Andrew Lichterman, Senior Research Analyst at the Western States Legal Foundation has written a compelling analysis of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. See http://wslfweb.org/docs/Lichterman-A-Divided-Opposition.pdf.
The following extracts from the working paper were selected to show how Lichterman’s thinking is in tune with the Voices of Humanity project. The sections in italics are my remarks.
-------------- begin working paper extracts --------------
The Ukraine war marks a profound shift in global affairs, one whose nature cannot yet be fully understood. In the near term, it has resulted in setbacks not only for peace and disarmament but for many aspects of work for a more fair and peaceful global society in balance with the ecological limits and rhythms of the planet. [A good description of the world that VoH is designed to nurture. –RE]
we need to rethink some of the assumptions and frames of reference we use to understand the world and guide our work [I.e. be open to new ideas. –RE]
I have tried to think the question through from the perspective of peace movements, and with the realization that in the present moment what we have are not mass movements but weak and scattered anti-war forces rooted in remnants of movements past. An obstacle to this is that much of the public discourse about matters of war and peace today, even in anti-war circles, is conducted in the language of geopolitics. It is a language that portrays countries as actors, describing the actions of “the United States” or “Russia” as if all who reside within their borders speak and act with unified intentions and a single voice. …It is a top-down frame in which the interests and competitions of a few “great powers” take center stage, and the actions and intentions of all other people and governments are pushed to the margins and devalued [The full paper goes into greater detail about geopolitics. It is an education. –RE]
If we are to have an effect, peace movements and those who hope to build them must begin with the realization that our role is distinct from the role of governments and those who are in a position to advise them.
The anti-war forces of the world should speak with one voice: Tell Russia’s Government to stop its illegal aggressive war and annexation of territory in Ukraine.
The first step, necessary in a nuclear-armed world to preserve even the possibility of addressing the deeper causes of all this, is an absolute rejection of wars of conquest and aggression. Hence all those working for peace should unambiguously oppose and condemn the Russian government’s illegal war, and its attempt to seize lands outside their borders and to impose their rule on the millions of people who live there. [The full paper goes into more detail about the sizeable and vocal portion of the fragmented peace movement that blames the US and NATO for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. –RE]
Article 2 of the United Nations Charter prohibits member states from “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state....” (Article 2, sec.4)
So far the climate change movement has gained the broadest support, but despite much talk about “intersectionality” few organizing efforts have escaped their single-issue “silos” or offered a critique that connected the nascent movements at the level of root causes. [The VoH Together & Apart feature provides a way to unify a global movement “across the silos” while also supporting each of the separate issues, one by one. –RE]
A civilization at its ecological limits cannot survive a global economic and state system dominated by endless competition among nuclear-armed neo-imperial capitalist governments for much longer.
In the age of weapons of mass destruction, the work of trying to build something different must be nonviolent. [Yes! VoH has a feature to facilitate a nonviolent global movement that is active locally and connected globally. –RE]
We must in every instance oppose wars of aggression, adding what weight we have to support for that fundamental norm. This alone will not create a world at peace, but it is necessary to keep open the space and time for non-violent social transformation that might address the root causes of war.
We must understand the workings of a fully globalized capitalism under novel conditions that threaten both its existence and ours: the exhaustion of unexploited natural and human frontiers upon which its economic growth dynamic always has depended, and the destruction of the ecosystems all life depends on by that dynamic of endless growth. We will need to rethink fundamental concepts like “self-determination,” and the meaning of the Nation-state itself. [VoH gives us a bottom up multi-faceted version of each nation designed to marginalize the hard-liners. –RE]
We will need much broader movements if we hope to prevent wars, movements of enough breadth and depth to begin to address war’s causes. The locus for deepening our understanding of all of this is in conversations with the movements focused on the civilizational ecological crisis and with the movements seeking to protect and give voice to communities most vulnerable to the resurgence of identity-based authoritarian nationalisms. There also is useful work going on in academia, but little new thinking has diffused into the world of anti-war activism. When there are mass movements, the boundaries between mainstream institutions like universities and the movements become more permeable, with conversations more equal and the movements having an effect on the questions asked and explored. We have no peace or broader system-critical mass movements now, but we should be thinking of ways to jump start such exchanges of ideas. [Voices of Humanity needs to be on the list. –RE]
In general, we need to spend less time on social media sloganeering and more on reading, critical analysis, and more searching discussion. The remnants of the peace movements past have fragmented further into a bundle of insular monocultures, with actual debate a rarity. The pandemic and the proliferation of web video platforms have exacerbated this. With face-to-face local events still uncommon, the already-small universe of U.S. anti-war activists now hears from an even smaller array of voices, with Zoom allowing local groups to easily schedule appearances by the same handful of nationally-known anti-war figures. This also tends to suppress rather than encourage the kinds of deeper cross-issue discussion we need, for it is in local settings that cross-issue contacts typically are made and relationships built. From the most general to the most particular, we need to rethink our theory and our practice. [VoH implements its logo: Organize Locally, Connect Globally. –RE]
Restoring Ukraine in the wake of this war will be an environmental remediation and redevelopment project of monumental proportions. Rather than focusing narrowly on military aspects of “common security,” those working for peace should also be thinking and talking about a positive program for post-war Ukraine. We should be advocating a program of reconstruction in which the people of Ukraine have a real voice, that rebuilds infrastructure and industries in ways that are ecologically sustainable, and that leaves Ukraine’s people and government in a position to determine their own futures free of debt either to global financial interests or to other governments. An approach encompassing a broader vision of human security for Europe and beyond is likely to be the only way to reach a settlement for this war that might be stable for the long term. Such a program for Ukraine could be a model and one way to spark a conversation about broader reparations for other regions devastated by war and by long-established patterns of uneven, extractive, and unjust development. [Peace! –RE]
It is not too early to start discussing how we might develop this broader vision. It may seem utopian, but so too will be any approach that posits a change in direction on the scale likely required if we are to have a humane future. This conversation also provides another way to make connections between work against war and other movements that in this moment have broader support and are further along in developing similar themes. [VoH does seem utopian, so I am delighted by Lichterman’s remark. –RE]
It is time to demand unequivocally that the Russian government end this war. We should do so not to endorse one nationalist or imperial vision over another, but because aggression is the greatest and most dangerous crime. We must first end this war to keep alive the hope that future wars may be prevented, and we must do so by insisting with one voice on the basic principle that any attempt by any government to change the boundaries or governance of any self-governing jurisdiction is unacceptable, illegal, a crime of the most fundamental order. Only then might we find the political space to begin addressing the causes of the endless cycle of wars that the global capitalist and state system generates and that geopolitics portrays as natural and necessary, as the inevitably inhumane side of the human condition. [But there is even now the political space we need to get started. The cities of planet earth are that space. To be sure, Moscow is not available for now, but no need to wait when thousands of other cities are ready to go. The idea is to build a network of cities that have officially adopted all the goals of the UN, including nuclear disarmament and peace as well as the SDGs. See my proposed draft resolution for a San Francisco UN Goals Commission at https://www.sfungoals.org/draft-resolution. –RE]
#The_UN_Goals #peace #together
