served in Iraq. Their sacrifice is no less for them having been placed under false pretenses in a war that should not have been.

Indeed, for many of them the sacrifice has been overwhelming as they have returned to Iraq for additional tours of duty. So let’s honor those who served. Let’s be certain they receive the benefits they deserve for their service.

The sad reality is that the people who get us into misguided wars like this are inclined to deny war’s terrible consequences and seek to get out of paying for them so they can get on with their next war.

Don’t let our politicians break the promises made to our veterans.

David J. Pack, of Lenexa, is co-chairman of the board of the national peace group Peace Action, is on the board of their local affiliate PeaceWorks Kansas City and is a member of the Kansas City American Friends Service Committee Program Committee.

Ending Iraq War: Op-ed in Bloomfield (NJ) Life newspaper by New Jersey Peace Action Executive Director

 

BY MADELYN HOFFMAN

GUEST COLUMNIST

Bloomfield Life, December 28, 2011

 

As 2011 ends, it is time to reflect upon continuing U.S. involvement in overseas wars and the impact that involvement has here at home. It is a good time to reflect on the role that protest played in getting us here and what those protests still want to achieve so the U.S. is genuinely safe and secure.

On Dec. 17, the last U.S. soldier was photographed leaving Iraq and the media proclaimed an end to the war which began on March 19, 2003 – almost nine years ago. The war cost the U.S. taxpayer more than $800 billion and claimed 4,483 U.S. soldiers’ lives. At the war’s height, the war in Iraq was costing taxpayers $12 billion each month.

Additionally, more than 1 million Iraqi civilians died, and 4.5 million became refugees. And during the last two years, more U.S. soldiers died by their own hands than in combat. On average, we lose 18 veterans to suicide each day.

So while it is important to mark the “official end” to the Iraq War, it is difficult to muster many cheers. Instead, it is critical to conduct an honest assessment of what happened.

First, we must acknowledge that U.S. presence in Iraq has not ended. The Project On Government Oversight argues that taxpayers will now provide funding for 14,000 to 16,000 contractors in Iraq. According to POGO, some of the companies who will provide contractors in Iraq – KBR, DynCorp and Blackwater – are in the POGO Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (www.contractormisconduct.org). All three contractors have extensive misconduct histories, yet they continue to operate.

Second, U.S. presence in Afghanistan remains – and may extend past 2014. According to a Dec. 20 article in the New York Times, the senior American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John R. Allen, suggested that American forces could remain in the country beyond 2014, despite increasing public opinion to withdraw forces from Afghanistan at an accelerated pace.

Lastly, we need to acknowledge the role that “The Protester,” Time Magazine’s “Person of the Year,” played in changing the course of this war, and what these protesters would like to see in 2012.

Bloomfield-based New Jersey Peace Action opposed the war in Iraq starting in the summer of 2002, many months before the war began. More than 800 protesters marched in Newark in December 2002, drawing the connection between the tremendous costs for war and how each dollar spent on the war would be a dollar taken away from programs and services that cities like Newark require.

Hundreds participated in national marches in Washington, D.C., and millions rallied worldwide on Feb. 19, 2003, trying to prevent the war in Iraq from ever beginning. That anti-war movement continued even after the first bombs were dropped, in an effort to end the war as quickly as possible.

Bloomfield residents started a weekly peace vigil in front of the Bloomfield Public Library shortly after the war began and continued it for years, as part of this national and international effort to stop the war.

While the consistent activism did not stop the United States from starting a war against Iraq, the ongoing activism did influence public opinion to the point where, by 2006, the majority of those polled were against the war. The 2006 elections, when many pro-war elected officials were beaten by anti-war challengers, were seen as a reflection of this shift.

Public opinion against the Iraq war deterred decision-makers from authorizing an invasion of Iran.

Protests to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to treat returning veterans well upon their return continue today. NJPA is part of a national “Move the Money” campaign to take at least 25 percent of the money from the military budget and move it into funding programs that address community needs.

According to the National Priorities Project, war spending for Iraq and Afghanistan for 2011 was $169.4 billion. This is more than enough money to erase every state’s budget deficit. No deficits mean more money for towns like Bloomfield and a lighter burden on local taxpayers.

NJPA, joined by Bloomfield residents, recently participated on day 170 of the People’s Organization for Progress’ Campaign for Jobs, Peace, Equality and Justice. The campaign honors the 381-day, 1955 bus boycott in Montgomery, Ala., which led to the desegregation of city buses. POP’s call is for jobs – with the understanding that the overseas wars must end, so that money can be used to help create much-needed jobs.

All are invited to participate in the these efforts to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring the war dollars home for our communities – for education, housing, jobs, health care and more.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

The author is executive director of Bloomfield-based New Jersey Peace Action.

Move the Money! From Endless Wars to a More Sustainable, Flowering Republic!

The following is excerpted from recent speeches I gave at the Nebraskans for Peace annual conference in Lincoln, NE and the Chicago Area Peace Action annual dinner in Wilmette, IL.

Move the Money! From Endless War to a More Sustainable, Flowering Republic!

-by Kevin Martin

Peace Action’s Move the Money campaign is our most exciting work at this time.  In my opinion, we have the best chance in a generation for serious cuts in the  military budget. Our Move the Money campaign, at the national and local level, is a serious coalition and alliance building project, creating strong relationships with  unions, human needs and economic and racial justice advocates,environmental and consumer groups, and local elected officials, who deal with the harm our out of control war spending has done to the national economy and to state and local budgets, among other constituencies.

Veteran peace activist Tom Hayden has a very good analytical tool he calls the Pillars of War, looking at constituencies or sectors of society that have perpetuated U.S. wars in the last decade. The news media, general public opinion, Republicans, Democrats (which need to be further divided into the party elite, those in Congress, and the party’s base) and corporate interests are key pillars to examine, especially in terms of leverage the peace movement may have in moving or, better yet, removing some of these pillars.

I would argue we have made significant headway pushing on some of these pillars (certainly public opinion and the Democratic base are now solidly anti-war, and we’ve made progress with Congressional Democrats and even the media to lesser degrees), but that perhaps the biggest impediment to ending the wars is corporate power, or the good old military-industrial-congrressional complex.

A recent example is the reaction of Lockheed Martin, the planet’s largest weapons contractor, to a proposed non-binding resolution in the Montgomery County, Maryland Council (just outside Washington, D.C., where both Lockheed and Peace Action’s national office are located). The resolution, pushed by our local Peace Action chapter, is simple, calling for an end to the wars and cutting military spending in order to fund jobs and human, community and environmental needs – a position supported by an overwhelming majority of the U.S. public.

Lockheed felt so threatened (evidently) by this non-binding county resolution that it called the governor, congressman (Chris van Hollen, to whom it had contributed $10,000 in the last campaign cycle) and county council president to scuttle the resolution. They succeeded in getting the resolution withdrawn, temporarily, but got a black-eye in the local media, including the usually reliably war-mongering Washington Post.

Frankly, Lockheed did us a favor in exposing the lengths to which it will go to stifle democracy (if the resolution had passed, we would have celebrated, but it would not have gotten an iota of the media coverage LM’s strong-arm tactics generated).

In this exciting year of the Arab Spring, Wisconsin and other state budget showdowns and Occupy Wall Street (and Omaha and Lincoln and Kansas City and Chicago and everywhere!) opportunities abound for peace activists to make common cause with allies demanding a more peaceful, just, democratic society.

In addition to the ongoing (such staying power!) Occupy movement, there is still time to demand the congressional “Super Committee” protect Social Security, Medicare and human needs programs and find their budget savings in the gargantuan ($1.2 trillion per year!) national security budget (there’s a link to the Super Committee on our home page at http://www.peace-action.org/).

Two important opportunities next year will be the NATO/G-8 Summit in Chicago, where they are linking the wars and the economy for us! Peace Action, along with local, national and international allies, will organize an educational conference and street actions demanding an end to NATO and U.S. war-making and a more just, equitable U.S. and global economy.

Finally, next year’s elections will present us an opportunity to press candidates for all levels of government to Move the Money from war and militarism to jobs, human and environmental needs. Our Peace Voter campaign will help give activists the tools to do that, from candidate briefings and endorsments, bird-dogging, voter guides, voter registration, education and Get out the Vote (GOTV) efforts.  President Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s vulnerability (over 80% of registered Democrats want to end the wars) matches up very well with our strength in the peace movement’s grassroots base (not that we are all Democrats, we certainly are not, but we have many connections with grassroots Democratic activists and structures).

Ending the wars, cutting military spending, abolishing nuclear weapons and creating a more just society are all central to Peace Action’s mission, but so is recognizing and framing a larger vision of the historic moment we inhabit, and the opportunities it provides. I like the framework Norwegian peace studies expert Johann Galtung uses – the Decline of the U.S. Empire, and the Flowering of the U.S. Republic.

All empires have ended, all of them. It’s our job to help end the U.S. Empire as quickly and nonviolently as possible, and to use the resources freed up (a “peace dividend” if you will) to help empower people to create the flowering Republic – peaceful, equitable, sustainable and just — that comes following the Empire’s demise.

A few years ago a dinner table conversation with my children, now aged 17 and 13, revealed that they thought the United States is always at war. And why wouldn’t they think that, as it has certainly been the case for nearly all their lives (and frankly for the majority of our country’s history)? It’s unacceptable to me that children in this country, or in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, Congo, Somalia or anywhere should have to live with that expectation, or even worse, that daily reality. For their futures, we cannot continue on the unsustainable path we are currently on. As the great pacifist A.J. Muste taught us, “There is no way to peace. Peace is the way.”

Kevin Martin is executive director of Peace Action, the country’s largest peace and disarmament organization with 100,000 members and nearly 100 affiliates and chapters around the U.S.

Peace Action on C-SPAN

Thanks to the hard work of national Peace Action board member (and University of Hawai’i Human Rights Law Center founder) Joshua Cooper, Peace Action got some serious airtime (an hour and a quarter) on C-SPAN. Joshua has organized Human Rights on the Hill conferences in DC for law students and the public for a decade now, and he and I were filmed at this year’s event at the University of the District of Columbia’s David A. Clarke Law School.

NUCLEAR TWO-STEP, ONE STEP FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK

By Yeabu Conteh

CTBT– The Next Sensible Step Toward Nuclear Abolition

Long part of Peace Action’s strategy for a nuclear-free world, we are renewing our efforts to secure Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).  CTBT is a multi-lateral treaty that outlaws explosive nuclear testing and is a simple, but effective, way to help stop the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology.  Currently, 179 nations, including the United States have signed the CTBT and 144 have ratified it.  In order for the CTBT to become recognized internationally as law, the United States and eight other nations must ratify it. 

In May, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Ellen O. Tauscher spoke before the Arms Control Association’s annual meeting on “The Case for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.”  She informed those present that the Obama administration would soon begin talks with Republican and Democratic Senators on the CTBT, including a discussion of key technical issues that was met with some resistance during a congressional debate on the treaty in 1999. The President also plans to soon start an education campaign to help lead to CTBT ratification.

As we near the start of another election campaign season, Peace Action will be working closely with our congressional and organizational allies to make the case for CTBT ratification.  There is a good chance that a vote will happen before the 2012 elections. Given the success we had with passing START (Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty), we are in a good position to ratify CTBT, but only if we keep the pressure on.

From our founding in 1957 as the Committee for a SANE Nuclear Policy, Peace Action has been a principal advocate of a test ban, working to impose a moratorium on testing during the administration of George H.W. Bush and pressing for ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) during the Clinton Administration. 

What’s the Bottom Line?
By ratifying CTBT, the Obama administration will fulfill an important campaign promise taking another step along the path he laid out in Prague in 2009, the path that leads to nuclear abolition.  It will take a lot of work from those of us who care about our planet, the future of our children and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, but in the end our world will be much safer for our efforts.
 

COMPLEX “MODERNIZATION” – Don’t Step Back

When the Senate ratified New START in December, it was a satisfying victory for Peace Action and the peace and disarmament community as a whole. The underlying stipulations for its passage however, specifically the bargain struck between President Obama and Senate Republicans to invest approximately $185 billion over the next ten years to “modernize” the nuclear weapons production complex, demonstrates the extent to which the far-right and the military-industrial complex are committed to this ‘nuclear weapons forever’ program.  This move clearly undermines President Obama’s stated commitment to a nuclear-free world and the work of the disarmament community to help the President achieve this goal. 

For fiscal year 2012, the Department of Energy requested $7.63 billion for nuclear weapons programs and activities.  After inflation, this request is 21 percent more than Ronald Reagan’s largest nuclear weapons budget and 19 percent more than George H.W. Bush’s highest spending level.  Instead of spending nearly $8 billion to upgrade nuclear weapons, that money would be more wisely spent on increasing the rate of dismantling the U.S. stockpile.  Less nuclear weapons makes Americans safer and sends the right message to the rest of the world.

Currently, there are plans underway to “modernize” the following nuclear weapons facilities in the United States:

• CMRR-Nuclear Facility at Los Alamos, NM
• Uranium Processing Facility at Y-12 in Oak Ridge, TN
• Kansas City MO Plant

In addition to these rather new facilities, the US currently maintains and operates five other facilities; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Nevada Test Site, Pantex Plant, Savannah River Site and the Sandia National Labs.

How is Peace Action Responding?
Peace Action chapters and activists in communities long forced to live with nuclear bomb making plants in their backyards are mobilizing local opposition to these plans.  Peace Action New Mexico, Peace Action West and Kansas City PeaceWorks have already done some excellent work to educate their communities and build local campaigns to stop plans for ‘modernization.’
Peace Action is lobbying Congress and the Obama administration to overturn this exorbitant and hypocritical proposal, as it directly undermines progress toward nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

In 2008, Peace Action defeated similar plans to “modernize” the US nuclear arsenal by then President George W. Bush called the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) and in 2009 we defeated Bush’s plan for Complex Transformation (better known in activist circles as “Bombplex”), the Bush administration’s $150 billion proposal for rebuilding US nuclear weapons production capabilities, enabling the production of as many as 125 new nuclear warheads a year.  Bombplex proponents refused to accept the defeat and waited for a suitable hostage (New START) to leverage support for their nuclear weapons forever program.

In May of this year, Peace Action lobbied Congress to increase funding for nuclear non-proliferation programs designed to dismantle Russia’s nuclear arsenal and secure its bomb grade materials by $190 million over their previous levels. Republicans sought a $600 million cut in funding. So, rather than spend $600 million to help reduce Russia’s nuclear arsenal, congressional Republicans – deficit hawks all – would spend $185 billion in the next 10 years building up our nuclear overkill. 
 
This is far from over.  We will be ramping up our outreach and education campaigns across the country around our annual Hiroshima/Nagasaki commemorations in August.  Watch for alerts and bulletins from Peace Action on how you can organize and participate in your community.

 

 

Afghanistan Exit

“Nobody wants to give up the gains that have been won at such hard cost. And nobody wants to give our allies an excuse to run for the exits.”
Defense Secretary Robert Gates

The image of our NATO allies breaking for the exit at the first sign the US begins withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan pretty much says it all. A bottomless quagmire, an unpopular, unwinnable war our allies can’t wait to be free of.

In the coming weeks, President Obama will announce his plan for fulfilling his promise that the 30,000 ‘surge’ troops he sent to Afghanistan would begin coming home this July. Americans no longer view the war as worth the cost. Opposition in Congress is growing, and members of his own administration, including Vice President Biden have expressed doubts about the efficacy of an all-in military campaign.

On the other side of the debate, Gates and the Pentagon Brass aren’t leading with the ‘allies running for the exit’ argument, but rather are pressing for a continuation of a strategy they say is protecting “gains that have been won at such a hard cost.” This is an argument that resonates with those predisposed to the military option.

Having toppled the Taliban, driven al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan and killed bin Laden, the US has achieved what it set out to do, albeit “at such a hard cost.” What’s left – preventing the return of the Taliban to power and al-Qaeda to its Afghanistan havens and the corresponding requirement of building a functional government to prevent that outcome, is purely a case of Gates and the Brass gambling with house money.

Let’s start with the foundation needed to achieve these objectives – building a functional government in Afghanistan that can prevent the return of the Taliban to power and al-Qaeda to its Afghanistan havens. Success hinges on the Karzai government, rigger of elections and overseer of the kleptocracy which controls only a small portion of the country. President Karzai is a harsh critic of US military strategy who even threatened to join the Taliban. A succession of US ambassadors and envoys have – at best – expressed serious misgivings as to his potential as a partner in US efforts to build a stable government.

Afghanistan’s economy is a shambles. Its two billion dollar budget will not be able to sustain the projected eight billion dollar annual cost for the security forces the US will spend some $30 billion to recruit and train.

The bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, created by Congress in 2008 to find waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement of contracts, has warned that tens of billions of dollars will be wasted on projects Afghanistan cannot sustain while tens of billions of dollars more will be eaten by old-fashion waste and fraud. The Commission concluded in its June 3 report:

“In Afghanistan, the United States has contracted for: schools and clinics that lack adequate personnel, supplies, and security; a large power plant that the host country cannot maintain or operate unassisted; roads that will need substantial and continuing maintenance; and security-force training and support whose costs exceed Afghan funding capabilities.”

While the Obama administration executes its warplan in Afghanistan at a cost of $2 billion a week, al-Qaeda’s presence in Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere is growing. In Pakistan, where Taliban elements find safe haven along a porous border, the US war, drone strikes and the killing of bin Laden fuels public anger and resentment at our government and Pakistan’s as well. This not only threatens the vital supply line to landlocked Afghanistan, but the stability of our nuclear armed and increasingly disenchanted ally.

So, with our own economy at risk as well, what are the alternatives to continuing the administration’s Afghanistan gamble?

• Draw down our force levels. The President promised to begin withdrawing surge forces in July and he must stick to his commitment. The argument that the Taliban will simply ‘wait us out” fails to recognize the war has gone on for 10 years now, and the Taliban will “wait us out” another 10 years if it has to, adapting its tactics, recruiting new fighters and inflicting maximum damage as long as foreign troops occupy Afghanistan.

• End offensive military actions. Stop the night raids and drone strikes that are causing civilian casualties. Challenge the insurgency to work for a political settlement.

• Accelerate negotiations. Seek a cease fire and set the stage for fair elections in 2014 that will allow the people of Afghanistan to determine their own future.

• Reach a political settlement. Our own military leaders acknowledge this is the only way the war will end. But trying to beat the Taliban into submission so they will be more compliant to our conditions for a settlement gambles our blood and treasure with no guarantee of a successful outcome.

Peace Action and twenty of our colleague organizations launched a week of action in May to build support in the House of Representatives for an amendment to the Pentagon spending bill calling on the President to provide an exit plan that would bring our troops home well ahead of the 2014 date favored by the administration. While the amendment failed 204-214, the vote was much closer than expected and represents growing congressional opposition to the war in Afghanistan. Last year, the same bill was defeated 162-260. Our work is paying off.

We have it on good authority that the President has heard the message from the House loud and clear. Our next step is to organize a bipartisan letter from the Senate to President Obama urging a substantial and responsible redeployment of our forces this summer.

Call the Senate switchboard – (202) 224-3121 and strongly urge your Senators to sign the Merkley-Lee-Udall letter to President Obama urging a “sizeable and sustained” reduction in forces from Afghanistan beginning in July.

We will soon see if it’s enough to make July a turning point in this terrible war. Come what may, we will not let up until the last of our troops come home.

Detroit City Council Honors Peace Action’s Al Fishman

By coincidence, I was with Al at two of the three actions he was arrested at mentioned in the City Council resolution.

Al Fishman Presente! – Long-time Peace Activist and Socialist

Memorial service will be held May 27, 2011 at 12:00 noon at Central United Methodist Church, Woodward at Adams in Detroit.

Detroit City Council Memorial Resolution for Mr. Al Fishman, Peace and Human Rights Activist [Adopted unanimously May 24, to be read at May 27 memorial meeting]

WHEREAS, Al Fishman was a leading peace and justice activist since being discharged from the U.S. Army in 1947 after which he organized countless picket lines, marches, rallies, teach-ins, and forums;

and WHEREAS, Al Fishman was involved in opposition to the Korean War, including the defense of Lt Gilbert, an African American officer who was court-martialed for refusing to order his men into a “suicide mission”. He also served as the Michigan coordinator of the Vietnam Moratorium;

and WHEREAS, Mr. Fishman, as a supporter of human rights, participated in protests against the racist murder of Emmett Till; the racist frame-ups of Willie McGee, The Trenton Six and the Martinville Seven; the political frame-up of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. He was a member of the National Negro Labor Council and it’s campaigns for jobs and helped force Black representation in trade union leadership. He was a member of the Michigan Congress Against Repression, participating in its activities against police brutality, and in the National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression , and the campaigns to free Angela Davis and Rev. Benjamin Chavis;

and WHEREAS, Al Fishman, notwithstanding, the corrupt and undemocratic aspects of our electoral system – about which he spoke frequently – was a dedicated participant in the process of advancing peace and social economic justice through electoral politics. He was proud of the fact that he participated in breaking racist barriers in landmark campaigns to advance the political representation of African Americans, including the campaigns of Charles Diggs, William T. Patrick, John Conyers, Richard Austin, Erma Henderson , and Coleman A. Young. He was organizer and State Co-Chair of the New Democratic Coalition, which served as a unifying force for progressives in the Democratic Party. He was an active supporter of George McGovern for President;

and WHEREAS, Al Fishman was part of the campaign, led by the Honorable Erma Henderson, to eliminate redlining. He helped to organize the Michigan Coalition on Utilities and Energy, which opposed unwarranted utility rate increases;

and WHEREAS, In the spirit of the Ghandi-Martin Luther King teachings about non-violent resistance, he risked arrest in a number of peace and justice actions. He was arrested protesting apartheid at the South African Embassy in Washington, D.C., for protesting the Indonesian massacre in Dili, East Timor, for protesting the continuing development of nuclear weapons at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in Nevada, in support of the striking Detroit newspaper workers, and against the then imminent US invasion of Iraq;

and WHEREAS, Detroit’s Al Fishman co-chaired a coalition opposed to the first Persian Gulf War. After the attack on the World Trade Center, he co-convened the twenty organizations of the Detroit Area Peace With Justice Network, which was part of dozens of protests against the war on Iraq; he led annual events to commemorate the horrors of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki;

and WHEREAS, Since the early 1980′s, he was a member of Peace Action – at that time called the Nuclear Freeze Campaign. He served Peace Action of Michigan for many years as a Co-Chair and as its representative on the National Board of Directors. He served as a member of the local Board of Directors, writing frequent articles for its quarterly newsletter;

and WHEREAS, Al was a member of the New Jewish Agenda, the first, and for some time the only, Jewish American organization that supported Palestinian statehood. He was a member of the Board of Directors of the Michigan Coalition for Human Rights;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Detroit City Council mourns and honors Al Fishman, one of our City’s finest Peace, Civil and Human Rights, and Labor activists, advocates and champions, one of our true Citizens of the World.

Possible Impact of the Mid-Term Elections on Peace Action’s Agenda, and a Review of a Few 2009-2010 Accomplishments

So the early reactions from peace activists to the mid-term elections seems to range from “catastrophic” to “really, really bad” to “coulda been even worse.” I’d love to hear your thoughts, please feel free to comment on this blog, and also any thoughts on the topics below — how the elections may impact our work ahead, and our recent accomplishments.

1. New START ratification – this looks tough, but it still could be approved by the Senate in the upcoming “lame duck” session, something we will vigorously advocate. Some Republicans are arguing to postpone a vote until the new Senate convenes next year, so new senators have time to assess the treaty, but their motive is almost assuredly to block ratification, as there will be fewer reliable Democratic votes for the treaty in the new Senate. Either way, we will need a new strategy on nuclear disarmament moving forward, one that will likely emphasize pressing the Obama Administration to take executive action to reduce nuclear weapons dangers, rather than the painstakingly difficult treaty negotiation and ratification processes. (More on this soon!)

2. Afghanistan –  some Dems may feel more empowered to oppose the war, but Republicans and even some in the military will press the president to ditch his plan to begin withdrawing US troops next July. Our strategy will likely be focused on the cost of the war and its devastating effect on the economy, and, strategically, on Obama’s re-election prospects. It’s hard to see how his base will support him in 2012 if we are not well on our way out of Afghanistan. These issues can be linked for the president and his administration – end the war, re-invest resources in jobs and the economy, win re-election.

3. Iraq – like Afghanistan, there will be pressure on the administration to postpone the December 31, 2011 deadline for all troops, contractors and bases to be out of Iraq. We will need to be vigilant to make sure there is no backsliding on this deadline, nor on our country’s commitment to helping the Iraqi people rebuild their devastated society.

4.Iran – there is cause for real concern here, as the Republicans (and many Dems) will push harder to ratchet up economic sanctions and military threats against Iran. New House International Relations Committee Chair Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) is probably already booking a room for regime change in iran hearings in January (I’m not really exaggerating here! Or at least not much). Our message will be simple – start a third war? What are they smoking? Diplomacy with Iran is the only way to address concerns over its nuclear program, and the best solution would be the establishment of a Middle East Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone, which we support and will campaign for along with peace movement and governmental allies in the Middle East and Europe.

5. Cutting the gargantuan US military budget – this is a long-term campaign, but with a possible short-term opportunity around the president’s deficit reduction commission, which will likely put military spending cuts on the table (more on this soon, too!). And some Republicans, even Tea Partiers, are raising the idea that the military budget needs to be cut. While this will not be easy, my sense is we now have the best opportunity in nearly twenty years for progress on this issue.

A general note – we shouldn’t write off everybody in the Tea Party movement as hopeless dupes or racists, though some of the “we want our country back” rhetoric does have some very troubling racist undertones to it. That said, many voters and activists are understandably motivated by fear and economic insecurity, and understanding that could be important to building new alliances. Our chapter in the Stamford/Greenwich are of Connecticut was able to find some common ground over concern about excessive military spending with local Tea Party supporters, so this isn’t just theoretical.

As we look to the challenges and opportunities  ahead, it is also good to acknowledge important 2009 and 2010 accomplishments like the following:

-Helping turn the tide of public, media and even Congressional opinion against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (of course we are not nearly done, but the end is perhaps finally in sight, especially in Iraq);

-Playing a lead role in organizing  a highly successful mobilization at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference at the United Nations last May, including a 15,000 person string rally and march, and a conference of over 1000 people from nearly 20 countries at historic Riverside Church. At the gathering, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon told us that we, the grassroots peace activists of the world, hold the key to abolishing nuclear weapons;

-Building new alliances at the local, national and international levels calling for dramatic cuts in spending for war and militarism in order to reinvest in human and environmental needs and a more sustainable, just economy;

-Expanding Peace Action’s national grassroots affiliate network to new states including Idaho, Illinois and  Utah, with promising prospects for growth into several more states in 2011.

Please take a moment to share your thoughts on the topics above by commenting on this blog.

 

A Few Hours Left in AZ. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist! It takes a movement.

By Judith Le Blanc

Congressman Raul  Grijalva’s Tea Party opponent, Ruth McClung, has a couple of catchy campaign slogans,  “It takes a rocket scientist. “(She works for Raytheon.) “Grijalva Kills Jobs” or “Boycott Grijalva, not AZ.” ….catchy and misleading to say the least.

Today as people gathered at 4 AM at the Grijalva Campaign headquarters to go out and put up signs or go to the polls with literature, we are putting the icing on the campaign cake. The main ingredient in this recipe is people talking to people, one on one, at their doors or on the phone.

Since February, Raul’s supporters have been door knocking every weekend.  When, hopefully, Raul wins tonight, it will have been done the old fashion way: listening and talking to as many people as possible.

We are in the final few hours of calling people to get to the polls. Some are cranky because they have been called more than once. Most are happy to know that we are out to do some Tea Party butt-kicking…smile.

One of the phone canvassers I am working with is a postal worker. He comes every day to the calling center I coordinate. He told me, ”People want the opportunity to talk . If they think you are open to listening, then they more often then not, respond well to ideas running counter to what they see in the attack ads on TV.”

He is really proud of his work on Raul’s campaign because he has convinced a fair number of folks to vote. He likes telling folks that the Republicans, including Ruth McClung, are controlled by corporate money and that they are who the Republicans will support once they get into office.

This week, in AZ, that was again proven to be absolutely true. Private prison corporations and their pals decided that the next “growth market for big profits” were the thousands who would and could be stopped  and detained  based on racial profiling under the AZ State Bill 1070 (SB 1070) passed earlier this year. They colluded with their cronies in the state legislature and got it passed.

Twenty-one college students from California came in to work on the campaign because of SB 1070 and the national movement that opposes it. They told me that we need more congress people like Raul, “to stand up for the community.”

Raul told canvassers preparing to door knock on Saturday morning that Ruth is right. “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist! It takes passion, integrity, purpose and a set of ideals.” It also takes grassroots, community based movements.

It is critical and strategic, for the peace and justice movements to be involved in electoral struggles. Elections are all about the issues and building grassroots understanding of what we must and can do together to change government policies. When people from grassroots movements run for office, like Raul Grtijalva, it is a winning combination.  Hopefully, we will win tonight when Raul is reelected.