Category: Peace

  • Bush Calls on Henry Kissinger

    Bush Calls on Henry Kissinger

    In 1973 the Nobel Peace Prize was tarnished when it was awarded to Henry Kissinger for his role in negotiating the end of the Vietnam War. The duplicitous and secretive Kissinger had also been involved in sabotaging peace negotiations with the North Vietnamese five years earlier. He eventually helped conclude the war, after some one million more Vietnamese and 20,000 more Americans had died, on substantially the same terms that he sabotaged in 1968. Kissinger was also deeply involved in conducting the secret and illegal US bombing of Cambodia and Laos, and of withholding information from the US Congress on this broadening of the war.

    Add to Kissinger’s work in Southeast Asia his role in undermining East Timor and the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile, and there is a strong case to be made that Kissinger is one of the 20th century’s most egregious criminals. This is the case that has been made by Christopher Hitchens in his book, The Trial of Henry Kissinger. The book also forms the basis of a new documentary called The Trials of Henry Kissinger. Both the book and documentary are important for anyone wanting to understand why Henry Kissinger is wanted for questioning in so many countries. He is a walking, talking advertisement for why an International Criminal Court is so critical to upholding human rights in the future from national leaders like Kissinger who place their view of national interests above human rights.

    Mr. Bush has recently attempted to resuscitate Kissinger by appointing him to chair a “Blue Ribbon” Commission to investigate the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001. This is a bit like appointing Al Capone to investigate the Mafia, or Ken Lay, former CEO of Enron, to investigate corporate wrongdoing.

    Mr. Kissinger, always a ruthless power seeker and broker, even keeps secret the client list at his power brokerage firm, Kissinger Associates. One wonders how Kissinger could possibly be even-handed in this important investigation when he may be called upon to investigate his secret clients. He and Mr. Bush seem to be operating on the assumption that what the public doesn’t know won’t hurt them. While this is one way to shove conflicts of interest under the rug, it is an exceedingly dangerous assumption in an already dangerous world.

    With Kissinger leading the investigation, we can be sure that the public will hear only what Mr. Kissinger and Mr. Bush want them to know. In an editorial on 29 November 2002, the New York Times wrote: “It seems improbable to expect Mr. Kissinger to report unflinchingly on the conduct of the government, including that of Mr. Bush. He would have to challenge the established order and risk sundering old friendships and business relationships.” It is likely that Mr. Kissinger will flinch only when one of the countries wanting to investigate him for murder and other high crimes actually gets him into the defendant’s docket.

  • “Strike against Terror”

    “Strike against terror” is a misleading expression. What we are striking against is not the real cause or the root of terror. The object of our strike is still human life. We are sowing seeds of violence as we strike. Striking in this way we will only bring about more hatred and violence into the world. This is exactly what we do not want to do.

    Terror is in the human heart. We must remove this terror from the heart. Destroying the human heart, both physically and psychologically, is what we must absolutely avoid. The root of terrorism should be identified, so that it can be removed. The root of terrorism is misunderstanding, intolerance, hatred, revenge and hopelessness. This root cannot be located by the military. Bombs and missiles cannot reach it, let alone destroy it. Only with the practice of looking deeply can our insight reveal and identify this root. Only with the practice of deep listening and compassion can it be transformed and removed.

    Darkness cannot be dissipated with more darkness. More darkness will make darkness thicker. Only light can dissipate darkness. Violence and hatred cannot be removed with violence and hatred. Rather, this will make violence and hatred grow a thousand fold. Only understanding and compassion can dissolve violence and hatred.

    Hatred, and violence are in the hearts of human beings. A terrorist is a human being with hatred, revenge, violence and misunderstanding in his or her heart. Acting without understanding, acting out of hatred, violence and fear, only helps sow more terror, bringing terror to the homes of others and ultimately bringing terror back to the homes of the attacker. The philosophy of “an eye for an eye,” only creates more suffering and bloodshed and more enemies. One of the greatest casualties we may suffer results from this wrong thinking and action. Whole societies are living constantly in fear with their nerves being attacked day and night. Such a state of confusion, fear and anxiety is extremely dangerous. It can bring about another world war, this time extremely destructive in the worst possible way.

    We must learn to speak out for peace now, so that our spiritual voice can be heard in this dangerous and pivotal moment of history. Those of us who have the light should display the light and offer it so that the world will not sink into total darkness. Everyone has the seed of awakening and insight within his or her heart. Let us help each other touch these seeds in ourselves so that everyone can have the courage to speak out. We must ensure that the way we live our daily lives does not create more terrorism in the world, through intolerance, hatred, revenge and greed. We need a collective awakening to stop this course of self­-destruction.

    Spiritual leaders in this country need to be invited to raise their voice strongly and speak up for peaceful solutions to the world problems and bring about the awareness of the teaching of compassion and non-violence to the American nation and the people.

    By understanding the nature and cause of the suffering of humanity, we will then know the right method to begin to heal the great problems on this planet.
    * This Article was written by Thich Nhat Hanh, a Buddhist monk and peace activist: 
    “Thich Nhat Hanh is a holy man, for he is humble and devout. He is a scholar of immense intellectual capacity. His ideas for peace, if applied, would build a monument to ecumenism, to world brotherhood, and to humanity.” –Spoken by The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., in nominating Thich Nhat Hanh for the Nobel Peace Prize.

  • The Future of Peace: Let Students Know Non-Violence Works

    Published by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer

    Whenever I write about non-violent theory and practice, I get several e-mails informing me that I’m dangerously naïve and, even worse, that I refuse to acknowledge there is evil in this world.

    It’s baffling, really. Not that most readers would know it but I grew up in East Oakland during the ’80s and early ’90s. That was during the peak of the crack and gang-banging era in urban America.

    I’ve seen human evil.

    So when I get an e-mail that insists I see only the little bit of good in people, unless I decide to respond by sending a mini-autobiography, I have to shrug it off and say to myself: He or she doesn’t really know me.

    Who cares, right? You can’t expect people to know details about something they have no reason to care about.

    But what’s really baffling about the claim that the philosophy of non-violence overlooks evil is this: The most celebrated practitioners of peacemaking are famous precisely because they stared human wickedness dead in the face and moved forward with a courage even the bravest of the brave must admire.

    Jesus, Gandhi, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Bishop Desmond Tutu — to name just a handful — confronted more evil in a week than most of us have seen in a lifetime. The assertion that non-violence doesn’t candidly confront the demonic aspects of “real” life is clearly nonsense.

    One thing that’s so unsettling to the orthodox military mind about non-violence is that it raises a different set of questions than does conventional thinking on the use of force.

    Here’s a good example of one of those unsettling questions: Given the vast toll of human misery created by wars and violent conflicts, and given the potential (perhaps even the likelihood) that an escalating cycle of military attacks and counterattacks will eventually snuff out humanity in the fiery winds of a nuclear winter, is there an alternative to the fight-or-flight model?

    Or to put it another way: Can evil, or certain kinds of evil such as totalitarianism or fascism, be effectively fought with non-violence as a weapon? Must freedom always be defended with violence? These are the age-old questions of peace and, as a casual glance at the daily newspaper will confirm, it’s an inquiry more pressing now than ever.

    No doubt, peace is one of those things that everyone — and I mean everyone — is for. I suppose even Hitler wanted peace, which means we shouldn’t be too impressed if some political leader talks a lot about peace but does little about establishing justice. No justice, no peace.

    When it comes to peace, there are only two relevant questions: peace under what terms, and how do we get there from here?

    Our collective inability to even talk about peace in fruitful ways is largely because the subject, for all its professed importance, doesn’t get taken seriously by our education system.

    No, this isn’t a public school-bashing column. America is still a place with a proud tradition of educational excellence and a country full of able teachers.

    But I think social critic Neil Postman has it right: The biggest problem facing American education today is that our children are going into school as question marks and coming out as periods.

    In other words, most students are being taught to remember and regurgitate what Alfred North Whitehead called inert ideas. Meanwhile, teaching the art of inquiry, the skill of questioning and critical-thinking are no longer at the core of the curriculum.

    To ask well is to know much, says the ancient African proverb. A modern rendering of that proverb might read: To task well is to earn much.

    Parent-Teacher Associations, school committees, academics and politicians should be aware that standard curriculum ought to include peace studies — the history of non-violent theory and practice.

    Why? Because non-violence works. In many cases, non-violent political action has been more effective and less harmful to human life than military might. And students everywhere need to know that.

    Teachers should get their hands on Scott A. Hunt’s new book “The Future of Peace: On the Front Lines with the World’s Great Peacemakers.” Hunt gives us a glimpse of what it means to be a peacemaker in his book of profiles on living non-violent leaders.

    From the Dalai Lama to Vietnam’s leading dissident Thich Quang Do to Costa Rica’s Nobel Peace Laureate Oscar Arias, this collection of intimate conversations could serve as a textbook, introducing students to a history that is not taught in school.

    The book is well worth $25 for the inspiration it provides alone. Treat yourself. I plan to read it for the second time while I’m on vacation in Florida this week.
    *Sean Gonsalves is a columnist with the Cape Cod Times.

  • Cultivating Compassion to Respond to Violence: The Way of Peace

    All violence is injustice. Responding to violence with violence is injustice, not only to the other person but also to oneself. Responding to violence with violence resolves nothing; it only escalates violence, anger and hatred, and increases the number of our enemies. It is only with compassion that we can embrace and disintegrate violence. This is true in relationships between individuals as well as in relationships between nations.

    The violence and hatred we presently face has been created by misunderstanding, injustice, discrimination and despair. We are all co-responsible for the making of violence and despair in the world by our way of living, of consuming and of handling the problems of the world. Understanding why this violence has been created, we will then know what to do and what not to do in order to decrease the level of violence in ourselves and in the world, to create and foster understanding, reconciliation and forgiveness.

    Many people in America consider Jesus Christ as their Lord, their teacher. They should heed His teachings on non-violence, especially during critical times like this. Jesus never encouraged people to respond to acts of violence with violence. His teaching is, instead, to use compassion to deal with violence. The teachings of Judaism go very much in the same direction.

    Spiritual leaders of this country are invited to raise their voices, to bring about the awareness of this teaching to the American nation and people. What needs to be done right now is to recognize the suffering, to embrace it and to understand it. We need calmness and lucidity so that we can listen deeply to and understand our own suffering, the suffering of the nation and the suffering of others around the world. By understanding the nature and the causes of the suffering, we will then know the right path to follow to heal it.

    I have the conviction that America possesses enough wisdom and courage to perform an act of forgiveness and compassion, and I know that such an act can bring great relief to America and to the world right away.
    *Thich Nhat Hanh, the author and a Buddhist monk, has been a tremendous peace activist since the sixties and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Martin Luther King Jr.

  • Unsolicited Advice About the Future of Peacemaking

    Originally Published by CommonDreams.org

    Why doesn’t our society see peace as a viable option? We relegate peacemakers to the footnotes in our history books and all but ignore the important role nonviolence has played throughout history.

    Many of my students think that nonviolence means just laying down or getting stepped on, a passive act rather than a powerful active stance for justice. We are taught to compartmentalize our lives, to put things in neat categories whose boundaries don’t touch. Fight or flight, we’re taught.

    Violence is a simple dichotomy: good versus evil, right versus wrong, you versus me.

    So how do we deal with that?

    By teaching young people about strategic, organized nonviolent strategy. Peace is an inside job I was recently told. It starts with taking a deep look at authenticity. Is our education authentic? Are standardized tests making us smarter and more well-equipped to deal with the real problems we encounter everyday?

    How do we feel about our career options? Is work exciting? Can we work in a way that nourishes our talents and skills and preserves the planet for the seventh future generation? Are we autodidactic?

    How do we even get to the point where we can think of how we can enjoy our lives when problems like police brutality, racism, classism, gentrification, verbal violence, environmental injustice, neo-fascism, globalization, capitalism, misogyny, structural and institutional violence, militarism and the ever-expanding academic-prison-industrial complex are rampant. Not to mention the ongoing global threat of nuclear weapons…

    It all seems so overwhelming when we stop to think about it.

    Fortunately, I received some words of comfort from a friend of mine who spent a month at the Findhorn Foundation in Scotland. She said, “Leah, there is enough of everything. Enough time, enough love, enough energy, enough resources and enough money to build and meet the needs of the entire planet.” Those words are not utopic.

    It starts with a paradigm shift. The problems we face are a result of a crisis of perception of “us” versus “them” where we retain the good qualities and they embody the evil ones. Life is not that simple. Dr. King said that there’s some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. Hate the sin, not the sinner, he said.

    For my part, I have chosen to address the injustices in the world through education. I believe in peace education because it is proactive – it is its own agenda. It is a response, not a reaction.

    Peace education corrects the version of history that deems mankind is a violent and vicious species and instead tells the stories of where the anonymous, unsung peacemakers have quietly changed millions of lives. It is the patient coursework that advocates reading the literature of peace, the words of Tolstoy and Dorothy Day, of Einstein and of Joan Baez. It is the classroom instruction that encourages students to start learning in the real world. Peace education advocates community service and a view of the world where the personal, local, national and global issues are interconnected.

    At this point, peace education is its own semester-long class where students venture daily to learn about how nonviolence applies to them. They are in a Patch Adams-style learning environment where every student is a teacher and every teacher is a student. When I am absent, my students teach the class.

    It’s more than just one class, though. Peace must be a balance between content and process, where the material students learn in every class – French, History, Science, Math – is geared at promoting peace and responsible citizenship, and where the process is also nonviolent where administrators, teachers and students share power rather than reinforcing the traditional patriarchal “power-over” structure.

    So what are you waiting for? It starts with you. Run don’t walk to get Grace Llewellyn’s book “The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quit School and Get a Real Life and Education.” Grab William Upski Wimsatt’s book “No More Prisons.” Watch “A Bug’s Life” and learn about the power dynamics that keep the ‘powerful few’ in power over the ‘powerless many’ and make the connections between that film and real life.

    Talk with your friends and your enemies you probably have a lot in common. Get organized. You have power even though you might not be able to vote yet. Take back this world and make it what you want it to be.
    *Leah C. Wells serves as the Peace Education Coordinator for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. She credits her high school “Issues and Themes” teacher Mr. Jackson with her love for teaching.

  • U.S., Iraqi Students Exchange Letters of Peace

    Originally Published by the Ventura County Star, CA

    Dear Friend, My name is Fahad. First I want to thank you about your nice feelings toward our people in Iraq. Here in Iraq we love all peoples in the world and we try to help them if we could. All people in the world must not believe everything bad said about us in programs made specially to produce bad facts about Iraq.

    My students received this pen-pal letter from a student at the Al-Markaziya School for Boys in Baghdad. Earlier this month, I visited Iraq to deliver pen-pal letters from students in my “Solutions to Violence” classes, and now a friendship between two warring nations has the opportunity to bloom.

    The lack of intercultural communication between students in the United States and students in Iraq is troubling. All we know of them via mass media is that all 24 million Iraqis are equated with their one leader. All they know of us are 12 years of economic sanctions and no-fly-zone bombings.

    When I watch your movies on our black and white TV, I have many dreams to have a color TV, to see your real colors. Do you have the same face that we have? Do you have the same heart?

    The high-school-aged students have most often crossed my mind. When teaching about Iraq, I inquire as to the age at which my students had their first memories. Most students say somewhere around 3 to 5 years old. My students, most of whom are 15 to 18 years old, have grown up knowing leisurely lives, free from bombings, free to watch what they want on television and to buy what they want in shopping malls.

    I ask them to stand in the shoes of their same-age counterparts in Iraq. Imagine that since conscious memory, all they have known has been war. It’s a powerful exercise in empathy.

    Friday is my holiday. I don’t go to school, but I study for hours and hours to get to the medical college. Because of the embargo on our country, there’s no medicine for diseases, and many newborn kids and children are dying.

    Even more troubling to me are the youngest children, those 12 years and younger. They were born after the sanctions and after the Gulf War. They have known no life other than war. And the saddest part? It’s not at all their fault. They are being held hostage under a dictatorship they did not choose, captive and deprived of basic nutrition and access to education.

    I would like to tell you that all Iraqi people are against the idea of war. We believe in peace and that we have the right to vote our own leader.

    UNICEF reports that 80 percent of schools in Iraq are in desperate need of repair. Eight-thousand schools lack basic infrastructure and the basics to support education: no new textbooks since 1989, no chalk, no classroom repairs. Teachers’ salaries prior to the Gulf War were approximately $500 per month. They now earn $5 per month. Students are sent home to use the restroom because those at school pose too great a health risk. And the rate of primary school-aged girls dropping out has increased to 35 percent in the past 12 years.

    According to UNICEF, education is the only sector in Iraq that has shown no improvement since the sanctions were imposed in 1990.

    As a teacher, I am deeply concerned about the connections between education and war-making. Every penny we spend on weapons of mass destruction, every dollar that is diverted from academic enrichment to daisy cutters and pre-emptive strikes deprive American students of the right to a quality education.

    How enraging that our military recruits disproportionately in poor communities of color. How egregious that my students who cannot afford higher education must join the military to pay for their studies. This classist, racist policy glares at the American public who are too blinded by war talk to notice. We are sending poor people to kill poor people. Where is the democracy in that?

    So we are a people who like the peace and work to get it. Because whatever I say I can’t describe to you how much Iraqi people suffered after the war.

    Currently, the pen-pal letter exchange program, supported by Voices in the Wilderness and the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, is the only one of its kind. No study abroad programs exist. All diplomatic ties with Iraq have been severed since the early 1990s. It is even illegal to travel there.

    Knowing this, how can we expect the youth of America to know that “our quarrel,” as so many governments have said, “is not with the Iraqi people.” If we don’t make the distinction, how will they?

    Education is the key to ending wars. Through this simple outreach of American to Iraqi students, young people are changing the world.
    *Leah C. Wells, a Santa Paula teacher, serves as peace education coordinator for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation in Santa Barbara. She recently paid a second visit to Iraq and opposes the economic sanctions and no-fly-zone incursions on that country.

  • Peacful Tomorrow: Organization of Family Members of Sept. 11th Victims Speak Out at NAPF Event

    On September 24th, Kelly Campbell, who lost her brother in-law to the September 11th attacks, spoke at an event held at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation on how she and other family members of Sept. 11th victims came together in their grief to promote peaceful options in search for justice. These individuals formed an organization called September Eleventh Families for Peaceful Tomorrows (www.peacefultomorrows.org) in an attempt to prevent others from suffering the pains of loss they have in the midst of US military retaliation. “Our grief,” they said, “is not a cry for war.”

    To make clear the connection between their own suffering and the suffering of victims of the “War on Terror,” Peaceful Tomorrows has sent delegates to Afghanistan to meet Afghan civilians who have lost love ones in the US bombing campaigns. These delegates returned with the Afghans’ message of “do not forget us,” and they continue to be in contact with their Afghan sister families.

    According to Campbell, delegates who traveled to Afghanistan were shocked by the stark contrast between the lack of aid for Afghans devastated by US bombing and the outpouring of support and compassion from around the world to their families after the Sept. 11 attacks. To address this injustice, Peaceful Tomorrows advocates for government funded aid to Afghan civilians accidentally bombed by US forces, urging the administration to take responsibility for detrimental effects of its military campaign.

    Representatives from groups in the local community working on Afghan issues, such as the revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), were also present at Tuesday’s meeting, and joined Campbell in strategizing on effective means to reach the media and policy makers with their important message.

    In addition, the participants discussed the links between the military campaign in Afghanistan and the Bush administration’s push to wage war on Iraq, which would no doubt have a devastating impact on the Iraqi civilian population. In a letter to President Bush the Peaceful Tomorrow members stated:

    “We know that war in Iraq would cause the suffering of many thousands of innocent Iraqi families, people who, like our family members on September 11th, will find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. A war would also place our military personnel in harm’s way, causing deaths and the suffering of more American families. It is out of concern for our own service people and for the Iraqi citizens that we implore you to pursue a resolution of the situation in Iraq without war.”

    After the NAPF event Campbell flew directly to Washington D.C. to meet with Congressional representatives to oppose war against Iraq.

  • Choose Hope – An Interview with Dr. David Krieger Living Buddhism, Journal of Peace, Culture and Education

    “Ordinary people can and must guide their leaders to create a future free from a nuclear menace.” This is the theme of Choose Hope, published this month by Middleway Press. It is a dialogue between Soka Gakkai International president, Daisaku Ikeda and Dr. David Krieger, founder of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

    This dialogue reveals how the development of true peace can grow only when narrow national loyalties are surpassed by a shared global vision. Inspiring examples of individuals working for an end to the nuclear threat showcase the role everyday people can play in the quest for peace. Living Buddhism interviewed Dr. Krieger about the book, which is available at leading bookstores and online.

    Living Buddhism: The title of your new book is Choose Hope. How do you define hope and what does it have to do with the seemingly intractable problems of war and the nuclear threat?

    David Krieger: The title of the book reflects our belief that hope must be a conscious choice. It is possible also to choose hopelessness or, in other words, to believe that nothing or not much is possible in the way of positive change. This is a formula for giving up and withdrawing into complacency and apathy, which are pervasive malaises of our time.

    I define hope as the belief that we can realize our dreams by our efforts. I don’t see hope as being wildly detached from reality and certainly not detached from our own efforts. I don’t think that hope is a magic wand that by itself can change the world, but it can certainly give direction and energy to one’s intention.

    Related to problems of war and nuclear threat, hope is a starting point for seeking change. War is our most destructive means of attempting to resolve human conflicts and, in fact, doesn’t resolve them. When nuclear weapons are added into the mix, war could result in the annihilation of large populations, even of the human species. Of course, we should not give up hope that we can make a difference on issues of such importance. Without hope, we are, in a sense, giving up on humanity and we simply can’t do this. We owe it to all previous generations and to all whom will follow us on Earth, to maintain our hope and to work for a world without nuclear weapons and without war.

    LB: The book’s subtitle is “Your Role in Waging Peace in the Nuclear Age.” Weapons policy, international relations and the nuclear threat seem very far removed from most people’s daily life concerns. With all the problems ordinary people have to deal with, what role are you urging people to take on? Can these efforts truly effect change?

    Krieger: It’s true that problems of a global scope may appear removed from our daily lives, but, of course, they are not. Finding solutions to these great global problems may be the most significant challenge of our time. The future of humanity rides on how we deal with these problems. If citizens opt out, decisions on weapons and warfare will be made by leaders whose interests are not necessarily aligned with the best interests of humanity and of future generations. These problems are far too important to be left to political or military leaders. I’m urging ordinary citizens throughout the world to engage in issues of war and peace because their voices and their efforts are needed. We all need to engage as if our very lives depended upon it because they do.

    I remember being with Jacques Cousteau, a man deeply committed to the welfare of future generations, when he said: “The time has come when speaking is not enough, applauding is not enough. We have to act.” It is time to act. I’d like to see ordinary citizens become change makers for a world free of nuclear weapons. One concrete action they can take is to sign, circulate and spread the word about our Foundation’s Appeal to End the Nuclear Weapons Threat to Humanity and All Life, which they can find on our web site at www.wagingpeace.org. The principles in this Appeal can help guide their actions.

    It is difficult to know if our efforts will bring about the change we desire. We can’t be certain, but we must proceed as if they will bring about this change because the alternative of giving up hope and doing nothing is unacceptable.

    LB: In the book, you and Mr. Ikeda advocate abolishing nuclear weapons. With the chance of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists and so-called rogue states, wouldn’t the United States be making itself vulnerable and weak if it gave up its nuclear stockpiles?

    Krieger: We’re not advocating that the US alone give up its nuclear arsenal. The elimination of these weapons would be done multilaterally and in phases and with verification and confidence-building measures to assure that all nuclear-armed nations were also eliminating their nuclear arsenals. In a world without nuclear weapons, the US would remain a very powerful nation. Giving up its nuclear arsenal would certainly not make the US vulnerable and weak.

    Mr. Ikeda and I agree strongly on the need to abolish nuclear weapons. This is a position nearly uniformly supported by the people of Japan where they know first-hand the terrible effects of the use of nuclear weapons. The truth is that nuclear weapons make a country more vulnerable rather than less so. If you have nuclear weapons, you must rely upon nuclear deterrence, the threat of nuclear retaliation, for security. But deterrence cannot provide security against terrorists, who do not fear retaliation, or against accidental launches.

    The more reliance there is by some states on nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that these weapons will proliferate to other countries and find their way into the hands of terrorists. That is why the United States, which now possesses overwhelming military force, should lead the way toward achieving the phased, verifiable and irreversible elimination of nuclear weapons. That would require wisdom and compassion. Such leadership is unlikely to come from political leaders. It is far more likely to originate from the people; ordinary people like you and me.

    LB: Through dialogue with Mr. Ikeda and association with SGI, have you learned anything that helps you in your own work?

    Krieger: I am very taken with Mr. Ikeda’s focus on “human revolution.” I share his belief that each of us has the power to make a difference far beyond our imaginations. Mr. Ikeda himself is an example of a single individual who has made an enormous difference in our world. Through his vision and perseverance, he has created a wide array of noble institutions that educate young people and contribute to the common good. I am also impressed by Mr. Ikeda’s tremendous commitment to dialogue and the open and flexible mind that he brings to solving problems. His annual peace proposals are among the most thoughtful and useful contributions to the global dialogue on bettering humanity’s future.

    I am also very appreciative of the positive spirit of the members of the SGI who I have met. As individuals and as an organization, there seems to be a deep concern in the SGI for embracing the world and all of its inhabitants. There is also a “can do” attitude, a willingness to roll up one’s sleeves and work, which I appreciate very much.

    LB: What are your long-term goals for this book?

    Krieger: One of my goals for this book is to help awaken people to action to create a better world, a world in which people are valued for what they contribute of themselves, not what they possess. I would be very pleased if this book helped people to see that hope is indeed a conscious choice and a starting point for committed action. I’d be delighted if Choose Hope encouraged more young people to become involved in the great issues of our time, engaging with compassion, commitment and courage. I hope that the book will contribute to realizing the dream of a world free of nuclear weapons.
    *David Krieger is president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

  • Nonviolence Timely Topic At College

    On the same day Vice President Dick Cheney urged a military strike against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, students in a Moorpark College classroom were discussing philosopher William James’ “The Moral Equivalent of War.”

    The students, enrolled in a new four-week Philosophy of Nonviolence course, joined in guest lecturer John Birmingham’s discussion, which compared James’ essay to what it means to be a patriot.

    “War is romantic because it conjures up ideals of honor and value,” Birmingham said. “Even in academics, those who are less inclined to be militaristic will list being involved in World War II on their resumes.”

    The course is the only one of its kind in the Ventura County Community College District. Both Ventura and Oxnard colleges have a number of philosophy classes, including ethics, logic, introduction to philosophy and some focusing on Western and Eastern religions.

    Students meet Tuesdays and Thursdays for a couple of hours to discuss the works and thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi, existentialist Albert Camus, naturalist Henry David Thoreau, Buddhist Thich Nhat Hanh and philosopher William James.

    Moorpark College professors are brought in as guest speakers to lead discussions on topics relating to those works, while philosophy professor Janice Daurio oversees the program.

    The class was the brainchild of 20-year-old Gazal Humkar, a Muslim from Simi Valley who has been very active in the college’s Muslim Students Association and Philosophy Club.

    She got the idea after leafing through an old college catalog, which contained a similar course.

    “It needed to be taught and I persuaded Dr. (Janice) Daurio to teach the class,” Humkar said. “My hope is that I will look at different aspects and try to lead a life in which I promote human understanding and tolerance and that everyone in the class does the same.”

    An instructor at the college since 1994, Daurio said the timing of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks combined with an increasingly violent society give proof that the nonviolence class is a must at Moorpark.

    “We live in a violent society. People are not only violent in obvious ways but in subtle ways, too. There’s a lack of civility and manners … of common courtesy, disrespectful to people,” Daurio said.

    Only by community building, such as volunteerism and club participation, can society begin to turn itself around, she said.

    The course includes A Celebration of Life event from 10 a.m. to noon Sept. 11 in the college’s Performing Arts Center. The two-hour event will feature speakers; a geography presentation; a dramatic presentation of “Profiles in Grief,” taken from the New York Times series; and a lecture by Leah Wells, founder of Peace Education in Nuclear Age.

    On Sept. 10, Maha Hamoui, founder of the Islamic Education Foundation, will give a talk from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. in the Performing Arts Center.

    For more information, call 378-1400.

  • A Thousand (Five Thousand) Cranes for Peace and a Better World

    On 6 June 1987 World Environment Day, we are shown at the UN a wonderful film: “A Thousand Cranes,” the moving story of the cooperation between American and Russian environmentalists to save a rare breed of Siberian cranes. The film was sponsored by Lufthansa which displays the graphic crane on all its planes, and which transported the eggs of the cranes between the two countries.

    The film tells that the oriental children believe that if they make one thousand paper cranes, their life will be blessed with happiness. The picture is shown of a Japanese girl wounded at Hiroshima who made a little more than 100 cranes before her death. Her friends finished the thousand cranes and erected a monument to her.

    The following morning when I woke up, a sad truth flashed through my mind: during the fortieth anniversary of the UN in 1985, American children sent me several boxes with a thousand paper cranes they had made, but I had understood their true message.

    They were not only a happy birthday gift to the UN but also a personal message to me, asking me to my own thousand cranes for peace. Therefore, I seized a notebook and wrote on it: “one thousand cranes for peace”, to record in it, every day, my actions for peace and a better world. After a month I discovered to my dismay that I had taken only 60 actions for peace, i.e. a mere average if two a day, while I lived under the illusion that I worked for peace all the time!

    It is as if a peasant would sow into the fields only two seeds a day! It would take me a year and a half to reach one thousand cranes of peace. My only consolation was that some of my cranes had reached people who in turn released their own cranes of peace. Some of them even started their own notebook, “One Thousand Cranes of Peace”, writing to congressmen, to newspapers or to other people—, joining a local peace group or the UN Association, promoting peace in their family, in their community, in their profession, through their religion or through many other means.

    I sent one of my cranes to Lufthansa, suggesting that institutions and firms should also start their own One Thousand Cranes of Peace. Lufthansa could keep a record of it’s own, adding many more cranes to the one it released by sponsoring the remarkable film we saw. How wonderful it would be if all organizations, institutions, firms, religions, communities, cities, villages, associations, professions, families and last but not least 6.2 billion people of this planet one do at least one thousand cranes for peace during their life. It could change the course of history.

    At the end of July 1987 I reached a total of 97 cranes for peace, and thereafter did not continue to keep track of them. But this great idea was revived on 11 June 1994 when my future second wife, Barbara Gaughen. After the death of my first beloved wife Margarita, pointed out to an audience om Santa Barbara that there remained exactly 2000 days to the first of January 2000. Anyone who would write down one idea a day would reach 2000 on that date!

    Remembering the cranes of peace, I exclaimed: “I will do it!” I did and this time I did not give up. I reached 2500 ideas on January 2002 and continued until July 2002 when I reached a total of 5000! They are called Ideas and Dreams of a Better World. Many of them were implemented. They are available in eleven volumes of 5000 ideas each and an index. As of June 2002 4000 of them were on the Internet website: www.robertmuller.org The remaining 1000 will soon follow.

    Please dear readers, write down your cranes for peace and a better world. They will bring much happiness.