Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF)

See The Whistleblower

2011-08-07T16:57:00.000-07:00

The Whistleblower is a political thriller starring Rachel Weiscz. It is now playing in LA and NYC, with more cities being rolled out in the coming weeks.

Larysa Kondracki, the director and co-writer of the film spent two years researching the reality of peace-keeping operations in Bosnia before writing the script. Weiscz plays Kathyryn Balkovac, a Nebraskan cop who goes to Bosnia as a Dyncorp employee, part of the international police task force. Like many people, she chose to work overseas because of the high pay without taxes.

C.J. met director Larysa Kondracki at a special screening of The Whistleblower on Wednesday, August 3.

The first time I saw the film, I was overwhelmed with horror. It was more difficult to watch than any film on a battlefield, because the war in this movie takes place on the bodies of enslaved women. Years ago, I heard that there were more slaves in the world today than at any point in human history. I thought that was hyperbole until the cold truth was dramatized for me.

Even more shocking is that the drama is true.

Everything that is portrayed in the film actually happened. It did not necessarily happen to those characters, but it happened. The sadness and the tragedy is that not enough was done. --Madeleine Rees, former Head of Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Ms. Rees is portrayed by Vanessa Redgrave in the film. Though it may be unclear from simply watching the drama, she was instrumental in shining light on the situation in Bosnia. So much so that she was pushed out of the UN and filed a discrimination lawsuit. While Rees was able to find employment after leaving the UN (she is currently the Secretary General of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom), Balkovac is struggling to find meaningful employment, though she did publish a memoir of her experience.

Join the WILPF campaign to challenge the idea that immunity equals impunity.

Rees explains how human rights has framed her work and what she's doing now to challenge the idea that immunity equals impunity:

Executive Committee Elected, Program Discussed, Departure

2011-08-07T16:49:00.000-07:00

This post was written by Catia Confortini, WILPF US Representative to the International Board.

This is my last blog report from the 30th WILPF International Congress. Today was our voting day and I am glad to report that we elected as new International President Adilia Caravaca from Costa Rica. The four Vice Presidents elected were Martha Jean Baker from the UK, Ila Pathak from India, Neelima Sihn from India and Kirsten Griebaeck from Sweden. Nancy Ramsden will continue to be our International Treasurer. We also approved a number of resolutions and the International Program, all of which will soon be published on the international congress website.

WILPF Secretary General Madeleine Rees has committed to revise the international program she and WILPF staff drafted by the end of September 2011 to incorporate the good suggestions received at congress. She insisted that Program and Resolutions are empty words if not for us who will translate them into action. During the discussion the UK representative Lorraine Mirham suggested that, once Madeleine has produced the final version, we make sure the program is circulated among the branches and members, and that could also make part of the packet that we send to new members when they pay their first membership fee.

I will make sure to circulate the program to the branches list and on WILPF website and this blog, but it is up to you to bring it to each other attention. If you are a contact person for your branch, make sure these blogs as well as the international program and information from the congress website reaches your members!

I forgot to mention in my previous reports that we had a very productive meetings of the Americas, where we decided to create a quarterly bulletin describing the activities of our sections and branches and linking them to international program, in particular with the two WILPF projects in New York. The bulletin will be bilingual. I will send you more information about the decisions taken at this meeting when the minutes are approved and translated.

Last night we were treated to a vegetarian, organic dinner organized by the Costa Rican Section and prepared and served by volunteers from a network of women’s cooperatives that serves to empower rural women in Costa Rica and help them find markets for their products. Many of us bought souvenirs and food products to bring home with them. Who knows, next time you go to one of your WILPF sisters’ house you will be washing your hands with Costa Rica organic fairly traded soap! It is here that I would like to thank the Costa Rican section (and in particular our new International President) for the marvelous organization, for their hospitality and tireless work and the new ties of friendship develop in San Jose. I also would like to thank the International staff and the Swedish section for having generously donated time and resources to make this possible. In particular, big kudos go to young WILPFer Karin Friedrich who, on her own time and money, went from Sweden to Geneva to put this congress together. Her attention to detail, dedication to WILPF, and many many hours of work made all run incredibly smoothly. Young WILPFer Jennifer from the UK Section is going to set up a Flick’r account where pictures from Congress will be posted hopefully very soon!

As final commentary about congress, I would like to commend and thank the US delegation for having positively contributed to this congress in so many ways and for their commitment to the work of WILPF International. Look for more news about the congress on the next issue of Peace and Freedom, where many of our delegation members will be contributing articles on the different subjects discussed at congress and on the wonderful developing contacts with WILPFers around the world!

Five New WILPF Sections, PeaceWomen and 100th Birthday Planning

2011-08-04T22:48:00.000-07:00

This post was written by WILPF US Representative to the international board, Catia Confortini.

Today five new sections were admitted into our WILPF sisterhood: the DRC, Spain, Mexico, Pakistan, and Nigeria. Last night Molly, Kristin, Morgan, Alicia and I had a fabulous meal at a downtown restaurant together with the representatives of one of Nigeria. These two young women, Adanna and Joy, have done an amazing work to form the new section, with 30 members and a impressive range of activities. You can read their report and see some of their photos on the international congress website.

Earlier today we listened as Maria Butler described the work she is doing as director of the PeaceWomen project. Maria pointed out how PeaceWomen's work is about monitoring and accountability to the commitments express in 1325, offering a library of information, advocacy, and outreach, while keeping local contexts and local differences present in our mind, but also seeing as proper of our organization, the connections and similarities in our lives and the lives of women around the world. A really important task we have is to increase section collaboration, a part of PeaceWomen's work that needs fostering. PeaceWomen works in coalition and integrate our work with disarmament and other thematics. Outreach is done in a variety of ways, one of the most important ones being the translation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 into over 100 languages. Now 1325 is the most translated resolution ever in local languages, and this also talks about the ownership of the resolution by women's organizations who use it in their contexts. PeaceWomen have also started 1820 translation, so if any of us has expertise in a language that we don't have please contact Maria at PW to offer your expertise toward the translation of 1820.

Among the amazing number of activities that PW organized was a civil society space in NY in occasion of 1325, a week long fair organized on the theme of prevention, with a women's march to the UN Security Council to let them know that this is the women's resolution and we will keep ownership and enforce its application.

As a final highlight of Maria's speech, PeaceWomen has also done a comprehensive analysis of the UN Security Council to analyze how and to what extent the SC has adopted gender language and gender analysis in its work. They also included recommendations to what kind of language and analytical framework to use. Now there is also an iPhone app that can be downloaded.

The afternoon program was devoted to the welcoming of new sections and to a description of the events to celebrate the 100th anniversary of WILPF on April 28, 2015. An international steering group is working on it, including our ex Secretary General and US member Susi Snyder. We are going to meet at the Peace Palace from April 22 to April 25 and have a big anniversary event for the jubilee at the World Forum on April 28. The steering group has already started working, talking to Hague officials, writing grants, securing web domains and spaces, but there is still a lot of work to do. A steering group is set in place coordinating with secretary general and with some subgroups with specific tasks. There will be a group on our story, which will collect the wealth of information and published material on our story and present it. A fundraising group will contact potential donors, individuals, foundations, governments to donate to this campaign. A logistics group will deal and sort out lodging, food, scheduling, travel, etc. Media and publicity will tackle publicity and media relations. Communication will look inside and outside WILPF to make sure we all talk to each other and to our international partners, providing materials for local partnerships. The Program group will organize the workshops, speakers, the gala event, the film event etc. We need to look forward, find people who can help with fundraising or donate, people who want to help with the organization, have events to advertise it. We are looking for members to make up the Committee of 100 who will commit to donate or raise one thousand Dollars, Euros or Swiss Franks toward the Congress. The easiest way to donate is through WILPF International website.

Reaching Critical Will: Challenging Nuclear Power and Nuclear Weapons

2011-08-03T23:05:00.000-07:00

This post was written by Catia Confortini, the US Section Representative to the International Board of WILPF.

Official day 2 of International Congress! We started with a report from Ray Acheson, director of the Reaching Critical Will project. Ray is helped in this by Beatrice Fihn in Geneva, who couldn't be here as she is due in one month and couldn't travel. Ray beautifully summarized the excellent work that RCW is doing, which is unique to WILPF, as we bring gender and economic, social and environmental justice analysis to disarmament and militarization issues. RCW works with other organizations, with academics to produce reports and analysis that supports local branches in their local actions, but also does advocacy at UN treaty bodies and supports the advocacy of local branches. Ray asked that we let her know of any action that any section or branch undertakes and how RCW can support them. They are currently working on a number of specific areas, including work with the Conference on Disarmament, the Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, the NonProliferation Treaty and many others. Her email is on the RCW website at http://reachingcriticalwill.org. I would also suggest you visit that website regularly to see the wealth of information the project has assembled. Ray also mentioned the work of our own Carol Urner, of the LA and Portland, OR branches in conjunction with RCW on disarmament. RCW is also trying to lobby for an Arms Trade Treaty that will put obstacles to the trade in arms, rather than facilitate it as some countries would like to, and to add a gender perspective to such treaty. The negotiations for this treaty are going to start in July and that gives us some time to get our voices heard. If anybody is interested in working with RCW on this, they should contact Ray. Finally, Ray talked about WILPF's work against nuclear energy, on which WILPF's position has long been that it cannot be separated from production of nuclear weapons. WILPF has a unique role to play in challenging militarism, saying that there is a two way street between militarism and many of the problems of the world. Violations of women's rights are linked to militarism. Disarmament is human right.

Following Ray we had a moving presentation from Japanese Section delegate Kozue Akibayashi who described the tragic consequences of the recent earthquake, in particular the radioactive spillover from the damage at the Fukushima power plant. There is a government coverup of the real data on contamination and its present and future effects on human health and the environment. With great difficulty and contrition, Kozue moved everyone to tears when she said the following: "My country is greatly responsible for damage to the environment and to future generations. Radiation cannot be seen, so we don't know how this will impact the future generations but we know that nobody will be safe." The Japanese section is asking for sister sections' solidarity and for local work against nuclear energy, especially against the 'Atoms For Peace' campaign, which is in reality, the Spanish section later pointed out, a political masquerade that ends up supporting the production of nuclear weapons. Robin Lloyd of the Vermont branch succinctly explained WILPF's and other civil society organizations' efforts to close down the nuclear plant in their state. These kinds of actions are, it seems to me, an important opportunity to link the work we are doing locally to Reaching Critical Will and the work of WILPF International.

The second part of the morning was occupied by the International Treasurer report. Our own Nancy Ramsden stressed the excellent program fundraising job that RCW and PeaceWomen are doing. They are financially healthy parts of our organization, but the rest of WILPF badly needs to step up our fundraising efforts, not only through grant writing but also through local help and support for international. Madeleine needs an office director in the Geneva office and the NY Office also would need one, but we need people who are qualified and competent professionals, because we have had bad experiences with well meaning help who however was not qualified to do that kind of work. We have now 3-4 months worth of money now left in Geneva for operating budget (which includes Madeleine Rees' salary) and only 2,000 dollars left in the UNO office. We have, however, a number of outstanding grant applications that might help our international office extend our financial sustainability. But programs can be funded through grants, but office work and operating budget is much harder to raise money for. There is a really urgent need to raise money from the sections if we want to save WILPF. Madeleine Rees, WILPF International Secretary General, stressed that we need to be a membership driven organization that doesn't need to raise money for its operating budget.

The fundraising workshop addressed precisely these issues. Petra Totterman Andorff, the secretary general of the Swedish section, showed the very effective tactics that enabled the section to go from 1/2 person employed to 4 people employed and the capacity to support other sections and international as well as well as with a vibrant number of young committed members. Petra stressed that having good, strategic projects to start with that connect the local branches, the national organization and the international is an essential part of fundraising, because it gives visibility to the organization and attracts program money from where we can start building capacity. She mentioned US WILPF in particular, citing the 1325 campaigns (the Whistleblower campaign and others) as good examples of projects that get us started toward creating a stronger organization. we are getting excellent feedback from international and other sections on these plans, so I urge you take engage in them to the best of your capacity! If your branch has not yet replied to Tanya's inquiry about your willingness to participate in our Whistleblower campaign, do so! I also want to stress that a number of other sections are also doing actions both around the Whistleblower and on Security Council Resolution 1325. You will have the opportunity to see how 1325 relates to WILPF's International Program once the Congress approves it. Our US campaign is wonderfully in line with it and I felt very proud that it was mentioned by the Swedish section representative.

This is again it for today. More will come tomorrow!

WILPF International Congress Begins

2011-08-03T23:04:00.000-07:00

This report was written by the US Section Representative to the International Board, Catia Confortini.

Hello from WILPF International Congress in Costa Rica! This is your incoming IB representative's first email from Congress, and I hope this will not be the last, hopefully I will have some time each day to write a little something. The US delegation is 25-member strong and many of us have committed to write up short pieces from Congress for the next issue of Peace and Freedom, so watch out for it in the next couple of months.

I arrived on Saturday July 30, so I missed the apparently very rich and interesting Gertrude Baer seminar, but don't worry, you'll hopefully be reading all about it in Peace and Freedom!

During my first full day in Costa Rica we were delighted to go on a very interesting trip to a coffee plantation where we learned a lot about how coffee is grown, picked (by hand, mostly by migrant workers), and dried to be ready for export. Of course being WILPF women we all asked the difficult questions of our guide: how much do the workers get per basket of berries, do they get benefits, are they unionized, are they documented, do you spray the trees, how sustainable is your estate, etc. I have to say that, although workers are mainly Nicaraguans and often without papeles, they receive free housing and electricity from that employer as well as medical attention and schooling for their children for free from the government.

During the trip we also had the chance to start filming short videos, asking WILPFEers to explain what security means to them, as part of our 1325/Whistleblower campaign. They will be available shortly on the Facebook page of the campaign (which I encourage you to 'like' and make use of, including filling out the survey about security).

Later in the day we had a meeting of the US delegation, to get to know each other, brainstorm and help each other understand the subtleties and sensitivities of intercultural communication, but also to divvy up tasks and journalistic assignments for Peace and Freedom. We have a very enthusiastic and knowledgeable group, eager to contribute to International as well as communicate what happens at this Congress to their respective branches.

My second day began with a very interesting lecture by anthropologist Anna Arroba who talked about the history of patriarchy and the destruction of early civilizations' matriarchies due to the needs of war making. Sarah Masters, of IANSA, the International Action Network on Small Arms, pointed to the need of alliance between WILPF and IANSA across common action points, using the the women, peace and security agenda to work on the gendered impact of small arms in our communities and in the world. During the second part of the day we all attended several workshops. Because our delegation is so much bigger than other sections (the second largest section being Sweden, with 15 members. We make up in fact about 1/4 of the entire congress I believe), we made an effort to spread ourselves across all different workshops. You will also have the chance to read about some of theses workshops on Peace and Freedom.

Today is the third day and as I write I am multitasking and listening to the very interesting presentation of the new sections, namely the DRC, Nigeria, Mexico, Pakistan and Spain. These new sections were created through the support of other sections and the work of WILPF Vice-President Amparo Guerrero. Earlier we had a very interesting morning, where the French delegate presented her somewhat controversial vision for WILPF, followed by a response by WILPF Co-President Annelise Ebbe and then small group discussions.

This concludes my email from Congress for today. Let me however thank my two predecessors, Darien DeLu and Audley Green for mentoring me into this task and patiently put up with my inexperience and mistakes. I hope I will live up to their legacies!

July 27, Fr. Louis Vitale and MacGregor Eddy arrested while Vandenberg breaks the law

2011-07-31T18:45:00.000-07:00

This post was written by MacGregor Eddy.
The July 27th test missile launch by USA in violation of Non Proliferation Treaty failed!

Fr. Louie Vitale and MacGregor Eddy ( myself ) were arrested at 1:20 am July 27, protesting the launch of a nuclear weapon delivery system from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The missile was destroyed by Vandenberg Air Force Base over the Pacific Ocean because of a malfunction (anomaly ) .

Jim Haber and Mary Lou Anderson of the Nevada Desert Experience as well as world war II veteran Bud Boothe and legal observer Kelly Gray attended at midnight protest of the ICBM launch from Vandenberg Space Command near Lompoc Cal. The nuclear capable, solid fuel, high speed test missile was set to land in Kwajalein atoll, in the Marshall Islands of the Pacific Ocean.

Fr. Louie and I were cited and released to go on trial in federal court later. The US and UN treat North Korea as a danger when the DRPK launches a few, liquid fuel, short to medium range missiles. The US, UN and NATO use the North Korean missile tests as an excuse to build up military in Pacific area. The building of a Naval base on Jeju Island, South Korea is part of this build up. The Aegis destroyers set use the proposed Jeju base (under the mutual defense agreement all South Korean bases are open to US vessels) .

Fr. Louie and myself were inspired by the actions of the people of Gangjeong to go onto the base and attempt to stop the launch by citing international law and the need for world peace. We read the statement by David Krieger of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation which states that these test missile launches create international tension and decrease security.

We made the decision to go onto the base and try to stop the launch when we thought of Brother Song Kang-Ho climbing onto a huge barge to try to persuade the construction crew not to destroy the beautiful coral reef of Jeju Island, the Island of peace. We thought of Mr. Go Kwan-Il lying under a 200 ton crane to stop it from destroying the shore of the island of peace for a base of war. Just because something seems impossible (stopping the launch) does not mean we cannot try to do it if it is the right thing to do. We talked it over and were inspired by the people of Gangjeong to try to stop the launch using non violence and reason and law.

personal note : I am not as brave as the people of Gangjeong, so I was nervous of the huge Air Force Base at night. Fr. Louie was not afraid at all. HIs calm and clarity are amazing.

Fr. Louie felt at home in Lompoc because the federal prison where he lived for the last six months is right there on the same federal land as Vandenberg Air Force Base. He served six months for protesting the teaching of torture and repression at the School of the Americas in Fort Benning Georgia.

When we were arrested we asked the Military Police to then arrest the commander of Vandenberg Air Force Base for violation of an international treaty which under the US constitution is the highest law of the land. All US military swear to defend the Constitution. (The do not swear to uphold current foreign policy ) They stated "no comment".

Fr. Louie and I were cited and released for trial in federal court at a later date. Fr. Louie already has a court date on Sept 15, so it might be on that date in Santa Barbara. The base commander was not arrested or cited. We appeal to the court of public opinion to evaluate the actions of both parties.

The US is in serious financial difficulties and last night launch wasted millions of dollars. The money was wasted regardless of the success or failure of the test launch.

Why WILPF? Lessons from Emily Greene Balch and Mercedes Randall

2010-06-29T20:22:00.000-07:00

I've begun reading an incredible book, Beyond Nationalism: The Social Thought of Emily Greene Balch. I feel a special connection to Ms. Balch, as she was an economics professor at Wellesley, my alma mater. The trustees fired her for her "radical peace activities." The closing of that door allowed her to become WILPF's first secretary general. Her work inspired the creation of Wellesley's Peace & Justice Studies department, which provided me a major and will soon be the employer of Catia Confortini, an amazing member of WILPF.

In any case, back to Emily. Her literary executor, Mercedes M. Randall, edited a volume of her essays and provided an introductory biographical sketch. This is an excerpt from page 32 of that sketch:

Emily Balch gave the best years of her life to the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, because it stood, as she conceived it, not so much for "peace" with its negative connotations, as for liberation from all that divides and separates men, for reaching out to one another, for building up together.

"Only connect," as E.M. Forster urged. Like Forster, Emily Balch believed first of all in personal relationships as something solid in a world full of violence and cruelty. WIth that as a starting point, order can begin to enter the contemporary chaos. To nourish one's own little light, one's own trembling flame, with the knowledge that it is not the only light shining in the darkness, to keep open a few breathing holes for the human spirit, to try to put Force back into the box where it belongs in order to make room for the great creative energies of mankind, this, for Emily Balch, as for E.M. Forster, meant what it was to be truly civilized and to justify the human experiment.

I remain inspired and emboldened by the precedent set by these two incredible WILPF leaders, Emily and Mercedes. And I urge everyone who agrees with this vision for the future, to join WILPF, and to create liberation through the League.

Branch Reports at Northern California Cluster Meeting

2010-02-27T14:04:00.001-08:00

East Bay / Berkeley: Don't have young members, so invited someone they know to attend a meeting. The young woman said that if an organization doesn't exist on the web, young people don't think it exists. So, the branch built a website. They're also doing a program on white privilege.

Fresno: Gloria, their new president, attending her first cluster meeting gave the report. Two interns from Fresno State, 200 members, weekly film event and many, many activities

Monterey County: monthly meetings, support for labor unions in area hotels, book sale, work in coalition with 27-organization peace coalition in the community

Palo Alto / Peninsula: was formed in 1922 by the wife of the president of Stanford. 4 areas of interest: disarmament, Middle East, health care for all, fair elections. Branch strongly recommend the documentary Stealing America, Vote by Vote; showed the film "A Single Woman," about Jeanette Rankin in coordination with five other organization; one of the founders of Raging Grannies within WILPF as a great way to do outreach. In November, potentially 65 initiatives on the California state ballot.

Pajaro Valley (14 miles between Santa Cruz and Monterey): our branch is on life support. Since September, 2011 did a weekly peace vigil until the end of October, 2009. Participated in an annual exhibit "Mi Casa, Tu Casa." Shed light on history of bracero program in Watsonville to the local community.

Sacramento: attempting to put the branch back together. We're holding regular meetings whether anyone comes or not (4th Sunday of the month). Focusing on Analyzing, Thinking and Planning Strategically.

San Francisco two proposals to the cluster meeting on future regional communications; several activities on the topic of Afghanistan, including a public session with a representative from RAWA

San Jose: Prop 1 Road Tour, full report available on paper

Santa Cruz 250 members, renewal rates strong now that it's included in newsletter address block. Dozens of activities, including two talks by Professor Stephen Zunes on the American invasion of Afghanistan and on Obama's first year.

Sierra Foothills: bring plays to Auburn, including "Women at Ground Zero: Stories of Courage and Compassion." This year they're hosting a play in tribute to Coretta Scott King, "A Song for Coretta."

Updates from Northern Califonria Cluster Meeting

2010-02-27T12:09:00.000-08:00

SMART campaign planning
next National Congress: summer, 2011
next international Congress: August, 2011 in San Jose, Costa Rica
search for Secretary General almost complete
New program being developed to integrate UN advocacy with national and local activities
international WILPF's website will have a new URL soon
Advancing Women Peacemakers Project, celebrating Jane Addam's 150th birthday and the 10th anniversary of the passing of United Nation Security Council Resolution 1325nited
update on national section: Ellen Schwartz, new US Section Treasurer (in the position less than a month). One of her primary goals is sorting out our membership records and ensuring renewal notices go out and accurate lists are available to all branches
update from Jane Addams Peace Association: the Jane Addams Children's Book Awards is a great way to promote peace education and expand recognition of WILPF among librarians and parents. Branches can buy sets of the award winners at a discount and donate them to libraries, community centers, and schools. Santa Cruz Branch created bookplates that permanently explain that the books were donated by WILPF.
update from Membership Council: a self-organized group of WILPF members from across the country. Concerned about the lack of accurate membership lists. Shared copies of an article that appeared in the Winter, 2009 edition of Peace & Freedom. Update was cut short by additional explanation of the roots of the Advancing Women Peacemakers Project.
lunch, followed by Raging Grannies songs
presentation of reasons peace activists should be vegans by Paula Rochelle, who coordinated all food for the event

Why WILPF? Why Now?

2010-02-27T10:54:00.000-08:00

I am attending the Northern California WILPF Cluster Meeting in Palo Alto. Below is my report on international WILPF.

Last summer, I started a global conversation among WILPFers about the meaning of our organization. Some people took this as a jumping off point for further criticism of the organization, others weighed in with reminders of the purpose of our organization as outlined in our international constitution and by-laws.

Get five WILPFers in a room, and you're bound to end up with ten opinions. I'm not sure we, as members of the League from California, will come to agreement today, but I'd like to offer a forward looking perspective based on my work on the Secretary General Search Committee, my participation in the International Board Meeting in January, and my eleven years of activism in the US Section.

Political advocacy can feel the most relevant when dealing directly with a local issue - for example, a local military recruiter pushing their “college” deals at the local high school; or the local utilities company pushing chemicals into the public water supply. These are extremely legitimate and important issues that must be countered. Through WILPF, we have the ability to tie these local issues to international treaties, like the International Rights of the Child. By connecting to an international sisterhood, we can learn from our sisters overseas, and coordinate our work so that every time we act on a local issue, we know that our sisters in Costa Rica and Japan are struggling with similar concerns, and that together – drop by drop – we will change the way governments enforce international treaties and we'll ensure those international laws are written from a feminist / peace-building perspective.

By nature, I'm a critical person. So I completely understand the instinct to focus on what's wrong and to be critical of the presumed centers of power in WILPF. I also try to understand the desire to support the peace & justice movement in general. And I definitely understand being overwhelmed by all there is to do as volunteers; my own branch has been on life support for several years and I often wonder if I should have been focusing my time re-energizing my branch rather than helping WILPF at the national and international level.

There are ways in which I'm biased. I think we need to learn from good examples and work to strengthen our capacity, through tools like SMART campaign planning and work plans. Next year, we'll have both a national and international Congress and we need to work towards building bridges of cooperation domestically and with our Latin American sisters (and indeed all sections) prior to those meetings.

Several staff members have moved on in the last few months – and soon all of those openings will be filled. Though I consider Susi Snyder among my closest WILPF sisters, I am so excited about the new Secretary General. The Search Committee went through a vigorous process of reviewing resumes and interviewing three finalists. We coordinated Skype calls across three continents – Los Angeles, Sweden, Berlin, and Tokyo. And we recommended a candidate to the Executive Committee who will raise the profile of WILPF internationally and help announce to the world that we are starting a new chapter in our history.

Make no mistake – members are not the only critics of WILPF. At the international level, funders and sister NGOs have already written our epitaph. People have suggested that our highly successful UN projects, Reaching Critical Will and Peace Women should break away from WILPF and become separate NGOs. Thankfully, none of our current leaders agrees with that idea and under the leadership of our incredible UN Office Director Anjie Rosga, the NGO community is beginning to understand how the projects are connected to our organization as a whole. Additionally, she has worked with members and interns to develop a new international program that concretely connects WILPF's UN advocacy with local activism.

As we move closer to our 100th anniversary, it's time to make a choice: it's time to work together, to build a stronger WILPF, to move our institution to the forefront of change, to allow WILPF to lead the way towards a better future. I've been working through WILPF for 11 years because I believe in the power of our women-led organization. I believe that we're stronger together than our individual parts. As exciting as the work of some of your branches is, it is our collective power, as an international league, that gives us our unique strength and promise.

5 January: Campaign Planning Workshop

2010-02-06T15:46:00.000-08:00

The second day of the board meeting began with a communications workshop, presented by Pia Johansson (Swedish Section Information Officer), Susi Snyder (WILPF Secretary General), and me. Prior to the presentation, we had a lot of help from Anjie Rosga, our UN Office Director.

Actually, communications workshop is a misnomer for what we did. Having experience in WILPF, we felt it was important to take a step back and provide a global view of campaigning that we might all agree upon and utilize in the future. Many people are familiar with the SMART acronym (Strategic, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely). First, Pia and Susi provided examples of SMART campaigns from WILPF's work in the recent past. Then, I used a presentation I found on the web as the basis of our explanation of SMART. I also wanted to provide some advice based on my years as the US Section Program Chair, so I added in some key points about why education cannot be the primary goal of a political advocacy campaign. Next, the attendees broke up into small groups to design SMART campaigns around upcoming UN events. Each group reported out to the larger meeting. Susi, Pia, and I provided feedback on their plans and then the group provided feedback on the workshop.

Below is the presentation from the workshop. I've updated the template and added the WILPF logo and posted the presentation on Slideshare.net:

Campaign Planning by WILPF

View more presentations from C.J. Minster.

5 January:Mosques, Bhadra Fort, Hindu Temple

2010-01-21T20:08:00.000-08:00

On Tuesday, our morning excursion began at the Juma Masjid.

Description: "At the eastern side of Teen Darwaza, Juma Masjid is one of the most beautiful mosques in India. AHmed SHah built the grand edifice in 1423 A.D. from the items ransomed from the demolished HIndu and Jain temples.

Built in yellow sand stones, this marvelous mosque has a combination of Hindu and Muslim styles of architecture. There are about 260 columns within the mosque to protect its roof."

Photo of some of the intricate inlaid stone work within the mosque.

Detail view of the front of the mosque. All carving was done by hand.

Ahmedabad is a city of gates. This is one of its gates.

The Bhadrakali Temple is housed in the Bhadra Fort. Description: "It is dedicated to Hindu goddess, incarnation of goddess Kali. This Hindu sanctum was built in 1411 A.D. during Maratha rule in Ahmedabad." The outside of the temple is flanked by statues of a penguin and a rabbit.

Here is a view of the Bhadra Fort from within the city: Description: "Among very eminent tourist destinations in Ahmedabad, Bhadra Fort is the most prestigious one. The royal fort, built by Ahmed Shah (founder of the city), had added charm to the city of Ahmedabad."

The final destination of our morning excursion was the Sidi Syed Mosque. Description given: "The Sidi Syed Mosque, built in 1573, is one of the most famous mosques of Ahmedabad. The mosque was built by Sidi Saiyyed, who was a slave of the Sultan of Ahmedabad.

The mosque is entirely articulated. The world famous 'jalis' in the mosque are taken from a temple. The rear wall is filled with square stone pierced panels in geometrical designs. The two bays flanking the central aisle have reticulated stone slabs carved in designs of intertwined trees and foliage and a palm motif." The mosque had a blue door on its side with intricate carving above it.

4 January: Dance Program by Dr. Kajal Muley

2010-01-20T21:45:00.000-08:00

Author's note: originally, I was going to skip the other cultural events, to try to get my thoughts about the IB meeting up as quickly as possible. However, I was so impressed by the Indian Section's understanding of the intersections between cultural and politics, and I want to honor the work that they did to bring us a complete program by describing as much as possible. I apologize that my work schedule does not allow me to complete this reporting faster.

On Monday night, we returned to the auditorium for a classical dance program, developed by Dr. Kajal Muley. Dr. Muley received her doctorate from Gujurat Vidhyapith in "Attainment of Peace Through Music." It is such a pleasure to know that the interconnection between art and society is taken so seriously in Ahmedabad. Dr. Muley and her students performed four dances and provided a written explanation of the program.

Dr. Muley performed the first solo item, "Tal - Tintal (16 mantras)." The written description is: "Starting with Ganesh Vandana, followed by Amad, Toda, Tukda, etc."

The second dance, Paramparik Kathak, was performed by students. The description is: "Performing technical part of classical Kathak which is a pure dance form. Its contents are Paran, Parmelu, Chakradhar, Kavit, Palta, & Tihai."

Thumri, the third dance, was performed by Dr. Muley and her student. The description: "Thumri is the Bhava Portion of classical Kathak. Words of Thumri are "Biraj mein Hori Kaise Khelungi mein Savariya Ke Sung." In India Holi is the festival of colours, this thumri depicts how th Gopis will play colours with Lord Krishna."

The final piece, Maa Kalika Stuti, was performed by the students. It was a very striking piece, with multiple group poses. Together, the dancers created the image of a single god, complete with other-worldly eyes. The description: "In this program the last item will be a dance related to women Empowerment. The words of the song are "Mata Kalika....." which depicts the various images of Maa Shakti."

4 January: Presidents' Report

2010-01-19T22:14:00.001-08:00

The WILPF International Co-Presidents provided copies of their report to attendees on 3 January. Monday afternoon, they opened the meeting up to discussion of the report. Unfortunately, I did not have time to finish reading the report before this section of the meeting (partially because I gave my copy to another meeting attendee before I had a chance to read it).

You can read the President's Report on the WILPF international website.

It provides a quite thorough review of political events, the work of WILPF, and the current areas that need to be addressed. Several board members objected to the way current events were described in the report. Apparently, it is not appropriate to describe how governments describe the reasons for their actions. Personally, I believe we need to fully understand the rationale given for government actions, so that we can accurately refute erroneous reasoning, rather than simply speaking from a place of authority that doesn't acknowledge alternative viewpoints.

In any event, the discussion of the agenda and the President's Report did not leave time for the previously scheduled discussions of the Secretary General Report, Executive Committee Vacancy, and Regional Meetings. Those items were moved to later in the week.

4 January: Orientation, Agenda Review

2010-01-19T21:29:00.000-08:00

It felt quite weird to have a logistics and orientation session at 4:30 pm on Monday, after a full day of activities. While I really appreciated the time spent reviewing examples of effective WILPF work from around the world, I wonder if we have a universal understanding of the consensus process and how much time is needed to develop consensus. My observation throughout the week was that the board developed agreement on proposals through a combination of consensus building and voting. I am hopeful that we can reach an agreement on our process prior to our next meeting. The reason I'm spending time writing about this is that as a convener of a standing committee, I am a non-voting member of the International Board. I think this means I can participate in the consensus process, but I cannot vote. When polls are used to check for consensus, it makes it difficult for me to know whether it is legal for me to express my opinion.

My technical questions are the most benign of the queries that rose during this part of the meeting. Several representatives from European sections spoke about their disagreement with the schedule's structure. They were convinced that having a communications workshop before talking about the meat of our program was putting the cart before the horse. (I tried to explain that the workshop was developed to give all participants a baseline understanding of campaign planning before we got into detailed conversations about our program.)

It's difficult for me to attempt to report on Monday afternoon in an unbiased way. I feel that I understand all sides of the argument: people who brought up concerns via our board listserv felt their concerns were not fully answered by the Executive Committee. The ExCom felt that people who objected to the proposed agenda did not offer an alternative (i.e. what areas should be cut to allow time for additional conversations). While the agenda was ultimately adopted, the process showed some interesting divisions:
--members of the International Board do not have a unified understanding of the purpose of the board
--members of the International Board do not agree on what makes WILPF unique, nor do we all agree on the political priorities of our League

Again, I'm hopeful that we can work through these differences. By working with my international WILPF sisters for a week, I've learned that there are many things that divide us. It's not just the divisions created by age and nationality. We also come to this work from different perspectives. For example, since I have a BA in Peace & Justice Studies, I have a strong appreciation for the role of civilian institutions in creating a peaceful world. Therefore, I'm committed to supporting the structural health of the League as much as I support its political aims. Having served as the national program chair of the US Section, I'm not as interested in arguing the relative importance of one plank of our program over another plank. There's a simple reason for my perspective: regardless of how much we debate whether to focus on the economic causes of war or the environmental effects of nuclear weapons and nuclear power, our members will decide individually which area to put their time into. I believe we need to develop international programs that provide a unified theoretical framework for distinct local, national, and regional projects.

To do this properly, our local program leaders need to be connected to our national program leaders and they need to be connected to our international working groups. Being connected to the different levels of WILPF doesn't have to be a huge time commitment: often it simply means signing up for a listserv and agreeing to respond in a timely manner to messages received. Of course, our communication system can be a huge barrier to women whose mother tongue is not English. But for those of us who are fluent in English, we simply have no excuse for not connecting our work to the work of our WILPF sisters around the country and around the world.

4 January:Women's Human Rights Mechanisms

2010-01-19T20:49:00.000-08:00

The goal of this workshop was to describe the way women's human rights mechanisms were utilized in a local conflict situation to provide an example for how to utilize these mechanisms in other situations.

First, let me say I truly appreciate the work of the WILPF India Section for the people of Kandhamal, Orissa. They provided an extremely thorough presentation of their work. First, we learned about the history of the state of Orissa, including some of the reasons ethnic violence erupted, through a PowerPoint presentation. (I'm hopeful that the presentation will be available in the near future on the web.)

Then, WILPF India President Dr. Ila Pathak, WILPF India Vice President Dr. Pushpa Motiyani and WILPF International President Annelise Ebbe described their experiences touring camps where internally displaced people are living.

The complete report of this work on behalf of the women attacked in Kandhamal, Orissa is available on the WILPF international website. (pdf) It provides background information, reports from three IDP camps, recommended legal actions, and conclusions. Here's the key take-away: citizens must hold their government accountable for living up to the international treaties they sign. WILPF has systemically pointed out how India is not living up to its commitments for protecting civilians during times of violence, nor does the country have a good process for integrating women into the conflict resolution process.

Unfortunately, no discussion occurred on how to replicate this example nor on how the international WILPF community could utilize the report in support future work of the WILPF India in support of the women of Kandhamal. I am hopeful that we will begin these discussions via email and conference call.

4 January: Seminar on Non-Violence and South Asian Realities

2010-01-17T18:17:00.000-08:00

In the morning, we were joined by local WILPF members and members of the Gujurati NGO community for a seminar on non-violence and South Asian realities. During the first hour, there were introductions: of the leaders of WILPF India and WILPF international, along with the panel of speakers.

We also received a written history of the Indian section written by Krishna Ahoojapatel, the IB member from India. I hope that this history will be available soon on the international website.

Due to time constraints, the seminar speakers felt it was prudent to speak very quickly in order to complete their remarks during the allotted time frame. Unfortunately, it was very difficult to follow the seminar because everyone was speaking so quickly. Some things that I was able to discern:

There is some discrepancy on what constitutes South Asia. Some people are expansive, including all countries from Afghanistan to Sri Lanka to Nepal. The smallest definition is Pakistan and India. Usually, it refers to Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan.

South Asia has a common history, but rarely had a common government. It was a political dispute that led to the creation of India and Pakistan following independence from Britain. (Though this could be construed as politicized history, it's generally believed that the leaders of independence could not agree on a power-sharing structure, leading the Muslim leaders to agitate for their own country - hence the creation of Pakistan. However, it is false to assume that all, or even most, Muslims moved to Pakistan following the division. In fact, India is a vibrant mix of multiple religious groups, most prominently Hindus and Muslims.)

Originally, Pakistan had a Western and Eastern side. Urdu was declared the only official language, which discriminated against the citizens of Eastern Pakistan and was one of the reasons for the war of independence and the creation of the state of Bangladesh in 1971. [Aside: I heard an interesting description of this history from a Bangladeshi woman in the Singapore airport who was on her way home to happily participate in an arranged marriage.]

An interesting point was made by Shri Prakashbhai Shah (sp?), the journalist on the panel: India's democracy, especially its vibrant journalism, creates the space for the free flowing of ideas and emergence of new theories and practices not seen in the West.

Dr. Indira Hirway, the economist on the panel also hinted that there are economic theories and practical applications being created in India that could be replicated in other places, but said there wasn't enough time to go into details.

Social scientist and gender expert Dr. Kamla Bhasin was also on the panel. Some of her published work (in Hindi and English)is available from Sangat, South Asia Gender Activists and Trainers. Dr. Bhasin was also the South Asia coordinator for the 1,000 Women for the Nobel Peace Prize 2005 campaign.

Dr. Puspha Motiyani, Vice President of WILPF India introduced the panel, which was moderated by Vice Chancellor Dr. Sudarshan Iyengar.

I really hope we have the opportunity for further collaboration with the intellectuals featured on the panel. I also hope we have the opportunity to learn more about the academic and political work of our WILPF India sisters. Dr. Pushpa Motiyani, as an expert in Gandhian philosophy and feminist activist would be a perfect candidate for a US speaking tour.

4 January: Excursion to the Shaking Minarets and Kankaria Lake

2010-01-17T17:06:00.000-08:00

The Gujurat branch organized local excursions Monday through Thursday from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. These voluntary trips (which cost 50 rupees each, approximately $1) allowed participants a chance to see the highlights of Ahmedabad tourism while participating fully in the IB meeting. I really appreciate the time and effort they put into planning these trips: not only did they hire a bus to take us from place to place, but local volunteers were our docents and took the time to do test drives beforehand to ensure the traffic would allow us to get from place to place in the allotted time frame.

When we registered, we received a WILPF India IB meeting tote bag, a notepad holder created by SEWA (Self Employed Women's Association), a pad of paper, a recycled pen, and detailed information on the morning outings.

Here is the description of the Shaking Minarets: "It is believed that the mosque was constructed by Sidi Bashir, a slave of Sultan Shah. The mosque was completed in 1452.

There are two minarets in the mosque, each of which is three stories tall with carved balconies. The Shaking Minarets of Sidi Bashir's Mosque remains a mystery till today. Shake one minaret and the other resonates in harmony while the interconnecting terrace stands still. The actual cuase of this is unknown. This phenomenon was first observed in the 19th century by Monier M Williams, a British Sanskrit scholar."

We received a tour of the mosque from its care-taker, who told us the job has been in his family for generations. I really appreciated the time he took to show us the architectural details. Also, as the week went on, I would learn to appreciate the fact that he was such a gracious host to a group of women, since many mosques do not allow women inside.

After leaving the mosque, we were taken to Kankaria Lake: "Kankaria is a polygonal artificial lake. It is the biggest lake of the city of Ahmedabad, Gujurat. It has an approximate circumference of 1.4 miles (2.3 km). Built by Sultan Kutubuddin in 15th century A.D> This bewitching lake has intricate sluice gates and 34 sides which were completed in 1451. Its ancient name is Haui-E-Kutub. It also consists of a water purfication system but that is lost with time. At one point of the circular lake, there opens a walkway which later merges into a garden called Nagina Wadi (means jewel garden in Urdu) that is located in the center of the lake.

Mughal Emperor Jahangir and his Empress wife Noor Jahan frequently visited the lake. It now stands as a local picnic spot and a space for joggers."

After taking a group photo at the lake, we returned to the campus of Gandhi University for breakfast, the morning seminar, and the beginning of the board meeting.

3 January: Gertrud Baer Seminar and Dance Recital

2010-01-11T04:43:00.000-08:00

Editor's Note: Internet access was not available for IB participants on the campus of Gujurat Vidyapith. I am back in Los Angeles and will blog as my schedule allows with some details from the meeting. The minutes of the meeting will provide the most comprehensive report, but the Executive Committee will need time to compile and approve them before they are published.

Unfortunately, I did not attend the Gertrud Baer seminar. It was attended by many members of WILPF India and all international WILPFers who were on campus at the time. It began in the morning with an introduction of the leaders of WILPF India and WILPF International. The seminar itself began with an introduction to WILPF: Susi Snyder gave her famous presentation on WILPF's structure. I hope this portion was videotaped and/or the information is now available in a presentation. One of my goals is to make all presentations from the meeting available not only on WILPF's website, but also on Slideshare. By distributing our information on community platforms across the net, we'll increase our visibility and potentially attract new members and new funders.

The participants were broken up into small groups to answer 3 questions:
1. Why join WILPF?
2. What would you say to an older member of WILPF?
3. What would you say to a newer member of WILPF?

The discussions got quite lively and a lot of new energy was found for membership recruitment and retention. I look forward to the written report from the seminar.

Unfortunately, Young WILPF (Y-WILPF) was not represented at the meeting. There was some age diversity in the participants, but the international networking group for younger members did not meet during in India, nor was its future discussed in depth. I know from discussions with the WILPF US representative to the international Y-WILPF organizing committee, Kristina Mader, that it has been difficult for US Y-WILPFers to maintain contact with their international sisters. I hear that young members are quite active in some of our sections (including the UK and Sweden), but not as active in other sections. As a reminder, on the international level the definition of "young" is left to the interpretation of individual participants. In the US, the network is available to all WILPFers 35 and younger.

I arrived in the evening and was able to join my sister WILPFers for a delicious vegetarian meal and then attend a cultural program. The entire hall filled up with local people, and they graciously reserved the first two rows for us. The program consisted of folk and modern dance, performed by students and it was just wonderful. The evening ended with singing the Indian national anthem.

Transitions in WILPF

2010-01-09T19:40:00.000-08:00

WILPF's Secretary General, Susi Snyder, will be leaving her position effective Janaury 15. The Executive Committee, recognizing that her participation in our governance process could not be replicated, requested that she attend the International Board meeting in India. I had the privilege of rooming with her during the meeting.

I wish we had more time for the giddy chatter we shared on my first night at the Vidyapeeth. Instead, her nights were filled with ad hoc meetings and our mornings were filled with incredible sight-seeing journeys coordinated by the Gujurat branch.

I've known Susi for seven incredible years. She came to a US Section board meeting when she was transitioning from being the director of our Reaching Critical Will project to being the head of our UN office. The leadership and vision she exhibited seven years ago have inspired me to continue putting my volunteer time into WILPF. We share a common belief in the power and need for our incredible League.

We WILPFers talk sometimes about the pressure put on our staff, but I don't know if we fully understand it. Susi has been the only full-time staff person in the Geneva office for the last 1.5 years. She represented WILPF at the UN in Geneva, pushing open the Conference on Disarmament to allow space for NGOs to speak, coordinated our sections, participated on the Executive Committee, and oversaw our UN office in New York. I've seen the toll this has taken on her emotionally and physically. So, when she announced her resignation, though I knew it was a blow for WILPF, I recognized it as a healthy step for my dear friend.

I also believe that our League's true strength lies in the coordinated efforts of thousands of women across the world, not in any one individual leader. Though Susi is among our brightest, shining stars, she's allowed us to develop individually and collectively so that we can take the next step, building our League to even greater heights as we approach our 100th anniversary. Plus, she's still a member, so I remain hopeful that she'll continue to be active in the years to come.

Below is a short video in honor of Susi's departure. It was compiled by our UN Office Director Anjie Rosga. We had hoped to surprise Susi by showing it at the IB meeting, but technical difficulties made that impossible. I can't bring myself to repeat the title Anjie gave the piece, because I refuse to believe this is an end; rather, another door has opened.

Farewell Susi! from WILPF-UNO on Vimeo.

International Board Meeting, Gandhi University

2010-01-07T01:02:00.000-08:00

It's hard to know whether to try to describe everything that's already happened at the meeting or get back to the proceedings. I'm at an internet cafe across the street and I'm sure I've missed some important events by taking this time to report back to the US Section.

We've been represented by five people: Laura Roskos, our co-president is the alternate IB member since Audley Green could not attend. Nancy Munger, our other co-president is also here. Nancy Ramsden, our international treasurer is here, as is Joan Bazar, the editor of International Peace Update. I'm here as the convener of the Communications Committee.

I co-lead a workshop on Tuesday and had a successful committee meeting yesterday. I'm also trying to write the story of this meeting on my laptop and plan to post more detailed updates once I get back to the States on Saturday.

I am so grateful for this opportunity to represent WILPF US and am so excited about our future. Thank goodness we exist and thank goodness we're growing towards our 100th anniversary. Yesterday, Amparo gave an exciting presentation on the emerging Mexico Section. We also had an Americas regional meeting, and Sandra gave a great talk on what's happening in Colombia. So much is happening and I wish you could all be here. I also wish we could stream video from our meetings, though that might be tricky since several people do not want to be on film. I think we need discussion about this because to me, it's important to utilize all available forms of communication to spread our events to members who are unable to attend.

US to Escalate Destabilization of Afghanistan

2009-12-03T22:37:00.000-08:00

Tuesday night was a turning point in the Obama presidency. All weekend, details of his "plan" leaked out in the political media. So I had plenty of advanced warning that like many foolish presidents before him, Obama thinks he can save the world by occupying it with the US military. So many people are so hopeful for the leadership he supposedly offers. Sure, he's said some pretty rhetoric about nuclear disarmament. But what does any of that talk - or his Nobel Peace Prize mean when the man does not recognize that Human Beings Live in Afghanistan. He talked about the Taliban and al Qaeda, but never about poverty or corruption, war lords or illegitimate presidents. And then he had the gall to end his speech hoping that we all join in unity, like we did after 9-11.

Let's be clear about something: if you have to rely on pandering to the fears created by the horrific terrorist attack on US soil in 2001 to unify your audience, then you've failed to make a persuasive argument.

Yet, he did. And there are so many people who think he's right. I'll admit something: eight years ago, I thought the US military would be useful to bring women out of the shadows of Afghanistan and create space for all people of the country to create a real nation. How foolish I was. And how foolish the US political elite continues to be.

Obama's Afghanistan strategy relies on everything that is wrong with international relations. IR focuses on Power: you must be a war lord, terrorist, state leader, or corporation to be meaningful in a discussion based on "realist" theory. The men who created this paradigm thought so highly of their beliefs that anyone daring to oppose them were derided as "idealists."

I'm tired of these standards of discourse. Poverty, political corruption, and social instability have never been resolved by military occupation. Flooding Afghanistan with English speaking US soldiers and US-paid mercenaries serves one purpose: it props up the corrupt, illegitimate Karzai government and gives carte blanche to warlords wielding power in the name of fighting terror.

I accepted the reality of international relations seven years ago, when I made the decision to stop pursuing a career in the foreign service. The paradigm shifts needed to create real human security are so massive: non-violent social upheaval is simply the only way to make it happen. And I can't help move the world towards needed paradigm shifts from a job serving the US Empire.

Tuesday's speech depressed me. It's depressing not just because the most recent Nobel Peace Prize winner fundamentally does not understand how to create global peace. It's depressing because to explain the faults in his reasoning requires a level of sophistication in political discourse that simply does not exist in the US mainstream media. The only place I've heard a bit of common sense on the topic was Josef Joffe, a German publisher/editor on "To The Point" explaining that Europeans, after experiencing two horrific wars on their soil in the 20th century, think diplomacy is the best way to solve international disputes and create nation states.

Remember, Europeans did not find these beliefs by sitting in ivory towers, thinking up ways to rule the world. The true horror of war, the disgusting indiscriminate nature of aerial bombings and painfully slow path to reconstruction taught them the simple truth: War Is Never The Answer. Period. Full Stop.

You may call me an idealist, but I believe I am the true realist. I have seen the core of human nature, I have seen the destruction of war and I say firmly: the US military is not a liberating force. The US fails to live up to UN Security Council Resolution 1325, which mandates women's equal participation in conflict resolution. Fighting terrorists through mercenaries, the US military, and corrupt warlords does not create human security for US citizens or Afghans.

The US Government has chosen the path to further destabilization of Afghanistan.

At this crucial moment in world history, will you silently ascent to the senseless deaths of more US soldiers and Afghans? Or will you take a stand for real justice?

Things to do:

Sign the Code Pink petition against Endless Occupation.
Join Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. We work tirelessly to challenge and change the root causes of war and injustice at the local, national, and international level.
Explain your opposition to the hopeless military escalation to your friends, family, and co-workers.
Chastise mainstream media for excluding articulate anti-war voices from their political talk shows. Ask how balanced a panel is when no one on it rejects the paradigm of IR realism.
Find a way to create peace in your own life so that your anger doesn't consume you: depression, though a logical response to this endless war, only poisons you.

Corporate Personhood: Reflections by Jim Allison

2009-11-21T13:27:00.000-08:00

In a recent TV show on the U.S. Supreme Court, Associate Justice David Breyer claimed with evident pride that the court would never hand down a decision without explanation. No, said Breyer, the court took care to explain its rationale for each and every decision.

Like any WILPF student of the genesis of corporate power in America, I thought immediately of the glaring exception to Breyer’s Law: the Supreme Court decision of 1886, in Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific R.R. (pdf link) This is the decision that became the precedent for corporate person hood, a holy grail that corporate lawyers had sought in vain for decades. It was the way to evade the interference of the state governments that had always chartered, controlled and regulated corporations.

With the Santa Clara decision corporations could and did claim the 14th Amendment protections that Congress had clearly framed for the benefit of freed slaves, not corporations. ". . . nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Those protections, firmly embedded in law, enabled corporations to become the dominant force we see today in every phase of American life, from economics and politics to war and peace.

Such a momentous decision must surely provide a clear example of Breyer's Law. If we read the decision handed down in that case, we must surely find a closely reasoned explanation of the corporation’s metamorphosis from legal entity to person hood. But we find no such explanation.

The decision itself is about taxes and fences, not person hood. The only reference to person hood is in the decision's head note, a summary written by a clerk, with the approval of the court, to the effect that all justices thought corporations were entitled to constitutional person hood protections. Moreover, the history of the decision reveals that the court had instructed the litigants that it did not want to hear any arguments about the question of person hood.

To this day, the court has provided no rationale for corporate person hood, even though many members have expressed grave doubts about that status. The skeptics include liberals Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, conservative William Rehnquist, and most recently Sonia Sotomayor. The issue is still very much alive. Soon the court will decide a case that could suddenly remove all fetters on corporate campaign contributions. The basis for the suit is the First Amendment protection of freedom of speech, which corporations claim as an entitlement of corporate person hood.

If the likes of Breyer, Black, Douglas, Rehnquist and Sotomayor are correct, the 1886 court was a curious group indeed. Its evident leader in the Santa Clara decision was Chief Justice Benjamin Waite. What could possibly explain his behavior?

The archives of the Library of Congress contain 22 lineal feet of Waite’s papers. I wonder whether anyone has searched those papers for an explanation of the Santa Clara decision--a momentous one in American history and, if Breyer is any guide, a most peculiar departure from Supreme Court tradition.

Jim Allison is a member of the WILPF Corporations v. Democracy Committee and a leader of the WILPF Bloomington, Indiana branch.

Further Reading
Read about the amicus brief WILPF signed in the case of Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission, urging the Supreme Court not to overturn laws preventing corporations from making political contributions in federal elections.

WILPF has developed material to help you campaign locally to abolish corporate personhood.

WILPF also developed a ten session study guide to understanding corporate power.

Breakthroughs at the UN, Negotiated by WILPF's Staff (and sister NGOs)

2009-09-15T21:12:00.000-07:00

Breaking News from the UN, from WILPF UN Office Director Anjie Rosga, PhD:

It's been a big day in New York City as the General Assembly opened, with several big news events of relevance for WILPF members:

1) UN mission finds evidence of war crimes by both sides in Gaza conflict

A U.N. investigation concluded Tuesday that both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Gaza committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity, raising the prospect that officials may seek prosecution in the International Criminal Court. Read the AP article on NPR's website.

2) New General Assembly President opens session with call for UN reform
The General Assembly opened its 64th annual session today with its new President, Ali Treki of Libya, calling for reform of the United Nations with an expanded Security Council representing full geographic diversity and an Assembly that has the ability to implement its resolutions.

3) UN to establish single new agency to deal with rights of women
(This was a major success for WILPF's PeaceWomen Project which has been working for more than three years with other organizations here in New York and elsewhere to push for this important dimension of UN system-wide reform -- hats off to PeaceWomen's Director Sam Cook for all her good work as part of the GEAR-NY [Gender Equality Architecture Reform-New York] Lobbying Group!)

4) Ban exhorts world to seize momentum to reach disarmament goals
(Ray Acheson, Director of WILPF's Reaching Critical Will Project has been similarly hard at work, together with Susi Snyder, WILPF's Secretary General, in various efforts to support forward momentum leading up to the 24th September Security Council Summit on nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation -- check out www.reachingcriticalwill.org for news from the recent conference in Mexico City where Ray gave a well-received talk.)

What are the statues in Washington D.C. telling the next generation?

2009-04-30T13:45:00.000-07:00

Walking through the historic places of our nation's capital for the past week has been an eye-opening experience in many ways. It was the first time I had a chance to do so as a discerning adult, and what I saw was very different from what I remembered from childhood. My memories from earlier visits included pride, and beauty, and valor. My experience last week was overwhelmingly shame and anger, as I perceived the relentless paternalism, racism, and militarism of iconic public art.

My first shock came while walking through Lincoln Park, near the William Penn House where we were staying. The Emancipation Statue, the centerpiece of the park, is a study in racism. Lincoln's facial expression is pure patronizing self-satisfaction. He holds a look of concern, but does not deign to look directly at the figure of Arthur Alexander - the last slave to be captured under the Fugitive Slave Act, and as a resident of Missouri not freed by the Emancipation Proclamation - instead gesturing vaguely as if to pat the kneeling Alexander on the head. Alexander, in contrast, is portrayed as a blind animal, shackled and half-naked. His eyes are blank, and he seems to grope his way forward, entirely dependent on the guidance of his "benefactor." It also, apparently, barely looked like him.
The tragedy of this portrayal is the fact that this statue was funded entirely through donations by freed slaves, to honor Lincoln - the first five dollars for the statue were donated by Charlotte Scott, through her former master. However, the fundraising was run by white people, from the Western Sanitary Commission in St. Louis, and it was designed and sculpted by Thomas Ball, a white man so racist he refused to use an African model in designing the statue. Frederick Douglass spoke at it's dedication ceremony, stating clearly that the statue "showed the Negro on his knees when a more manly attitude would have been indicative of freedom." This comment, incidentally, was not reported at the time in any of the newspapers.

This is just one example of the "historic" and "iconic" images I found peppering our nation's capital. Yuck. Justice would be better served by tearing the thing down.

Hate Update

2009-04-29T20:07:00.000-07:00

Great strides are being made in many areas of human rights and equality - we now have a president who has publicly condemned torture (though I have some opinions as to whether it was appropriate to issue a de-facto pardon of CIA personnel involved in it), who has declared nuclear disarmament a priority, assembled the most diverse cabinet ever, and prioritized multilateral engagement. We also must note that this president - President Barack Hussein Obama - is racially identified as "black" and has a common Muslim middle name (though he himself is Christian - and his religion shouldn't really matter), something that seemed an impossibility just a few short years ago. These things make me very happy, and very hopeful that the general upward trend toward peace and justice will continue. However, we are not there yet. And as we have seen with advancements in the past, the backlash is severe. It is how we deal with this "backlash" that will create the new standards.

In the past month alone, we have seen gay marriage legalized in Vermont in an historic vote of the legislature overriding the governor's veto, and in Ohio through a decision of the Supreme Court. Just today, the New Hampshire senate passed a bill that would guarantee civil marriages to gay couples, and will send their version back to the House, where a similar bill has already passed. Others may be close behind. However, the controversial Proposition 8, which passed narrowly in California, would retroactively nullify gay marriages already registered in the state. The marriage ban has been challenged in court - oral arguments were heard March 5th - and the decision is still pending.

In a precedent-setting recognition of gender plurality, a jury soundly rejected hatred as a defense for hate crimes. The man who killed Angie Zapata, a young transgender woman, was sentenced to life in prison under a new Colorado hate crimes statute. While the tragedy of her death remains with all of us, it helps to know that her family was able to obtain some bit of justice. It is my hope and belief that this verdict represents a move toward a system of justice that no longer unquestioningly protects or attempts to justify the actions of those who lash out in hate, under any pretext.

JUST TODAY: The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the "Matthew Shepard Act," by a vote of 249 to 175, and will now pass it on to the Senate.

"The LLEHCPA will authorize the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute certain bias-motivated crimes based on the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability. Currently, the federal government can only investigate hate crimes motivated by the victim's race, color, religion, and national origin. It will also provide local authorities with more resources to combat hate crimes and give the federal government jurisdiction over prosecuting hate crimes in states where the current law is inadequate."

Unfortunately, there are still those who do not believe others who may be different from them should have the same rights and privileges. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) found a record number of active hate groups - 928, up from 888 in 2007 - in its 2008 annual report. It attributes this rise in activity to "the national immigration debate...the worsening recession, and Barack Obama's successful campaign to become the nation's first black president." Racial issues, as always, were at the forefront of hate group activity. The SPLC states:

"A key 2008 hate group trend was the increasing militancy of the extremist fringe of the Hebrew Israelite movement, whose adherents believe that Jews are creatures of the devil and that whites deserve death or slavery. These radical black supremacists have no love for Barack Obama, calling him a "house n*****" and a puppet of Israel. They preach to inner-city blacks that evil Jews are solely responsible for the recession. The rhetoric of white-skinned hate group leaders in 2008 was equally alarming. Last September, for example the cover of National Socialist magazine depicted then-presidential nominee Barack Obama in the crosshairs of a scope, with the headline "Kill This N*****?"

It is a sad reality that the United States has been home to some of the most brutal of hate-based propaganda in many categories, including gender, sexuality and gender identity, race, and immigrant status, among others. The struggle to de-legitimize such hate-based propaganda continues. But there is an uphill trend. We need to keep talking about it. We need to keep acting on what we know is right. And legislation and court decisions in favor of human and civil rights certainly can't hurt.

* I'm sure there is many a lively debate to be had about the use of the "N" word in journalism. It is my personal choice never to use it, though it is spelled out in the SPLC source material.

UPDATE: The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act has been introduced to the Senate as S. 909 (Hate Crimes Prevention Act).

DC Days (April 28)

2009-04-29T07:33:00.000-07:00

The truly big news of the day was the abrupt switch of Senator Arlen Specter (PA-formerly Republican) to the Democratic Party. This leaves the Democrats one member shy of a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, opening up the opportunity to push harder for legislation in areas (such as healthcare, etc) that were sorely neglected under the Bush administration and the Republican-dominated congresses of the Clinton years.

Today I had the chance to meet with an aide in Representative DeFazio's office (D-OR), who was very knowledgeable about nuclear issues, and supportive of almost all ANA's asks. Later, another activist from ANA and I spoke with a researcher at the Congressional Research Service, with whom we were able to have a lively dialogue about what tradeoffs would be permissible in order to gain the votes needed to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). This is an issue that raises serious concerns about the effectiveness and implementation of international treaties. Since the United States has already signed and ratified the NPT, we have committed to engage in good faith in negotiations toward total nuclear disarmament. Most will agree we have not as of yet done that. However, the statements of President Obama strongly supporting this aim give us an opportunity that has been closed off for the last eight years to push forward toward ratification of the CTBT, which would serve as a very good deterrent to other countries which may wish to pursue nuclear weapons, and stop us from "improving" our arsenal in the United States. The problem as I see it lies in the partisan bargaining that is how things are done here in DC. Some have said that in order to secure the 67 votes necessary to ratify the CTBT, a package deal must be offered that may include provisions inconsistent with the spirit of the CTBT, or our already-existing commitments under the NPT. This concerns me deeply, because the United States needs to lead the way - in good faith - toward disarmament. As President Obama has said, "as a nuclear power - as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon - the United States has a moral responsibility to act." This action should be unambiguous, and therefore must not be packaged with any other action that may lead to further development of nuclear technology.

DC Days Anti-Nuclear Lobbying (Monday, April 27)

2009-04-27T20:08:00.001-07:00

I'm writing from Washington, DC, where I am participating through WILPF's DISARM committee in the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability's annual "DC Days" lobbying week. Six dozen activists from all over the US (and a couple foreign countries) have come together here to lobby congress and the administration for nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, genuinely clean energy and more responsible storage and cleanup of sites contaminated with nuclear waste. Yesterday, we had an orientation and a couple workshops, which helped us to get oriented and learn about aspects of the issues we do not usually work with. ANA has prepared some fantastic fact sheets that will be delivered either during scheduled meetings or through the office of every member of congress and to many key departments of the Obama Administration.

Today, we held a press conference, and began meeting with legislators and administration officials. More tomorrow!

Dr. Masooda Jalal and 1325

2009-04-13T12:32:00.000-07:00

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, "reaffirming the important role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in peace-building, and stressing the importance of their equal participation and full involvement in all efforts for the maintenance and promotion of peace and security, and the need to increase their role in decision- making with regard to conflict prevention and resolution...urges Member States to ensure increased representation of women at all decision-making levels in national, regional and international institutions and mechanisms for the prevention, management, and resolution of conflict," very clearly calling for international backing of women like Dr. Masooda Jalal, the only Afghani woman to run for the presidency of her country in the last election cycle. She was interviewed in an article entitled "Afghan Women to Obama: We Must Be at the Table!" by Patricia DeGennaro for the Women's Media Center. Dr. Jalal offers a refreshingly new and very strong female voice for peacebuilding in Afghanistan. She continues to insist that her proper place (and the place of other women) is at the negotiating table, as promised by UNSCR 1325, and by common sense.

During our conversation, I asked her what she thought about U.S. policy and talking to the Taliban. She was defiant, saying she has no problem whatsoever with talking to the Taliban. “As long as women are included in the conversation,” she said, “we must be there sitting next to them, then we’ll see.”

She continued by saying, “the Taliban, the looters and warlords, the ‘illegals,’” as she calls them pointing out that they are also the drug lords that international forces are tying to eradicate, “are only powerful because we allowed them to be.”

Yet, the world governments continue to empower them instead of, well, her and others like her. We all stood by while some of the most notorious and brutal mujahidin or Afghan fighters took posts in the government—marginalizing Afghan scholars like Jalal who prefer to give the power to the people.

In ending this post, I would like to again stress the fact that while the international community and the United States have made much about the "plight of Afghani women" and the unconscionable suppression of their rights under the Taliban, very little has been done to engage them in creating a government that will better protect their lives and freedoms. The international community has been guilty of a pervasive paternalism that likes to talk about the protection of women, but still refuses them an equal place at the table, and the legitimacy they deserve as half of Afghanistan's population. This criticism could be expanded more generally to include almost every country in the world. Women like Dr. Jalal are deeply qualified and committed to changing this atrocious inequality of representation. Imagine what a world could be created if the international community actually followed the mandate of 1325. We can make it happen.

"Paying for War" - a song of cynical levity

2009-04-09T13:29:00.000-07:00

Paying for War

From Lexington to Concord to Yorktown, I pitched in;
My taxes for my country - we never called it sin.
Taxes went for Sherman's march, at Gettysburg for guns,
For armies and battalions, for forts and garrisons!

I paid to steal the land from the natives years ago;
My taxes went for war on the land of Mexico;
I paid for ships with guns to fight across the seas;
Make war against the Spanish, the Philippines to seize!

I pledged my firm allegiance to flag and country too;
My taxes helped pay for World War I as well as World War II;
Nagasaki vaporized and Hiroshima too;
I paid for atomic bombs and planes on which they flew!

Korea asked for taxes and also Vietnam;
And so I sent my taxes for the blood of the lamb;
And blood there was aplenty carpet bombing Laos;
But still I paid my taxes and never raised a fuss!

The cold war was expensive, my war tax did increase;
I paid them without protest, and said a prayer for peace;
Our first-strike Trident missiles, they kept me safe, you know;
I gladly paid for "star wars" - the Bible* tells me so!

My country keeps on calling for billions for Iraq;
To bomb Iraqi people and let our troops attack;
It's shock and awe, forever, instead of brotherhood**;
We must pay our war taxes, as every Christian*** should!

Poem copyright by David Ortman, 2007
Music copyright by J. Harold Moyer, 2007

*Substitute Qur'an, etc.
**Substitute sisterhood, etc
***Substitute Buddhist, Muslim, etc.

RCW: A Farewell to (a few) Arms

2009-04-09T11:40:00.000-07:00

Here is an article that was recently posted by Ray Acheson on the Reaching Critical Will blog.

After adeptly showing the defense budget "cuts" to be less than advertised, she gets to the meat of the issue:

Overall, the varying reactions to Gates’ proposed military budget are virtually devoid of any criticism of what the $534 billion is spent on—weapons of war. Weapons that are used in the wars that the United States instigates, wars which have another budget all their own. On the contrary, even those supposedly in support of arms control and disarmament have recommended the military stop wasting money on weapon systems they don’t use and spend it on weapons they do use. Further, no one seems to have questioned the need or right of the United States to use these weapons—that the US would need different types of weapons to fight new types of wars is accepted as fact. For all the talk of giving the military budget a “massive overhaul,” no one has referred to the distinction between offensive and non-offensive defence, the latter focusing on defence systems that protect a state rather than on armed attack against other states.

And no, missile “defence” is not a form of non-offensive defence, as its methods and means are inherently offensive. For example, as has even been argued by pro-missile “defence” advocates, “The mere fact that missile defense ships could be deployed to war zones as part of larger naval armadas gives them an immediately recognizable offensive dimension.” Further, as Mike Moore pointed out, “The infrastructure for a ballistic missile defense system is, in large measure, the same as that needed for an offensive anti-satellite system.”

Finally, as the military budget continues to grow even in a time of the global financial crisis, where is the money for everything else a country needs to survive going to come from? Why isn’t anybody asking that?

"We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation."

2009-04-04T10:12:00.000-07:00

Forty-two years ago today, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered a speech at New York City’s Riverside Church on the war of the time, the war in Vietnam. Listening to it yesterday, tears came to my eyes and my chest has yet to unclench, because I see that the same problems so explicitly and compassionately identified by Dr. King in 1967 are still, on this very day in 2009, ripping our country and our world apart. Though the United States has withdrawn combat troops from that country, the unjust waging of war by the United States continues unabated in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the U.S. government's unconscionable meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations against the interests of human beings stretches around the world.

Though the speech is too long to post here in its entirety, I would like to include a few notable quotes.

Dr. King, like WILPF, understood the interrelatedness of human rights, civil rights, and militarism.

"There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor -- both black and white -- through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So, I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."

"My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years -- especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent."

"This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote: 'Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism.'"

"The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality we will find ourselves organizing "clergy and laymen concerned" committees for the next generation.... We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy."

"In 1957, a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution....It is [here] that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. He said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, [sexism, homophobia] and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

"A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

"A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, 'This is not just.' The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

"America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war."

"We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight."

Legislative update

2009-04-02T13:40:00.000-07:00

Two pieces of legislation caught my eye recently. One, the Family Leave Insurance Act of 2009 (H. R. 1723), would expand coverage for workers who need to take time off for the birth of a child, illness of a family member, or other qualifying necessity. The other, the Afghanistan and Pakistan Reconstruction Opportunity Zones Act of 2009 (S.496), would authorize the President to create "Reconstruction Opportunity Zones" (ROZs) - similar to Export Processing Zones (EPZs) - in Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan. Click on the titles to access the complete text of the bills from the Library of Congress website.

The Family Leave Insurance Act (FLIA) is sponsored by Representative Pete Stark (D-CA) and co-sponsored by Represenatives George Miller (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). It was introduced on March 25, 2009, and has most recently been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. The bill would provide 12 weeks of paid family leave to workers who had paid into the program for six months or more. A summary and the complete text of the bill is available on Representative Stark's website.

The Afghanistan and Pakistan Reconstruction Opportunity Zones Act of 2009 is sponsored by Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and co-sponsored by Senators Christopher Bond (R-MO), Robert Casey (D-PA), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). It was introduced February 26 and has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee. The bill lays out requirements that must be met by the country in which the Reconstruction Opportunity Zone(ROZ) would be located, which I have posted in their entirety below.

While the bill mentions respect for international labor standards, I worry that regulation would be lax in this area, due to the remoteness of many potential locations. While the stated aim of increasing opportunity for local people is a good one, and (I believe) has the potential to significantly decrease the number of potential insurgent/terrorist recruits, establishing the oppressive and frankly horrible conditions WILPF has denounced in many Export Processing Zones (EPZs) around the world would do just the opposite. I see little to substantially differentiate ROZs from EPZs. Other aspects of this bill that are worrisome are stipulations that governments must "elimate...barriers to trade and national development, including by...providing national...measures to create an environment conducive to domestic and foreign investment." Sounds innocent enough, but phrases like these have in the past meant policies that benefit corporations and investors and do little for the citizens of the country in which they do business. "Capital repatriation" is a shining example of this sort of exploitation, and also one of the most thinly veiled colonial leftovers I can think of. Capital repatriation drains rather than stimulates the local economies from which the profits were made, which is antithetical to the stated aim of this legislation. Also, the fact that pages are devoted to the regulation and prevention of transshipment, while only a few lines address labor rights, is troublesome.

Lastly, I am concerned that the sourcing of materials is not mentioned. If the US government truly wishes to support the Afghan and Pakistani economies, from the bottom up (providing a living to as many people as possible), they should include requirements that certain percentages of source materials be bought locally. This way, even if the profits of the enterprise are "repatriated" (removed from Afghanistan/Pakistan completely), local businesses and suppliers will not be left empty handed and more frustrated with the United States than ever. This bill is endorsed by President Obama, and has bi-partisan support. It is better than it could be, but the idea may need some fine tuning - or perhaps a complete overhaul - before it comes truly in line with human rights.

************

S.496
Afghanistan and Pakistan Reconstruction Opportunity Zones Act of 2009 (Introduced in Senate)

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF RECONSTRUCTION OPPORTUNITY ZONES.
(b) Eligibility Criteria- Afghanistan or Pakistan, as the case may be, meets the eligibility criteria set forth in this subsection if that country--

(1) has established, or is making continual progress toward establishing--

(A) a market-based economy that protects private property rights, incorporates an open rules-based trading system, and minimizes government interference in the economy through measures such as price controls, subsidies, and government ownership of economic assets;

(B) the rule of law, political pluralism, and the right to due process, a fair trial, and equal protection under the law;

(C) economic policies to--

(i) reduce poverty;

(ii) increase the availability of health care and educational opportunities;

(iii) expand physical infrastructure;

(iv) promote the development of private enterprise; and

(v) encourage the formation of capital markets through microcredit or other programs;

(D) a system to combat corruption and bribery, such as ratifying and implementing the United Nations Convention Against Corruption; and

(E) protection of internationally recognized worker rights, as defined in section 507(4) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2467(4));

(2) is eliminating or has eliminated barriers to trade and investment, including by--

(A) providing national treatment and measures to create an environment conducive to domestic and foreign investment;

(B) protecting intellectual property; and

(C) resolving bilateral trade and investment disputes

(3) does not engage in activities that undermine United States national security or foreign policy interests;

(4) does not engage in gross violations of internationally recognized human rights;

(5) does not provide support for acts of international terrorism; and

(6) cooperates in international efforts to eliminate human rights violations and terrorist activities.

WAM! Conference Posts

2009-03-31T21:47:00.000-07:00

Here's run down of the posts written during the Women, Action and the Media conference last weekend:

Friday, March 27: Pre-Conference Intensive on PR
Morning Panel Discussion
Introduction to the morning panel discussion
Elements to create a good media strategy
Media Strategy 101
Getting the mainstream, niche, and ethnic media to pay attention
How do you convey your message? USE MEDIA
Media exposure on the cheap

Afternoon Workshop on Creating a Media Strategy, led by Ina Howard-Parker of Represent, Inc.
Developing a comprehensive media strategy
Creating a media strategy continued
Elements of a communications planning process
PR Q&A
PR 101 Imagery

Friday evening: The Greatest Silence: Rape in the Congo. The most powerful documentary I have ever seen.

Saturday Plenary: Cynthia Lopez, Insider - Outsider

Interlude: shout out to The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way

Saturday Sessions
How to work in the mainstream media - and why you want to

Get inside the minds of editors

Where are the women in the political media?

Sunday Sessions
Write and publish persuasive op-eds for a national audience

Are the messages the new media? by Theta Pavis

Women and the economic crisis: getting beyond the corporate media narrative
Q&A on women and the economic crisis

Q&A on Women and the Economic Crisis

2009-03-29T09:50:00.000-07:00

The divide between women's organizations and labor organizations is a false divide and we need to work to build bridges between the two movements.

Occupational segregation is considerably stronger in the vocational education system than in academic institutions. The number of apprenticeships in the US has declined 80% in the past 20 years. The total number of civilian, non-post office employees has shrunk 25% since it's highest point in the early 90s. FDIC had 7,300 employees in 93 and now have 4,200 employees. Same thing happened in the The federal Equal Employment Opportunity office (EEO) was cut 60%. Office of Contract Compliance was also severely cut.

Going back to Medicare coverage, every sentence written in the NYT about Canadian Medicare during the Clinton administration was an absolute lie. It's very important to get the real facts into the MSM. Cultivate the columnists and opinion writers in your local newspapers. Write to reporters as well. Get that wonderful, factual material into the hands of people who can use it for good.

Shout out to an extremely important book: Sisters in the Brotherhood: Working Women Organizing for Equality in New York City

Our critique has to get more nuanced. We need to stop badgering the MSM and work to keep newspapers alive. We're at a moment when we're losing these venues for public discourse.

Julia, FAIR: This is the opportunity to help decide what media will look like in the future. It is going to be problematic that newspapers are laying off staff, but it's also an opportunity.

Susan: The stock market is an indicator of how profatibility of corporations will look like in the near term. The whole Obama plan is based on this false belief that banks create jobs. Banks create loans to credit-worthy enterprises and individuals. Banks do not like to lend to people and firms who wont pay them back. Non-bank financial institutions made the predatory loans. The underlying mortgages were based on fraud and deception because they were issued by unregulated institutions. There was no regulatory institution that said banks couldn't buy these false, paper assets. The rating agencies that gave these fictitious assets high grades were part of the fraud as well.

You should look at unemployment claims as the way to understand where the real economy is.

If these economic terms don't make sense, read Dollars & Sense and United for a Fair Economy.

Women & the Economic Crisis: Getting Beyond the Corporate Media Narrative

2009-03-29T08:34:00.000-07:00

Abby Scher, sociologist and editor of Public Eye, the quarterly magazine of Political Research Magazine.

It opens the question of what stories do we tell? The structural and personal stories need to be bridged. How do we educate ourselves so that we can be more knowledgeable when we write about economics?

Julia Hollar, managing editor of Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting's magazine, Extra!
Susan Feiner, professor of Economics and director of Women and Gender Studies at the University of Southern Maine.
Darlene Lombross, Sisters for Action in Power, documentary film-maker, made a doc about the Filipina women's movement

Julia: FAIR is a media watchdog group that advocates for a greater diversity of voices in the media. Our analysis of the MSM is that it is pro-corporate and pro-status quo. The liberal media is a myth that the right likes to propagate. Journalists tend to lean to the left on social issues and to the right on economic issues. What journalists believe isn't all that relevant to what is published. The idea of journalism is that you're supposed to be a conduit of information without injecting your opinions. We measure media bias by sources: the people that get to say their opinion in the media. Who gets to talk on these issues? Study after study it skews very heavily white, male, government officials and corporate representatives. On economic issues that skew is even greater.

On PBS NewsHour, economic segments during a six month study, 1/3 of sources were women. Almost 1/2 of female sources were in one segment about Walmart. Remove that one and only 1 in 5 sources were female and they were all white.

There's corporate ownership and sponsorship that is fundamentally invested in continuing the economy as it is: a capitalist economy where women and people of color are increasingly marginalized. What we see in stories today is talk about what the government is doing for corporations. There is a lot of coverage of the stock market: this idea that the Dow Jones Industrial average is an opinion poll. For someone like Chris Matthews, the stock market is probably a big issue but for most citizens it isn't as immediately relevant.

Health care is a huge economic issue and a huge women's issue. Single-payer would be a huge benefit for women but it's basically off the table for most corporate media. There were hundreds of stories about health care before Obama's summit, but there were only 5 advocates quoted. You were more likely to hear an anti-single payer person bring it up as a bogey man than hear a pro-single payer quoted.

The coverage of the economic stimulus: Rep Baynard came out and said the reproductive health provision would cost millions for abortion and that was picked up and run by MSM outlets without questioning it. That caused the Democrats to pull the provision out of the bill, without ever questioning the validity of his statement: it was a completely fabricated talking point.

Susan: I want to talk about taxes. The MSM and corporations have hijacked the discussion about tax reform. "Middle class" and "middle income" do not match up. Middle 20% of income is $25-40,000. State taxes are very regressive: the lower your income, the higher % of income you pay in taxes. If we wanted to help lower and middle income people, we would go to state and local legislatures and demand that they make the tax structure progressive and fair by removing the burden from sales taxes. We certainly don't hear much discussion of this. The idea of tax burden being different depending on your income level is wrong.

Corporate Watch has a website that will show you how to investigate what sort of tax give-aways the corporations in your state are receiving. David K. Johnston's Free Lunch gives info on how to do this research.

2/3 of tax units pay more in payroll tax than income tax. If you're trying to do stories on women's economic status, you must understand payroll tax. They've becoming massively more regressive over the last 30 years.

Payroll taxes come out of your paycheck automatically that you have no say over. They have 2 components: there's the part that comes out of your paycheck and then there's a portion that the employer pays supposedly on your behalf. The amount that's put on your employer is really put on you in the form of lower wages.

5 line items on the worker share: (this is very American and the tax structure is different in Canada and Europe)

Social Security tax: 6.2% of all earnings up to $94,000. On your whole income. If you earn $180,000, you only pay 6.2 on the first $94K and nothing on the rest of your income. This is called a single-income bias: if each partner earns $90K, you pay 6.2% on all income, but if the income is earned by one person, you pay 3% tax.

Medicare contribution: 8.3% of employee earnings (employer also pays 8.3%, which they pass through in

Estimated federal income tax and estimated state income tax are taken out.

Your public library always has tax helpers there, don't go to H&R Block, it's a rip off.

What the employer pays that you don't see is an unemployment tax. The federal government sets the guidelines for unemployment insurance and then the states do whatever the hell they want. Unemployment insurance is paid for out of state pools. 6.2% of the first $7,000 is taxed. What each employer pays per worker per year on average is $56. Rather than get an income tax refund, a payroll tax holiday for the next 6 months would immediately give you more money to spend. Cutting taxes is always skewed upward because income taxes are not really collected on low-income workers.

There is a burden on women journalists to expose how lop-sided this issues is.

Taxes are a Women's Issue: Reframing the Debate by Mimi Abramovitz and Sandra Morgen
Taxing Women, by Edward McCaffrey - more of a Nerve book. more for people who like the details.

Another important thing to remember: dividends are not taxed the way payroll is. So wealth created from capital, which is skewed male, is another area of discrimination.

Darlene: I'm an organizer. I'm the co-director of Community Labor United. I feel like one of the roles of an organizer is getting information out to the community. We work in the Greater Boston area to address the growing gap between the rich and the poor. We're seeing very extreme wealth and extreme poverty. It's the greatest gap since the Great Depression. CEO's make 344 times middle-class workers and 866 times minimum wage.

Blackstone CEO makes $400K an hour.

Massachusetts is the 2nd worst gap between rich and poor in the country (NY is first).

Kirball Institute looked at opportunity structures in various neighborhoods across the country. 90% of African Americans and Latinos and 55% of Asians live in low-opportunity neighborhoods: access to schools, health care, etc.

United for a Fair Economy (and others) stats:
Foreclosures and predatory lending has led to the biggest loss of wealth for people of color ever. Up to $213 billion loss of wealth for African-Americans and Latinos. 3 times more likely to have a predatory loans, women 33% more likely to have a predatory loans, 66% of black women's loans are predatory.

The face of the Montgomery bus boycotts could not be a Claudette Colvin, 15-year old pregnant girl. The Women's Political Council decided to choose Rosa Parks as the face of the boycotts because she was more media-friendly face. See this overview of the boycotts. The point is that activist history is silenced and individuals are remembered as the only creators of change in history.

Be strategic about which images to put out to the media. Not to sugar-coat the issue, but to create a face for the issue who does not incite backlash. Can't put the black woman, single mother up front in corporate media. Older blind man taking care of his sister was chosen as the face of the campaign which led to an important victory with Fannie Mae changing the way homeowners are being worked with. This work was done with City Life Vida Urbana: tenants' rights organization.

Community Labor United is organizing the Green Justice Coalition. Coalition of unions, environmental organizations, and environmental justice organizations to talk about green justice. How resources have been extracted from communities of color or waste facilities placed in communities of color. What we're doing is trying to make sure that the dollars that put into dealing with the climate and unemployment crises are accessible to poor communities.

Women in unions have a higher access to health insurance and pensions than women who have 4-year degrees. Because of the shift from manufacturing to service industry in the US, unions are now 45% women.

We are talking about sustainability in its broadest sense. We're talking about power relationships: an important opportunity to change power relationships and utilizing what will be the largest influx of government funding into the economy for dealing with justice and equity issues in our communities.

Abby: Employee Free Choice Act: a union-created name. Libertarian language to win people over to say if 51% of employees sign cards saying they want to be in the union that employers must accept the union.

Unions are not making the alliances that they should. They were really caught off guard by the backlash. They lost Sen Arlen Specter. The person who did the best reporting on this issue was Laura Flanders on Grit TV:

Are the Messages the new Media?

2009-03-29T07:31:00.000-07:00

A few weeks before coming to Boston for the WAM conference, I was reading the New York Times which had an article about people using new media at the SXSW gathering in Texas. It talked about how many people there were using Twitter, writing these micro-blog posts about the events they were going to. The author wrote: “The messages are the media…”

If I think about WILPF and wanting to bring younger women into the organization, I immediately start thinking about how young people are using media.

At WAM! I went to a panel put on by the International Museum of Women, which exists – you guessed it—completely online. It not only showcases the work of women artists, activists and writers, it often becomes a space for critical, political discussions and social change.

Jo Beaton and Masum Momaya were the presenters. The talked about how in the past much of our media looked like this:

The past = authority is the content provider

But now, with new tools like Facebook, Flickr, Tweeter, blogging, etc., it looks more like this:

The future = authority is platform provider

This raises other questions of course (and here we could have a discussion about the Open Source movement, who controls the Internet, privacy matters and more), but for the time being this alone is a major shift. If people are using things the Internet and things like blogging to create independent media, then all sorts of things start to change. People begin to talk to each other, report for each other, share with each other, create the media and the messages that they have not seen in the mainstream, as well as talking back to the platform providers about what they want to see, how they want to use the technology (not to mention hacking it, or building their own.)

The presenters noted that in general, women are using this new technology equally with men, and while the people using it are young(ish) say between 18 - 35 on average, more people that are 35 and older are starting to use these platforms.

While I sat in the room, at least three people there were “tweeting” about the session.

We also looked at social justice movements using technology:

The Blank Noise Project (India)
Sexual harassment incidents are written down and documented by women, what they were wearing and what happened to them when they were harassed. This is a huge blog.
It’s garnered a lot of media coverage, especially in India.

Ushahidi.com
This was developed to map reports of violence in Kenya – citizen journalists started collecting on-the-spot reports and mapping them in a time of crisis; it let’s people “crowd source” when a crisis happens. It is built with open source software; you can see real time maps of what is happening where. It has been used in Congo and Al Jezeera used it to cover the war in Gaza – the effectiveness lies in the combination of offline and online engagement; and it has been adapted and adopted in different places and developers are adding code to it; has gotten some media coverage too.

I came away with a lot to think about, and also felt very excited to see these new ways activists are using new technology to tell women's stories and building maps of real crisis situations.

Get Opinionated: Write and Publish Persuasive Op-Eds for a National Audience

2009-03-29T06:39:00.000-07:00

Laura Mazer, managing editor of Counterpoint Books, editorial advisor for the Op-Ed Project
Catherine Orenstein, founder of The Op-Ed Project, journalist and author

Laura previously edited syndicated columnists.

Catherine: Larry Summers speech about women not being in math and science led to other debates including why more women aren't on the op-ed pieces. One woman accused the LA Times of institutionalized sexism, Maureen Dowd said women were afraid of being called bitches, a woman at the Washington Post took offense at being called a woman journalist.

3 out of 4 submissions from men. At WaPo, 9 out of 10 submissions came from men. 88% of bylines were from men.

In the 90s I was targeted by the Progressive Media Project. They noticed that a lot of conservative think tanks were creating impressive journalism. Catherine was in Haiti at the time writing pieces for small publications. They taught her basic ideas on how to write an op-ed and published her on the the Knight-Ridder newswire. Ended up doing radio, television, met with Clinton's Latin-American advisors. They spent no more than 2 hours tutoring me. Target women with credentials and expertise. They are not rocket science or secret. It tends to get shared with people who already are involved in the public debate.

Why does op-ed matter? We're not talking about print first of all. Newspapers are in the business of news, not paper. The opinion forums of our nation drive all other media and create thought leadership. The spectrum of forums in the public debate are about the same: 85% of op-ed bylines are male. 84% male in talk shows. 83% male in Congress. Continuation of male thought leadership in the United States. You could look at best-selling nonfiction authors, Hollywood and radio producers, boards of Fortune 500 companies. These are the forums where people report not just what is going on but what we should do about it. This is currently the most powerful way of delivering thought leadership regardless of the delivery mechanism. It is over-whelming white, privileged, and male.

This information is easy to share and if we have a lot more women submitting, editors would have a broader selection to choose from. Maybe if women submitted more, we wouldn't need quotas. Maybe we're helping public debate to allow half of the best minds and ideas be part of that debate. Wouldn't editors and anyone concerned with public knowledge be eager to hear these voices?

The idea is not just to target and train, but also to create networks of mentor editors. On a one time basis, a very experienced editor will review an op-ed from every woman who comes through these workshops. Couldn't we increase the numbers to a tipping where we're not necessary? This is a hypothesis, but research suggest that a tipping point happens at a third.

Two examples of why I think this is important: absence of women in these forums creates the wrong ideas that women aren't leaders and don't have something to say. Two, public debate is lacking without half the best minds. Three, the people who tell the stories create the history.

I wrote a book about the fairy tale "Little Red Riding Hood." It's an epic story across multiple genres. There are various endings: first, 1812 she's cut out by the hunter. 1697 version, she dies. Does anyone know what spawned that fairy tale? The original Mother Goose fairy tales were parables about aristocratic life. It was parable about losing your virginity: a wolf was a parable for a man. Hunter was her father cutting her out of the belly of the beast allowing her a second chance at following a straight path of obedience. The earliest known version of the story, wise tales told by women: the heroine always escapes by her own wits and it's a story of coming into your own. If you'd like to read some of those early versions, read my book.

Gloria Steinem wrote an essay on "If Men Could Menstruate." If men could menstruate, they would research nothing about heart disease and everything about cramps. It's funny because half of that statement is true: it's true that cramps aren't researched, but women aren't protected from heart disease. It's the number one killer of women. The symptoms are different in women and men: women didn't know they were suffering heart attacks because they and their doctors didn't recognize the symptoms.

Questions to Ask:
1. What is credibility and how do you establish it? Credibility is accountability to knowledge. Don't just say what you know, but how you know it.

2. How do you build an evidence-based, value-driven argument? Evidence is the concrete-building blocks that you all agree is credibility even if you disagree on the conclusions. E.g. don't use a tiny, opinion laden newspaper as the basis of all your evidence. Are you a better person to say it? What is the value that you add?

3. What is the difference between being right and being effective? Example: A few years back, I wrote a piece on Sex in the City that ran in the NYT. I hated the show. They shopped a lot, had no causes that they cared about, and didn't seem to care about their jobs. The mail came in 4 to 1 against me. I thought about how I had just alienated 4 out of 5 people I was trying to reach.

A zone that has two qualities: empathy and respect. You need to believe that the people who disagree with you are both moral and intelligent. For a worthy opponent, those are the qualities that lead to efficacy.

4. What is the bigger picture? No matter how quirky your areas of care seem to be, the ability to understand how your concerns fit into a larger human picture will make you more valuable.

5. Do you understand your knowledge and experience in terms of the values of other people? It is more powerful to understand your worth in relation to other people. You have things that are not just important, but truly important to other people. If you think about that, if you let your value to other people be the driving force of how you communicate. You'll have a much more powerful platform from which to communicate from.

Laura: Op-ed is short for opposite editorial (as in opposite the editorial page). I think I have a unique perspective and could persuade people, not that I'm the only person who could write about it.

To make cookies what do you need? You need a couple of ingredients. You could get special ingredients and make it far more sophisticated and expert driven. Or you could get your butter, milk, and flour and make a damn fine batch of cookies. The recipe for an op-ed is extremely simple. You don't have to get sophisticated

1. expertise
2. timely argument
3. a piece (have to have it written)
4. a pitch

Everything else is chocolate chips.

Expertise: you don't need to know more than everyone else in your field. Because you're willing to put forth your opinion is the reason you should write. E.g.: "the universities have more and more graduate programs in media, journalism, and book development." I think this is terrible. Because the people who go to these graduate programs and spend a ton of money for jobs that pay very little are primarily white and privileged, leading to a more privileged media core.

I've worked in newspapers, magazines, and book publishing. I don't have a graduate degree. I have street cred that says I've worked with reporters on all levels and my expertise speaks to that more than enough to speak on this issue. Stop looking to see if other people have more credentials.

You don't have to get a graduate degree in something to be an expert in the area.

Timely argument: what's going on now that you can write about anchored in what's happening now? I could write a piece about how "these days poor reporting is happening." 3 days ago might be too late for the op-ed page.

You can manufacture the timely anchor in a way that's a little bit more creative. Back-to-school, September: This week people are going back to school. Pitch times to Valentine's Day: a piece about broken heart syndrome which is not just about being upset about breaking up with your boyfriend. Anniversaries of historical occasions.

A day or two after an event is the threshold, unless an event metastasizes (e.g. James Frey) you'll have more time. Or a local event can be stretched into a national story. Most of the issues you care about can be pinned to timeliness. You need to do the work of anchoring it to time: find the time hook.

A piece
Word count is key. There are no ads on op-ed pages. Really tight spot. In the 90s the count was 750, now it is 650. Regional newspapers are below 500. National newspapers were take a little more. Almost every, if not every media outlet has an online space. E.g. the NYT has a balooned online space and a smaller print space.

Attention span changes: 600 words should be a declarative statement on a piece of policy. 1,200 words or longer should give context.

Do not submit a piece that is longer than the maximum word count. If you really can't get it down to 600 words, maybe the NYT is not the forum for you. Really focus in on what the piece is.

Basic Op-Ed Structure
Lede: the news hook to get your attention. We forget that people don't know as much about our subject matter or care about it. Find a way to get people's attention.

News Hook: cultivate a creative, flexible mind about what is timely and important. If you have a good idea, it is probably going to be timely lots of times. Avoid the obvious: a piece on love on Valentine's Day. Anniversaries on 5th, 10th, not 37th. On the 50th anniversary you're competing with people who have waited 49 years to have their opinion heard.

Thesis: Explicit or implied

Argument: make 3 points.

"to be sure" paragraph: acknowledging what the opposite side of the argument thinks (don't actually lead with those words or people will know you're a rookie). This is a chance to be much stronger because it gives you a chance to frame the opponent's argument. The problem comes when you don't make it very clear where that thinking is faulty. Don't just be courteous: acknowledge and dismiss or acknowledge and dismiss, de-prioritize while you validate the opposition argument. The qualities of empathy and respect can be given free reign here.

Conclusion / kicker: tell people what you would have them do differently. If you want to make an effective case for the solution, give people something specific and do-able. Beats grandiose and vague every time.

The op-ed page shouldn't be used just to raise awareness. If there's no implication that something needs to be done, then it's really just me saying "I'm really upset about this." Practically speaking, if there's no solution explicit or implicit it's less likely to be run.

A lot of journalism spelled are purposely miss-spelled. Lede and graf and tk (to come) are purposely miss-spelled so that if you're searching an article, you know that these things are to come out before their printed. This gives you some insider cred.

How to Pitch
When you try to get fancy with the lede, it is distracting and annoying. You're really looking for short, quick. This is what I want to write about, this is what I believe, and get out.

E.g.: "Dear editor, I would like to offer you a piece how the expansion of media graudate programs is a detriment. I am a book editor with experience in newspapers and magazines. The piece is 600 words and is embedded below." If you go too far into your entire bio that's too much.

The pitch just gets attention. Here's a piece tied to this event, love for you to consider it, piece and bio below.

audience questions
Can you pitch a piece multiple times? Never pitch a piece twice to the same editor and don't pitch concurrently to more than one editor. Recast the piece if you want to offer the same piece 6 months later.

What areas are good to start out in if you're new? It's not a simple question. It's not about climbing a ladder. Find your expertise, your area of passion. I need to know what your field is to suggest publications. E.g. what do you read a lot of? That's probably the thing that you know the most about and that you can offer an expert opinion on. Those are probably the places you should pitch to first.

National Writer's Union in Boston meets about writing on social justice issues, including op-ed pieces.

Pitch should basically be 3 sentences in first paragraph, 3 sentences in second paragraph and go onto piece and bio.

Everyone is hurting for content. The internet is such an opinion-driven environment. The ability to express an argument with evidence makes your writing extremely valuable. There's a hunger for that kind of grounded argument rather than just screech and wail. In old media, content is much more expensive, so there's a high demand everywhere.

The key is to do it well. So many of them are poorly done and immediately discarded. People who want to write book are so intimidated. The point is that all those thousands of people who want to be published are doing it wrong, so if you're doing it right, you're ahead of the game.

What is credibility? Accountability to knowledge. One of the things we've discovered in this project is that it's extraordinarily gendered who describe themselves as experts. The reasons that women have such a problem with the term, I should ask why. Women often think it's immodest, self-promoting, or someone else knows more than me. I see an abuse of those values: selflessness to the point of self abdication. We have an ethical responsible to share what we know.

What's an evidence-based value-driven argument? It's not enough to have an opinion, you must have evidence.

What's the difference between being right and effective? If you want to end a conversation, great choose to be right.

What's the bigger picture? In our sessions we do an exercise to think about the larger connections and metaphors of your issue.

What if you thought of yourself as a resource to other people? So many of us walk around thinking that the things we spend our lives on are not important.

It could just be a numbers game that women aren't being published. We speculate that we need 15,000 new women submitting every year to reach a tipping point. I know I could not possibly do this without the staff that's helping us and with all of you. What matters most is what you do when you walk out of this room.

Everything that we talked about today, we consider open source. Share it.

We run seminars that are open to the public around the US: NY, LA, DC, and San Francisco regularly and in other cities infrequently.

April 18 in DC
April 25 in San Francisco
May 9 in NYC
June 20 in LA
end of July in Chicago

They cost $300 and 40% are scholarship.

The Other Glass Ceiling: We had a woman candidate, but where are the women in the political media?

2009-03-28T13:07:00.000-07:00

Mikki Halpin, freelance writer and editor
Lisa Stone, founder of BlogHer, journalist, and media strategist
Rebecca Traister, senior writer at Salon.com

Lisa: Political blogs written by women expanded exponentially during this presidential cycle. It is a myth that women are only interested in talking about lipstick and their children. Of the top 10 blogs on BlogHer, 5 were about the election, one was about the economy (how to save money when grocery shopping while being environmentally friendly).

Rebecca: I have some very mixed feelings about women and politics. There needs to be more. In terms of numbers, I have nothing particularly great to say. However, as somebody who spends all my working hours thinking about this stuff, I've noticed tremendously positive changes in terms of the number of women voices online, on blogs, on television news, and even in some newspapers. I actually feel pretty positive about some of the changes we've seen. I think it's pretty reductive to say that because there was a female candidate, more females were invited into the room. But that's actually true, and the same is true for African American pundits.

I have written a piece about the rise of Rachel Maddow. She would not have existed as she does now 18 months ago. "Ladies of the nightly news: How the most electrifying campaign of our time changed everything for Katie Couric, Campbell Brown and Rachel Maddow.

Katie Couric did not talk to me about the piece. Campbell Brown said she would ask the questions because she's a reporter, not because she's a woman. Rachel Maddow's issues are not about being female. Since then, I've interviewed Katie Couric and she's personally a feminist and speaks very intelligently about gender issues.

Lisa: I think it's extremely important for us to dissect ourself. On many sites hosted by women on the net, we're able to develop women's voices to a degree that aren't in the MSM. It is interesting to think about expanding our vision of what the punditocracy is and what feminism is.

The achievements of Maddow are interesting to look at while reflecting on how horribly the Clinton campaign was run or how much old-guard feminists have gotten it wrong.

Rebecca: One of my obsessions right now is the definition of feminism. The entrance of Sarah Palin into the presidential race really pushed the definitions of feminism. The right has taken a stake in what it's calling "feminism," It's the Sarah Palin brand of feminism. Real sexism was coming from all parts of the media, including the left. This left a door open for the right that Palin walked through. So they were able to co-opt the history of feminism. I feel it coming.

Lisa: The fundamental question, can you be a pro-life Republican and be a feminist?

Rebecca: This may circle back a little bit to what it means to have women in the media. What was so clear in the campaign was that there was sexism in the coverage of Clinton's campaign. The mainstream media on the left (or who on occasion sympathize with the left) refused to address it. They thought they would get old white lady cooties for even mentioning it. And when Palin came into the race, the right was throwing sexism around like it was a gender studies class. It highlighted the silence from the left and it was terrifying to me because all the words and slogans that were thrown around were being co-opted and would be used to legislate against me. If you were on the right, I suspect you felt very differently.

Lisa: In the politics of identity and the semantics of language were brought into such

Mikki: Gloria Steinem's op-ed in the NYT was painful to read.

Rebecca: Geraldine Ferraro's commentary during the election was even worse.

Steinem says she has written to apologize for the two errors in that piece. There were things in it that were troubling and that really spelled the end of 2nd wave feminism. A repetition of unhappy history: e.g. 2nd wave's inability to take in the experiences of people of color and GLBT women.

The rumors of the horrible rifts within feminism are greatly exaggerated. I talked to so many 2nd wave feminists who wanted nothing to do with Hillary. I talked with 3rd wave feminists who were supporting Obama who really cared about Hillary.

Lisa: I share your frustration. It's only the extremes of the community that bubble up in the MSM. Last week at South by Southwest, there was a panel on the election with 3 men who had substantively covered the election and an Obama girl.

Most women will say they vote on a candidate's track record before they vote by gender. Millenials (18-24 year-old's) vote this way to an even greater extent.

When I hear what you're saying and I think about the very real lack of substance in the MSM. Truly the way to get away from this 2 minute segment style media is to own and operate more media channels. Get enough funding and enough audience to support what you all are doing. I'd like to see even more about entrepreneurs and business models at the next conference.

Mikki: Take a look at all the women pundits vs. this shorter list of male pundits. Who has more influence?

Women: Donna Brazile, DeeDee Myers, Rachel Maddow, Mary Matalin, Peggy Noonan, Michelle Malkin, Arianna Huffington, Laura Ingraham, Linda Mavez, Michelle Benard, Ann Coulter, Amy Homes, Leslie Sanchez, Angela McChuun, Tina Fey, Oprah, The View

vs.

Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart, Rush Limbaugh, Tucker Carlsn, Chris Matthews, Steven Colbert, Jay Leno, Bill O'Reilly

Go here to read Michelle Obama's blog posts during the election.

There was a bit of a debate between Rebecca and audience members about why Michelle Obama's public speaking became less about politics after she was quoted as saying this was the first time she was proud of her country.

Lisa: I think it is always easy to under-estimate women in the media until you stop under-estimating women. I think it is ridiculous to think that you can only be taken seriously if you only write about politics. I've written about step-motherhood, about purses in the NYT, and I still expect to be taken seriously.

Rebecca: A huge portion of the blogosphere is media criticism. That happened a lot, but things were happening so fast in this election that it wasn't always easy to keep track of it. Essentially blogosphere uprising brought to the surface the fact that Fox News was calling Michelle Obama Barack's "baby mama."

Lisa: The economics are forcing mainstream media outlets to change their business model. That said, not every media outlet has feminist writing. I think the cream rises in the blogosphere.

I wanted to ask a question about the definition of feminism, but they didn't call on me. There was an exchange between the panel and the audience about critiquing 2nd wave feminism, questioning whether you need to believe in reproductive rights to be a feminist, acknowledging that some feminists are concerned about economic issues, but absolutely no one came from a global framework. No one mentioned the criticism I often hear on WILPF listservs that by labeling our analysis feminist it somehow limits the breadth of our analysis. It's quite fascinating to me that in the Women's International League there are members who are afraid of the feminist label, who think that issues of peace and justice transcend a feminist framework. If that's really true, why participate in a women's peace organization? Why not spend your time in a multi-gender organization?

Get Inside the Minds of Editors

2009-03-28T10:55:00.000-07:00

Marjorie Pritchard: op-ed page editor, The Boston Globe
Martha Burk, op-ed writer, editor of Money section in Ms. Magazine, founder of NCWO
Denise Zeck: ED of American Forum and the National Women's Editorial Forum

Submit op-ed pieces. Denise is more than happy to help edit them.

Martha: I am a national political writer, but nothing is automatic. It is hard to say whether I'm an advocate first or a writer first at this stage in my life. I certainly started as an advocate. I sorta started at the top because I didn't know any better. This is an important message for everyone in the room: I moved to DC and went to a journalism class at George Washington University. Sarah McClinton, a vertan White House journalist and Barbara Reynolds, founding editor of USA Today spoke. Next day, I called Barbara Reynolds and told her I thought she was a person I needed to know. She invited me for lunch. She was on deadline that day and her editor was unhappy with what she had written and wouldn't let her go to lunch until she got it how he wanted it. I sat for 1.5 hours while she continued working on her article. Gayle Evans, first female VP of CNN had a rule: help another woman everyday.

Barbara said when you get an idea, send it in to the op-ed editor and he'll take a look at it. I sent him 400 words and it got in the paper the next day. I didn't know you don't start at the USA Today and I just did. The politics of the paper changed a few years later and they stopped accepting op-ed pieces from me. Since then, I've written for most major newspapers in the country. It still isn't easy for me because it is still hard for them to make space.

My biggest problem with major newspapers is that you can't afford to allow them to sit on something for 10 days so they can have an exclusive, so you just don't send it to them. Washington Post said a few years ago they don't run female opinion pieces because only men submit. That's true because we got sick of rejection and having our writing be stifled as it's waiting for an exclusive placement.

You reach a lot of people with smaller circulation newspapers. There are feminist editors out there even in the smallest places. That's sort of the back and forth of what I do. I do write for the Huffington Post. I know there's a lot of controversy about free media and not being paid. I do get some speaking engagements out of it and my pieces there get circulated around the net.

Marjorie: I get 700 submissions a week and I read them all. I don't read to the end if I'm not interested. I have space for 13 freelance pieces a week because we stopped subscribing to syndicated columnists. We figured you can read those columnists in a lot of other outlets.

You have to study the media outlet you're submitting to. For example, Boston Globe has already run 2 pieces on octomom and we're probably not going to run a third.

Denise: WaPo has 17 regular op-ed contributors and I don't think they have space for any freelance pieces.

Martha: You're going to find a lot of page editors who are either lazy or overwhelmed.

Denise: We send out like a syndicate and smaller media outlets pick up our op-ed's. Op-ed pages are supposed to be a forum for dialogue.

Marjorie: If you have the same authors up there every week you aren't getting new opinions to the reader and that's a great disservice to the reader, who is the only person I care about.

Denise: George Will is the number one syndicated columnist. Not a lot of women are in the top 50.

Martha: If you look at some of the folks who are on the other pages, there seems to be either one or two women's slots and that's it.

Marjorie: I don't have slots for anything. I care whether we've covered it before and whether it is timely. Right now we have 4 spaces a day available. If I look at the op-ed page, it has a foreign piece, a national piece, a local piece, and a slice of life piece.

Denise: Think in advance about what discussions have already happened at a paper and what bills are about to be passed - getting an op-ed into the paper on the day a bill is passed.

Marjorie: When I first started out, op-ed pieces were 750-800 words, now they're at most 700 words.

Denise: Smaller places like 500 word pieces and a photograph with the piece.

Marjorie: A lot of newspapers are getting rid of their op-ed pages completely. People do trust the Boston Globe, but what sets newspapers apart from other competitors is opinion. When you have a lively opinion page, people will flock to you. Other newspapers are going very local with their freelance pieces. It depends on the market and what the op-ed editor wants to do.

audience question: Do you pay for opinion pieces?
We pay for everything we put in the paper except from elected officials. It's only $200, but at least it's something.

audience: How do you understand the demographics of a small paper?
Denise: You don't necessarily need to know the demographics of a small paper because they have a hole to fill. Just send it to us and we'll distribute it. You can send it to a lot of smaller papers at the same time. They're not going to pay, but you can get your voice out there.

Marjorie: A good op-ed page goes against the grain of who your demographics are. That's what makes thought-provoking pieces.

Martha: What subject line should people use?

Marjorie: Write that it's an op-ed piece in the subject line. "Op-ed on WAM." Or even "Time Sensitive" (and make sure it actually is time sensitive) so that if I can't use it you can submit it elsewhere.

Denise: Some women's issues can't get past spam filter. E.g. sex education.

audience: Should you send a pitch or the full piece?
Marjorie: I prefer getting the full piece.

audience: Cynthia from PBS. I'd like to get the head of the ICC to write a piece, but how do we get it placed if you're saying not to start with a pitch?

Martha: That's an exception. That would be a credible author who will be seriously considered.

Marjorie: There aren't a lot of women writing on foreign policy. [Editor's note: WILPFers listen up! We have the expertise! Let's get to writing!] There are a lot of military issues that are in the news.

Denise: The space is enormous right now for international pieces.

Marjorie: We are in two wars and everyone should be interested in what you have to say about those wars.

Denise: On foreign policy issues, they're not necessarily looking for a local angle.

audience member: The women in Afghanistan are organized and risking their lives for peace. They created an action for International Women's Day and wore blue scarves and stood in solidarity for an hour in 7 provinces.

Denise: Editors want to hear from young people. You have to think mutlimedia: audio commentary can be picked up by radio stations. Young people, please write.

audience: I'm a professor and study 19th century media and have been trained in writing in a way that isn't readable. What makes a piece more engaging?

Marjorie: It's how you write it. You can take things you're an expert in, but just bring it up to the present.

Denise: Have friends who aren't academics read it.

Martha: I often ask myself how to pep this up a little bit?

Marjorie: Make sure you grab the reader right away. You have to make it as interesting as possible.

Denise: The key question is answering "so what, why should I care?"

Marjorie: You have to include facts in your piece, but you not spend the entire piece on numbers.

Denise: Many times people don't research enough to peg their opinion pieces to the current news. Sometimes you're breaking state news on the op-ed page because papers don't cover the state legislature as much.

Martha: If you do a bit of work, you can anticipate things that are coming up. For example, unemployment figures come out every month. You can write about women losing jobs and slug in the numbers the day they come out.

Denise: Op-ed can lead to a lot of other media. A lot of senior producers for primetime shows are women. We had Hardball, Charlie Rose, and Talk of the Nation. They get ideas on who to bring on the shows by reading the op-ed pages.

Women need to get hooked on writing op-ed pieces. Women should be thinking about weighing in on public policy issues. Spanish language media is really hungry for translated pieces.

audience: Women's Media Center accepts submissions and pays for content on their website.

audience: If the newspapers aren't covering your subject (e.g. US-Latin American relations), how do you get a timely hook into the op-ed pages?

Marjorie: Call your local newspaper and ask to attend an editorial board meeting to lay out why they should cover the story.

How to Work in the Mainstream Media—and Why You Want to

2009-03-28T08:05:00.000-07:00

Ada Calhoun: editor-in-chief of Babble.com and freelance writer
Lynn Harris: journalist for Glamour, the New York Times, and other publications
Kara Jesella: writer and editor for NYT
Rebecca Traister: senior writer at Salon.com and writing a book about women and the 2008 elections.

Is it difficult to get a feminist story in the MSM?
Ada: I've had really good luck. The onus is on the writer to create a timely, relevant article that has a feminist angle. It can't be an evergreen article.

Rebecca: I started at the Observer in NY and that was a place that was not warm to feminism. It was a boy's newspaper at the time and if you proposed a story that in any way wreaked of earnest feminism, you were laughed at. Since then the changes I've seen in journalism have been tremendous. So many of the stories I was pitching had a feminist angle and I was able to create my own beat. And now even the Observer is publishing feminist articles. In my own career arc, I've seen a lot of opportunities open up.

Lynn: It's not an us-them thing. It's not all of us here trying to plot the overthrow of these other people. I think in the case of the Observer, it wasn't that they were anti-feminist, they just weren't earnest.

Kara: I have certainly found that it is easier to get these stories through if you are on staff or have a relationship with an editor. That's why it's harder for younger writers who are just starting out. I remember when I was at the Times filling in for someone in the Style section and had to come out as a feminist around a story on fat politics and it was helpful that I had already been there for months. I think the problem now is that so many people do want to write about these issues and now people think that one person at a newsroom or magazine writing about these issues is enough.

Surviving in Journalism
Rebecca: There were times early in my career that I had to take articles to pay my bills that I didn't necessarily agree with. I wrote an article on sex toys for a women's magazine to pay for a trip to a friend's wedding in Europe, but I wouldn't have taken some of the articles about body issues that I found offensive.

You do have to make some choices: finding the line between your principles / journalistic desires and the need to make a living.

Lynn: If you're a working journalist, your journalism is your work. It's important to remember that it's work. It's a fantasy to think you're only going to write things you care deeply about. If you think of your writing only as art, it allows people to pay you less. When you're a journalist, you're running a business. When you think of it as art, you're often willing to do it for less. Obviously, you don't want to write something you wouldn't put your name on. Dare I say, it's empowering to make a living as a journalist.

Ada: I was able to do a story on boxing in Texas that allowed me to learn about something I would have never known about without the job.

Rebecca: Some of my best experiences as a journalist was when I was learning and had nothing to do with personal interests whatsoever. Covering community board meetings, real estate transactions was a great way to learn journalism and reporting. In some ways, I think in a career arc sense it's really great to get the skills down in areas you don't feel passionate about. And then when you start to have a little more control over what you write about, you have the skills down and can write about you're passionate about well.

Kara: Have you had editors that have helped you move to the next level?
Lynn: I was an intern in 1987 for Ladies Home Journal and that was the job that launched a career. The executive editor groomed me and helped me go on to write for other magazines and for LHJ. To this day, we're in touch.

Rebecca: When I was at Talk, I wasn't a writer and I didn't think that was what I wanted to do. There was an editor who thought I could be a good reporter and got me the job at The Observer and now is my editor at Elle.

Do people what to write for glossy magazines?

Audience member: It seems like long-form articles can only be found in glossy magazines.

Lynn: the lipstick ads are funding the meaty articles.

Have you written for men's magazines?
Lynn: I wrote some profile articles for GQ and I had to salivate a little about how hot some celebrity (Jessica Biel) was but, that didn't bother me that much. You're right - GQ and Esquire have strong writing.

Rebecca: I was a beauty editor for years. I kinda didn't want the job, but I wanted to move from being an assistant. It was interesting in many ways, including being able to take private jets and going to Vegas and having Celine Dion put her arm around me, I was able to get some feminist messaging in there. The thing that I found most problematic was not actually the words, but the pictures. The stories were extremely feminist, if a bit consumerist. I struggled with the fact that most women would never look like the models and celebrities in the magazines.

Sue Katz, question from audience: It's easier to be on the staff than freelance, mostly with alternative, progressive media where the money has almost completely dried up. Is MSM money for freelancers drying up and is there a difference between online and print pay scale?

Rebecca: Money at Salon is tight. Money is tight at glossy magazines, though it is still paying better than online media or alternative media. The fact is, our industry is in serious trouble. There isn't a lot of money and there aren't a lot of jobs. It is hard to say I'm on staff because it is very rare.

Ada: Everything is being cut about 40%. Generally online is about half of what glossies pay. $400 in online media would compare to $2,000 from Glamour. If you want money, you still need to do print, mainstream.

Lynn: Insofar as you can get MSM work that makes money that are dumb, it will allow you to take other gigs that don't pay as well.

Rebecca: 2 paths to getting into glossies. The first is taking an internship or assistant position - where you're literally getting coffee and doing nothing to do with putting words together. It makes such a different to make those connections and work hard at whatever you're getting paid to work hard at (e.g. get really good coffee). The other path is fact-checking. I did both - I was an assistant at Talk and was a fact-checking / reporter at the Observer. Even if you want to be an opinion writer for the rest of your life, I'm a huge supporter of learning how to be a reporter first. Because the reader is trusting you to bring them factual news.

Ada: I did internships at Spin and Esquire in high school and I still run into those people all the time. I started writing for an alt-weekly in college and they're much easier to get into. It's important to take whatever stories are available, especially early in your career. Do it really well and really fast. Eventually you'll be able to go look wherever you want. Be fun to work with and on time.

Lynn: Write to the exact length that they tell you.

audience: How has your experience changed with the growth of online media?

Ada: I've been working primarily online for the last 5 years. I run babble.com and it's an online magazine that's fairly successful.

Rebecca: When I went to Salon I had people ask don't you miss having your words on paper? I actually feel that the words I write on paper are much more ephemeral than what I write online because glossies don't have the deep back history on their websites. I have been able to insist on writing 4,000 word piece words on Salon. We post a lot of articles that are really long.

Lynn: Go talk to women's magazines about their websites. One of the reasons people don't know about the good journalism in glossy magazines is that they don't have good websites. I know they're trying to build up their web presences and know how to make things stick online, go work for a women's magazine website.

Kara: I probably write less for the web than anyone here. I agree with Rebecca - whenever I write for magazines now, it just disappeared. You get a broader audience with the web, since male editors are definitely not reading women's magazines.

Audience question: Do you think newcomers have a better chance pitching essays or reported pieces?

Ada: I would rather have established reporters do the reporting. So I think it would be better to do essays.

Lynn: Make sure that the magazine you're pitching actually runs an essay. Make sure they run things in the first-person. Make sure they didn't just run an article on your topic. It might work in almost the same form in more than one publication, but you have to really tailor it to the magazine.

Rebecca: Also make sure you get the name of the magazine right. I work at Salon and we get a lot of submissions for Slate.

Kara: First learn how to write a really excellent pitch letter.

Lynn: Media Bistro has a ton of resources for writing excellent pitch letters and if you become a member, you'll have access to articles on how to pitch to particular media outlets. I sold a story to Parade magazine about dating violence because I wrote a really good pitch and practically reported the whole story during the pitch. That story wanted to be in Parade because the week after it ran, calls to the National Domestic Violence hotline doubled. And that story made a big difference even if I had to soften the edges to get into a national magazine.

Rebecca: The labor on a reported story is much higher than essays. When we're talking about lower rates, it is much more daunting to report a story for low rates. Especially as things shake out in the next few years, I think skilled reporters will have more jobs than essayists.

Tips for building relationships with editors?
Ada: I get 10 pitches a day from a range of people. Who they are, what column they want to write for, what they want to write about. And about 5 of those pitches are rambling and don't even mention the name of the magazine.

Have a time tag - why is it now that it is relevant and that you really know the magazine.

Don't call and don't expect a critique of the pitch.

Lynn: getting rejected is an important part of the process. You'll probably sell 1 out of every 10 pitches. Follow up with editors, just don't be annoying.

How to write for news-weeklies?
Rebbeca: I know about them mostly as a reader and observer. For women who want to be political beat reporters, White House beat reporters, news-weeklies would be one of the hardest places to break into those areas.

There's still room in those magazines to write about feminism in a soft-focus way.

There is still a huge market for some kind of Sex in the City thing. There are these spaces that women are welcomed as commodities. I don't think it is any more difficult to pitch a story for a news-weekly as a woman than as a man.

The Times now has two female columnists instead of one. That's double.

Time magazine is interested in having more women write for them. It is a push if what you want to write about is not about your experience as a woman or other women's female experience.

Why are stories about sexuality or other women's subjects seen as fluff?
Kara: I encourage you to pitch for places you want to write for even if you don't have experience.

Rebecca: I think I was too bleak before. More women have to pitch whatever you're interested in writing about. It can only get better when more people are taking the chance and doing it.

Audience member referenced article by Rebecca, "Another pretty face of a generation: The question isn't why a blogger like Emily Gould has the spotlight -- it's why other women don't."

Conference Interlude: The Lifelong Activist

2009-03-28T07:57:00.000-07:00

There's the regular tables of stuff to peruse between scheduled events. I never leave without buying something and this time I bought a copy of The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way, by Hillary Rettig. I can't wait to read it.

Cynthia Lopez Q and A

2009-03-28T07:00:00.000-07:00

1. We did a campaign on the lack of feminist voices on PBS. We wanted transparency on how videos are chosen for air time. Has there been a sea change internally on what kind of films can be shown?

Paula Krueger, the new president at PBS, has hired someone, Haiti Rodriguez, who looks at diversity across the national schedule. A report was done that shows a lot of work needs to be done to increase diversity on PBS.

We need to continue to be diligent on this. More research on minority and women's inclusion in media needs to be done.

In terms of support on what can be done to have public television support diversity, you need to look at the cuts that are being done at all public service media organizations, you need to express to your elected officials that they need to continue to support public service media and describe the type of media you're interested in. Change is slow in public service media, but we are moving in the right direction.

Corporate funded media gets on the air faster than any other type of media.

2. How far along are the films that come to you?

POV on average receives about 1,000 films a year and selects 16-18 films to feature. The series is kept to 16-20 shows because we wage large campaigns around each film. There is an "In the Works" submission for development grant, a regular submission site, and a Diverse Voices Project: the film-maker had never had a national broadcast and we worked with the "Made in LA" film-maker to go from concept to filming to broadcast.

3. How can we help get more actual public funding for PBS?

One, I would definitely read the cover stories on Current Magazine. There's an article that was published on February 17 that talks about what is happening in public television and radio. Also go to PBS's website.

4. How do you choose films for POV?
We have a rigorous screening process. For a weekend, we view 50-80 films, the final cut for films that are chosen to go to an editorial committee who then choose 20-25 films to curate from. Usually we find that film-makers have the pulse of the community not only domestically but also globally.

5. Finishing funds for a documentary?
ITVS has a finishing fund, consortia for minority community has access to finishing funds, as does POV. Click into "For Producer" at POV.

6. Do you have ideas on how to create a new economic model for public media?

Unfortunately, NOW with David Brancaccio is a million dollars short on their operating budget and have to go on an 8-10 week furlough.

News and public affairs programming depend on philanthropic grants and are better at producing news than at fundraising. The majority of our budget comes from foundations. How to change that during this economic climate is really difficult.

If you look at media business plans, they're not working - that's why Nightline had to leave a major network. When you're in a huge crisis is not necessarily the time to work on the over-arching plan.

Cynthia Lopez: Insider - Outsider

2009-03-28T06:30:00.000-07:00

After observing the killing of an innocent man by the police in Latin America, she realized she needed to create media that tells the stories we don't usually here.

POV: Questioning how we live and shedding light on a variety of political issues. 19 Emmies, 11 Peabodies, independent documentaries shown on PBS.

Clip from "Made in LA" shown: the story of immigrant garment workers seeking basic labor rights. Dual strategy for English and Latino press. Screened at National Association of Hispanic Journalists Conference. 7,000 media placements garnered for film. Univision, CNN, and Fox News all featured the film-makers. The 3 women featured and the film-makers continue to work together for immigrant labor rights.

Where are women working in the media today? The bad news is that instead of finding where we're working, I found out where we're not working. Media Matters 2000 report notes that all guests on Sunday morning news shows, on average men out number women 4 to 1. American Society of Newspaper Editors: in 2008, 37.6% are women. Minority women are 14% of the newsroom. Meaning 60% of newsrooms are men deciding what is the news and what should be covered.

Boxed in Study done at San Diego State University: 22.7% of radio professionals are women. The Center for New Words describes a lot of rich research we should all take a look at.

The role of women in primetime television: how do women fare? In recent Nielsen reports for 2007-2008: women were averaging 43% of actors. Women 40 or older are less than 10% of characters.

The good news: the 5 major public t.v. organizations are all headed by women (it's never happened before). A Seat at the Table: an Insider's Guide for America's New Women Leaders, book written by, Patricia Harrison, one of those women. Public service media is contingent on public funding.

Myths:
1. With proliferation of cable channels, people think PBS is no longer the most trusted media outlet. (It still is the most trusted, and then CNN, an Fox third.)
2. Nobody watches PBS. Why does it matter?
3. PBS doesn't produce a lot of documentaries.

Whether you're an outsider, or a hybrid outsider-insider, we understand that our role is to keep the flow of ideas going. Our challenge is to resolve that insider-outsider dynamic. To an activist who is trying to get me to film their story, I might be in an insider. To a journalist that I'm stalking day and night to pay attention to an issue, I might be an outsider.

Clip promoting new schedule that starts June 24 was shown: "New Muslim Cool," new film that will premiere in the new season.

PR 101: Imagery

2009-03-27T12:53:00.000-07:00

When you give things a human face it can create interest in the most difficult or wonky stories.

The media and your audience will respond to even stories they are fatigued by when you have images. Send links to people - don't send attachments.

Two different agencies:

Agit-Pop Communications - viral and guerilla marketing

Media Storm - amazing video content on serious issues, but keep tight controls on content

Self promotion is extremely important. An example is Amy Goodman: she speaks virtually every night at an event. She has an outreach coordinator who gets Democracy Now! on more networks and gets her more speaking events.

If working on an issue is your main focus, then make all content available for free distribution.

Create an echo effect: be http://davidsirota.com/ David Sirota.

Tomorrow night there will be a dinner meeting on book publicity. People interested should meet at the registration table at 6 p.m. (this is an alternative to watching a movie tomorrow night).

PR Q&A

2009-03-27T12:11:00.001-07:00

Pitch engine is a good alternative to a poorly designed website or one that you're working on. Can automatically push to social networking sites. Only a site that is really agressively miscommunicating your mission shouldn't be included as a link in press releases. If your problem is just that it's not the most up-to-date website, don't be too wary of sharing it.

What if you're looking to appeal to a wide range of audiences? Have one strategy for each audience if they're truly divergent.

An elevator pitch is key.

Goals could be:

1. drive traffic to website

2. emotionally engage people to get them to participate

3. reach a variety of online audiences whose interests might be very diverse

4. increase membership

5. get funders

Strategy:

1. Drive traffic through search engine optimization: make sure your website content is searchable. E.g. webpage titles are extremely important. (Guess what? WILPF is the #2 natural link when you search "women peace" on Google. Back in 2000 we were the #1 site. Guess what organization started in the last 9 years that has the that higher ranking now?)

Also need to link to other websites and ask those sites to link to you.

Could need to take a step back to think about audiences.

Right now the workshop is working through creating a communications strategy for a specific project of an audience member.

Communications Planning Process

2009-03-27T11:44:00.000-07:00

1. Identify our challenge

2. Research contributing factors

3. Set your goals

4. Formulate your strategy

5. Determine which tactics make the most sense and establish timeline

6. Establish measurements for success

7. Be prepared to try another plan if those measurements prove your tactics aren't working

1. Identify your challenge: what it means to succeed. E.g. expanding donor base, creating credibility for a new or changing organization, credentializing new leadership, attracting new employees / volunteers, reframing your issues so your organization is more effective, growing a critical mass of political will.

2. The critical thing for comunications is research. You need to research what your existing media profile is. Use clipping or monitoring searches (quantitative media analysis). Interview your staff, board members, anyone else who is getting feedback on your organization. Whenever possible, gathering data from your membership - whether from a survey, comments on website / blog. You should also research any other marketing strategies that exist in your issue area. You should look externally within the area that you work in - i.e. "competitors" (Human Rights Watch taking note of Amnesty International's public persona / communications strategy.) Research what media matters most to your audiences. Going after 16 year-old female high school students vs. potential celebrity spokespeople is completely different.

Figure out what Resources You Have:

Infrastructure is big: do you have a website, a blog, a t.v. studio? Do you have a 200K mailing list? Do you have a Facebook page?

Social network is key: do you have relationships with a celebrity, journalist, or other influencer?

Content toolkit can be key: if you provide the story already packaged, it allows people to use your content to bring eyes to their piece of media. E.g. provide a video to Talking Points Memo, rather than make people available for TPM to write a story on. This also gives you the power to control the message.

3. Set Your Goals:

Be realistic based on the amount of human capital and financial capital you have. Goals are broader than strategy.

Achieve media placements
clicks on content
to reach one particular influencer or decision-maker
sign-ups on social media page
purchases of your book, DVD, conference registration
communication is subordinate and there to serve your organizational goals and mission
establish brand recognition
bolster organizational awareness among funders
demonstrate the superiority of your vision

4. Formulate Your Strategy:

Once you have your goals set. Strategy and tactics are often confused. Strategy is the over-view of what you want to acheive and tactics are the steps your going to take to make that happen. Examples:

determine unique position of your organization among all others
develop partnerships by highlighting existing partnership
demonstrate value of organization to funders
build credibility through organizational materials so that our leaders will be recognized as experts in our field

5. Tactics

Action items. Must be do-able within your existing resources. They are best achieved through brainstorming. Think creatively about how we can serve the strategies we've identified. Include everybody you know. The only rule in brainstorming is to not allow criticism on anything. The tactics that get employed in PR are interesting. You need an interesting visual...unfortunately people like consumer issues (e.g. standing outside Apple store with HIV org branded t-shirt from Monday through Thursday until the first i-Phone is sold). Sometimes you need to figure out a way to bridge the gap to people who are burned out on hearing negative stories.

Turn ED into go-to person on stories on women. You can build a press center with a clip of the ED answering sample questions. Post media that has already happened. Also improving website and getting involved in social media.

Execute tactics and measure. Your online newsroom might not getting any hits at all. You might have a celebrity speaking for you and then they get involved in a hideous scandal.

Many ways of measuring that depend on what you're interested in measuring. Internal communication audits can review what hits are coming through to your website.

Create a Media Strategy (Cont)

2009-03-27T11:37:00.000-07:00

PR is placing your story into a greater context. This is the world that exists; this is the conflict that's taking place, this is the way we can create a solution to the conflict. Telling the arc of that story is PR. It is a blend of activism and journalism with a big dose of media production.

Turning stories into media production is increasingly falling on activists, rather than journalists. Over the last decade, editorial border guards are increasingly harder to get passed. The old ways of distributing media content are less valuable with the rise of the web. E.g. classified ads used to only be in print newspapers, now you can put one up for free on Craigslist.

The producers of content and their audiences can be connected directly through the internet. This is causing a crisis in traditional media b/c they can't monetize their content. Controversial issues cost more to cover, aren't as easy to syndicate, and aren't friendly to advertisers. Therefore, the border guards are more difficult to get through.

We can create and distribute content: it's less expensive to shoot and edit video. The burden for advocates of ideas is definitely rising. This is the lay of the land before we start strategizing.

Reasons for PR:

1. Opportunity to create advocacy-oriented content.

2. Means of influencing the public debate: reaching your audience directly and indirectly

Developing a Comprehensive Media Strategy (Ina Howard-Parker)

2009-03-27T11:00:00.000-07:00

Official description: Join Represent Agency to workshop the development of a successful media campaign. Learn some media tips and tricks for launching grassroots-to-grasstips advocacy campaigns, publishing a book, or creating a groundbreaking new website.

I'm super excited! Right now people are doing introductions about what type of work they do. Ok, 20 minutes so far of people's intro's....interesting number of people looking for book publicity help.

PR often gets a bad rap as spin in activist circles. Pretty clear that this audience doesn't have to get over that boundary. Just in case, the reasons it matters:

1. your organization always has a public image. Whether it's you and your mom or you and your international organization.

2. you always want to be actively shaping that public image rather than just being reactive. If you find yourself in crisis, you want to be able to shape the reaction.

3. have relationships with journalists, so that you have an open door for when changes happen. You're always going to be your best advocate and understand what's unique about your work.

4. funding is always an issue - advertising and marketing tend to be more expensive than PR. PR can be done with virtually no money. If you get 3 column inches in the NYT, you get a lot more credibility than buying an ad.

5. we are public educators trying to shift the public debate. To keep it within our own little thought bubble doesn't create the change we want as effectively as we can.

Media Exposure on the Cheap (Denise Moorehead)

2009-03-27T09:36:00.000-07:00

Through the lens of how do you do this on the cheap. Example: $3.8 million spent on marketing by the cigarette lobby per day.

"Free" media exposure isn't completely free because it takes time.

Traditional media, transitional media, new media will be looked at.

Traditional Media
How do you address issues that's unique, what expertise / experience do you bring to the table?, how is your organization unique?, who else is doing this work and what are their politics?

Don't always try to start at the top of the food chain: look at weekly newspapers, alternative news sites. Smaller outlet coverage can help you move up the food chain.

You can write op-ed's for other folks who are considered experts in the area and talk to editors to see if they're interested in it. Read it, use it, know it: with all media before you try to use it.

You can get a commentary on your local NPR station. Partner with organizations who might have access you don't have.

Letter to the editor of newspapers and magazines: continue to use by-lines of the experts in your organization, even if you're the one writing it. Create a group of members / constituents who respond to newspaper and radio stories. Once a month send out talking points and allow your constituents to speak to the media.

Public affairs shows on NPR and Pacifica. Community radio and t.v. Public Service Announcements can still be useful, even if it's used at 2 a.m. PSA's can be used by women's magazines. Ticket give-away for an event.

Transitional Media:

Your website of course. Clear, crisp, good visuals. Video logs, podcasts - make it interesting for folks. Really think about who is reading your website. It's not about your office politics, people are there to read about your issues. Do some surveys and polls.

Have a web press center. (I have to be honest, I don't do this well myself.) This is where action alerts and press releases go. Bios of your experts are needed: they don't have to be super-famous. Backgrounders on specific programs.

Online t.v. and radio sites. Other people's websites. If you write an article, send it to Ask.com (change around a little bit so they aren't exactly what's on your website).

New Media:
Use it before you pitch it. This is even more important than with old media. If you don't read anyone else's blog, don't bother trying to pitch the blogosphere.

Bloggers draw media to you.

Good2gether. Ning site. Google ads: any nonprofit can apply for free Google ads. Google alerts.

Green Media Toolshed. If you join, it gives you access to Vocus

Progressive Communicators Network

PR Newswire, Profnet: press people looking for people.

Help a Reporter Out (free)

We Are the Media

National Association of Black Journalists (also associations of Asian, Hispanic, and Native American journalists).

Now the Media is Listening, How Do You Convey Your Message (Jennifer Pozner)

2009-03-27T09:16:00.000-07:00

Live blogging from this session is also happening at Women in the Media & News, but Jennifer is now taking a break to be a panelist.

It's so important to reach out to ethnic media. Example: immigration marches were originally covered by Spanish language radio and newspapers, which gave organizers better access to organizing more people for the May Day rallies and pushed the mainstream media to cover the events.

In 2006, the March for Women's Lives brought together more people to DC than any protest up to that time (larger than the 60s anti-war protests, larger than the previous anti-Iraq war protests). That story was deemed to be largely inconsequential, would not have an impact on politicians, predominantly reported on for one day and largely under-counted the attendance, then there were "balanced" stories about the 200 or so anti-abortion activists who showed up. (I remember this event; I left a WILPF board meeting early to return to DC for the rally...I was living in DC at the time.)

Every time you read a story about feminism being dead the underlying message is "have we killed it yet?"

USE MEDIA

U - unpack acronym speak. Do oppositional research to understand how conservatives are speaking about your issues, and also, just as importantly, how the mainstream media is describing your issues. Understand right-wing spin (e.g. "if we don't fight them over there, we'll have to fight them over here.") Create frames and messages that work to unpack that particular idea. Spin Works is a great book with "the brother-in-law test." Explain your issue without jargon, that respects his intelligence and makes him understand that your issue impacts him is a good test of unpacking message.

S - Spin. Can be translated into propaganda. Can also be a positive thing: creating a message that is easy to understand, be ethical.

E - Engage. engage the media at every point in your work from beginning to end. Don't just send a press release and wonder why they don't show up. If you see a piece in the media that inaccurately covers your story, try to educate them. If they cover it positively, feed them research.

M - messaging

E - educate. Educate yourself to become spokespeople. Then you're better prepared to educate the public through the media.

D - Debate. Understand that it is a stacked deck. Women and people of color are vastly under-represented in broadcast media. It is important to not self-select out of the debate.

I - Initiative, Insistent, Innovative, Intuition: keep at it. Understand what has been said before about your organization and unpack them.

A - Accessible. Really important to pass the brother-in-law test. Reach as large an audience as possible while staying pertinent to your core audience. Arm yourself with information: prepare and practice soundbites. Don't go into interviews cold. Practice. Role-play with someone playing the inaccurate journalist throwing at you the craziest anti-feminist crap.

Getting the (Mainstream Niche and Ethnic) Media to Listen (Rochelle Lefkowitz and Kelly Chunn)

2009-03-27T08:55:00.000-07:00

1. Who cares? (developing target audience)
2. Who does it impact?
2. How do you make it entertaining?
3. How do you sell this story to (an almost always male) editor?
4. What else is going on? E.g. right now can you integrate an economic spin into your story? Peg what you're trying to communicate to a main story (also called a sidebar: e.g. philanthropic organizations impacted by the Madoff Ponzi scheme)

Case Study - "Sisters Together: Move More, Eat Better"
Media relations is part of an integrated marketing campaign. (Now we're talking my language...) Rather than communicating a message to the media that you hope they will get it right, by using the net you can communicate your story directly to your target audience.

Issue was obesity and how it relates to African American community. Diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, and cancer are potential negative health outcomes of obesity. One of the strategies was prevention and the pilot area was Roxbury / Dorchester, ages 18-35, low-moderate income women.

The campaign name came from focus groups. They basically gave us our tagline. Notice that there's no mention of obesity or negative consequences. By developing the strategy through focus groups, you meet people where they are rather than speaking from afar and judging them.

Marketing materials were developed with tagline and logo. Media campaign was developed around partnerships: partnered with WILD radio, spokeswoman was Olivia Fox, a radio personality with similar issues. Nutrition experts were featured on her radio show, along with cooking editor of Essence magazine, and did community-based events. Wellness Fair was sponsored in Roxbury. Boston Globe did a feature in their community beat section on Olivia Fox. Community cable show on cooking was also developed.

Because of the health disparities public policy issue, it helped us generate national coverage: Wall Street Journal, CNN did a story on Stop & Shop supermarket in minority community on healthy eating, community ethnic newspaper stories were written by us with pictures.

Community and ethnic media is often short-staffed. They're looking for people with writing skills and are looking for articles to fill their space. Build relationships with editors of those publications. This is an area of media relations - not a way to get paid for articles.

Media Strategy 101 (Mahdis Keshavarz )

2009-03-27T08:41:00.000-07:00

It's not all about national media. You can get a lot of impact out of small circulation newspapers.

Op-ed's are a good way of getting your message out.

[Interlude: someone is telling the story of the Boston Bio-Lab action, which he credited to Code Pink member Sue Gracey. Wasn't Boston WILPF the primary organization behind that action?]

Look to where you yourself get your information and reach other individuals who use those sources.

What's a media plan? Have a clear idea of who your audience is: everything from college students to community college students to college students in the Boston area; undergraduates or graduate students? Students is too large a category. Have a clear idea of your goals and communication capacity.

Do you read newspapers in print or online? Do you listen to NPR or Pacifica?

Women for Afghan Women: had been desperately trying to get attention of women under the Taliban before 9/11. After 9/11, women's situation was used as a justification for dropping bombs on Afghanistan. But with the help of a PR agency, WAW was able to get some of it's perspective out because now it's issue was seen as newsworthy.

Creating a Good Media Strategy

2009-03-27T08:19:00.000-07:00

Reasons for a strategy: exposure, change, funding, impact, leadership, advocacy, policy, outreach, increase attendance, increase readership, increase viewership

Elements of a good media strategy: short and long term goals, credibility, clear message, relationships, timeliness, news hook

Human resources needed: English proficiency (in journalistic English), other language proficiency, ability to speak in public, people who can translate complicated issues into easy to understand language, ability to create and articulate an inspiring vision, time, money, passionate about the issues, tracking current events to know what journalists are talking about, long-term relationships with journalists, tracking what the media is saying about your issue, oppositional research, thick skin about rejection

Media strategy and planning should not be an after-though. Should be integrated into programming.

Audience: you need to understand who you're trying to reach, what media they consume, and how to write for your different audiences.

Live Blogging: PR: Getting Your Word Out

2009-03-27T08:06:00.000-07:00

I'm attending the Women, Action, and the Media conference in Boston on behalf of WILPF. Right now I"m in a pre-conference intensive training "PR: Getting Your Work Out There - A dynamic day of media strategy for feminists and community organizers who are media savvy but not (necessarily) PR savvy"

First bit of advice: create and maintain relationships with journalists.

Remember that news rooms are losing hard news journalists, while maintaining sports coverage. Nightly news is short, primarily about celebrities and the weather. Hopefully after the intro, I'll be able to post some info that is new to y'all.

Now she's talking about "Pray the Devil Back to Hell." I'm so lucky to know Robin and to have read her post about the movie so I don't look stupid...she's pointing out that a radio journalist was instrumental in getting the women's activism promoted.

How would you categorize WILPF? I wouldn't say we're community activists, though we're definitely grounded in communities. Does it seem odd that I would not raise my hand for that category? Peace and justice activist, political activist, international change agent, yes. But not community activist. Do you disagree?

Pray the Devil Back to Hell

2009-03-06T10:18:00.000-08:00

I wrote this on Wednesday, but was unable to post it until now:

Life is exceptionally good right now. I'm sitting in a cafe named after my hometown, with good coffee and a good muffin, and I have never felt more proud to be a woman working for peace. This movement makes for excellent company. I'm still glowing from a screening of the documentary film Pray the Devil Back to Hell, about a group of gutsy, fed up women took peace into their own hands in Liberia, brought the major parties to the table, and made them negotiate, with the simple statement “we want peace, no more war.” I feel so proud to be a woman right now.

Some highlights include:
- This was the first time ever that Christian and Muslim women worked together in Liberia.
- They had a sex strike to get their husbands invested in peace.
- They brought President Charles Taylor and LURD (the opposition rebel group) to peace talks in Accra, Ghana. They went along and continued to monitor the process.
- When full-scale war broke out in Monrovia (the capital of Liberia) during the peace talks (as the women tell it, the warlords at the talks were living in luxury while jockeying for power and position and calling in orders from back rooms)
- After a particularly bloody episode where militants entered the US embassy, where many IDPs had taken shelter, the women in Accra went to the negotiating chamber, sat in front of the doors, and locked arms. In this way they trapped the delegates inside. Officers came and asked for the leader, and she stood up, announcing herself. They said they would arrest her, and she said she'd take off her clothes and make it easy for them (it is a curse in Africa to see your mother naked). - They left her alone. One delegate was prevented from jumping the barricade, and tried to kick the woman who stopped him, but was prevented by Mr. Abubakar, one of the mediators, who said “go and sit down. If you were a real man you wouldn't be killing your people.” The women gave the delegates two weeks, or they would do it again. They also demanded that they not be insulted anymore as they sat outside with their signs.
- The mood of the talks became serious, and in two weeks an agreement was reached in which UN peacekeepers would be sent and a provisional government would give way to democratic elections. Taylor fled the country. Many warlords got positions in the government. These women didn't like that, and continue to hold the government accountable, in the knowledge that they can reassert their will at any time.
- When the UN directed militants to bring their weapons to be surrendered for compensation, the women knew this wouldn't work, but the UN said they were the experts and wouldn't listen. Violence ensued. As one of the women put it, “the UN didn't know what to do. Luckily for them, the women were there. We told them all what they were doing wrong...fortunately we were able to calm the situation down.”

One quote, especially, sticks with me. “We campaigned until we forgot that we could be raped.”

I am beyond inspired. This is the true meaning of empowerment. Of course, women should be inside the negotiating chamber as well as blockading the doors, but wow – if we could end our wars by wearing white (or whatever color) and constantly and confidently asserting all people's right to peace (and we can), what a world it would be!

March E-News Feedback

2009-03-06T06:09:00.000-08:00

Within the hour, I will be blasting the March E-News titled "Demand Seats for Women at the Tables of Power."

You can read past issues of the e-newsletter on our website.

Please use the comment section of this post to provide feedback on our e-newsletter series. Do you find the emails too long? Do you enjoy receiving them? Would you like to contribute an article in the future?

Your feedback will help enhance future communication from WILPF.

Women must dare

2009-03-04T11:21:00.000-08:00

Since my last post I have attended some truly amazing events and meetings here at the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). As I write, I am sitting in on a panel organized by iKNOW Politics entitled "Getting Ahead: Testimonials of Women in Politics".

The current speaker is Tezira Jamwa, a former member of the Ugandan Parliament. She is speaking of how her government has increased women's visibility in politics and helped to foster their entry into politics through affirmative action. However, she says patriarchy is still strong and women only make up 30% of Parliament, and often face hostility and other challenges. She stressed the value of electronic networking for support and education to change historical gender inequalities. Because gender equality cuts across all eight MDGs, she reasserts its importance and timeliness.

Ruby Dhalla, a member of the Canadian Parliament, is speaking next. She is also the youngest member of Parliament in Canada. Her mother, as she said, made her watch the nightly news every day, and remembers the riots she witnessed that were happening in India. At ten years old, she wrote (then-prime minister of India) Indira Gandhi, and received a handwritten response. This experience convinced her that whoever you are, no matter your age, you can be heard. Echoing a previous speaker, she reiterated that the real power and knowledge is at the grassroots, "with the cleaners." As a teen, she volunteered in her parliamentarian's office, and from there rose to the point where she was asked by the Prime Minister to run for the seat she now holds. When she hesitated, a mentor told her that she had been talking the talk, and it was time to walk the walk. Her message was that if you have a dream, go out with confidence and do it. She says women have so much to contribute to the political dynamic. Women have been strong advocates for progressive social policies, and foreign policy and the economy are just as important to women in this world as to men. She advocates mentoring programs, international connections and cooperation, and a focus on women's policies instead of their hair.

The other panelists were Jan Grauls, Ambassador to the Permanent Representationj to the United Nations; Fredrik Arthur, Norwegian Ambassador for Women and Gender Equality; Dominique Tilmans, Member of Parliament in Belgium; Geraldine Fraser-Mileketi, Demoratic Governance Practice Director in the Bureau for Development Policy (BDP/UNDP); Geraline A. Ferraro, former US Congresswoman; Syada Greiss, Member of Parliament in Egypt; and Margaret Mensah Williams, Deputy Speaker of the Namibian Upper House.

These women and men have the clout to make a real impact on their national politics. It is wonderful and inspiring to see how hard they are using their power at those upper levels to promote gender-sensitive and woman-empowering policies.

UN CSW Day 2!

2009-03-03T06:44:00.000-08:00

As I write, I am sitting in the back of the morning NGO briefing at the UN Commission on the Status of Women. As a participant in WILPF's Practicum in Advocacy at the United Nations, I have the opportunity to attend this important yearly event. There are so many brilliant, inspirational women (and some men) everywhere I look and I am honored to be among them, though overwhelmed by the profusion of events I want to attend all at once! Yesterday I attended various workshops and a high level panel discussion in the UN and the church center across the street. I have very little time now, but will continue to post updates as the week progresses.

China, America, and a Peace Economy

2009-03-01T04:02:00.000-08:00

My traveling companion said "There is our trade deficit." The first thing I saw was a pile of crates. The huge kind that go on barges and ship gigantic amounts of goods from country to country and up and down rivers. There were not just a few, but stacks of 5-10 in groups of 5ish stacks and rows and rows as far as you could see in one or two directions. But you could only see so far because of the white-gray haze that hung over everything. The amount of goods and the overwhelming pressure of industrialization hangs over Shenzhen, one of the largest and most important international ports in the country of China. If you buy something that is marked "Made in China," odds are that at one point it may have passed through this city and the hands of thousands of workers who come here to find jobs.

We did not stop on our way through Shenzhen, we hust looked out the windows, but I could not keep my eyes off of everything I saw - the poor condition of houses, made of aluminum sheets, dirty wood, houses obviously made from the clay surrounding it. It's not that the houses are made from clay and wood, but that the wood is rotting and everything is covered in soot and dust from the pollution. There is no way that these people have good water. The heat in the air is stuffy and difficult to breathe. The statistics about heart disease in China are staggering. Population congestion means that communicable disease is a frightening threat.

I have never seen anything like it in my life. You cannot pass through this place and reconsider your lifestyle, your ability to help others in poverty and your buying choices. It's in front of your face and not across an ocean. These are people, not just imaginary production forces.

China depends on American buyers - there is no escaping the countries' relationship, which cannot be severed but at a disastrous cost to both. The system which is set up is skewed and bound for disaster. Not that one sells and one buys, but that the system abuses the global environment and forces awful working conditions on masses of people and a wasteful "get-more" mentality on others. We'd like to say that we should help people get out of these conditions, but the truth is that the United States has a conflict of interest here. It is in our financial interest to keep bad conditions to keep our prices low, so that people can afford needed goods. But which is more important - human lives and human rights in China or the cost of living and human rights in the United States? There is no good choice.

We need to look at these problems in a completely new way and tear down the system in order to build a better one up, one that supports and protects people from both countries. We need to be able to exchange goods without abuses. We need to re-evaluate what are our "needs" and what we can live without or find a new way to accomplish the need. We need to quit commiting violence against the Chinese and ourselves.

We need a peace economy. It is imperative; all of us are at stake.

Opportunity for solidarity with Nigerian WILPF sisters!

2009-02-27T06:00:00.000-08:00

Additional is funding needed for an amazing workshop to bring together women activists in the conflict-plagued Niger Delta.

At the International Board meeting last November, I had the great honor of getting to know a wonderful woman named Joy Onyesoh. She is working with a small group of 12 women to, in their words, “bring together women interested in peace, promoting political and economic justice for Nigeria women. We are working for promotion and protection of women’s rights, equal and full participation of Nigerian women in all political, social and economic processes. In our part of the world, being born a woman in today’s world is an immediate disadvantage. Your life is shackled from day one. First of all the joy every one expresses at your arrival is so diluted compared to the ecstasy at the birth of your brother, you are made to believe that you are inferior. We are poised to bring about a change in definition, behavior and engagement of our women. One of our goals is to reach out to young women, particularly those who are less privileged, to create an opportunity for young women to get involved and make empowering choices and bring about change in their communities. These young women will be taught on how not just to live but to thrive and develop their own leadership style.”

Some of the areas they work in include:

 Protecting women’s rights to own and inherit property and land.
Combating harmful traditional practices such as female genital mutilation, widowhood rights, girl child rights, child marriage etc.

 Promoting a culture of zero tolerance to all forms of violence against women, especially in communities that have military presence.

 Eradication of discrimination and violations of women’s human rights through legal and policy reforms.

 Economic empowerment and skill-building programs.

 Leadership development programs for young women in communities to give them more access to decision-making.

 Providing information on HIV/AIDS issues in order to make young women more visible, better resourced and more effective in advocating and leading the fight against HIV/AIDS.

 Promoting understanding of international disarmament efforts and how they affect us locally and as women.

The group has organized two workshops in the past, one concerning “Women in Business” and routes to financial independence on the 19th of March 2008, and one on the 6th of November 2008 in collaboration with the Nigerian Medical Women Association on Cervical Cancer. The group also has a program in two higher education institutions in the east where they bring women engaged in active politics as guest speakers to mentor the younger women.

They are currently organizing a workshop for the 28th of April. The theme of the workshop is “Women working for Peace,” and its main goals are to create more awareness of the problem faced by the Niger Delta area with specific reference to violence against women by the military, and chart the way forward; to advocate for sustainable economic and social development of the area; to campaign against environmental degradation of the Niger Delta by the multinational oil companies; to recognize women who are noted to have contributed significantly towards peace in the Niger Delta area; and most importantly to advance women's participation in conflict prevention and peace building.

WILPF UK was able to secure about half of the necessary budget, but they still need the equivalent of $555 USD to be able to put on this amazing workshop. If you can help, or know a person or organization who may be interested in contributing, please contact me (Robin) at thewildwords@yahoo.com, and I’ll put you in touch with Joy.

Here is what I have in terms of details. Joy would be happy to speak to anyone wanting to know more.

Women working for Peace workshop:

We will bring in women activists currently working in the Niger-Delta region to make presentations, and an environmental consultant will also talk specifically on the environmental degradation of the Niger-Delta and the way forward, the Oil drilling Multinationals will also be extended an invitation and given an opportunity to make responses.

There will be a paper on Peace and conflict resolution with special emphasis on women as agents of peace.

To ensure that the workshop will be a success and of immense benefit to participants, we are networking with other women’s groups and organizations, who would also assist in spreading the information on the forthcoming workshop. There will also be flyers, posters and insertion of the information in some women’s weekly magazines.

Since we already have a program running in two higher institutions, we would use the young women to spread the message to their peers in other higher institutions.

We also have relationships with rotary and rotaract clubs, and we have found them useful in the past as a means of creating awareness for our programs as they enjoy a wide range of membership.

We intend to circulate resolutions emanating from the workshop to various women's organizations and groups, State and National ministry of Women's Affairs and the Federal Government. After the workshop there will be follow-up meetings to discuss replies from the resolution sent out and other matters arising from the workshop.

We are applying for funding to make our project a reality. This is the first time such a workshop will be held in Nigeria. We are still a growing group and do not have the financial capacity to carry out such a project. Our budget for the workshop is:

BUDGET FOR WORKSHOP (CURRENCY US DOLLARS)
210 Hall and public address system
70 Printing of information leaflets and flyers
50 Printing of posters and banners
85 Hiring of video and photographer
55 Hiring of Projector
160 Printing 200 pcs workshop big envelope bag, printing and photocopying workshop papers, program and tags
70 Logistics (hiring of bus, generator,gas, internet cost etc.)
345 Tea break and lunch for 200 people
140 Cost of circulating resolution: Meeting after workshop to finalize resolution, printing, photocopying and mailing of resolutions, telephone calls and travel costs.

1,185 TOTAL

Shutting down the USA's version of terror

2009-01-22T10:29:00.000-08:00

This is the second day this week that I have been happy to see the news, which is in itself a rare occurrence. Today, President Obama signed an executive order to close our "holding" at Guantanamo Bay. Hopefully this will lead to a closing of all of the secret prisons and flights to transport prisoners all over the world. This is an amazing step to re-instating the importance of human rights in the United States, as well as a display of the kind of change in international policies this administration may bring. While we still have many issues to deal wit h, this is an exciting first step because it is an indication that human decency and respect still matter. And a promise kept as a first step is a good thing.

As for the re-swearing-in, that's just funny. "Just making sure..."

Together is the only way

2009-01-19T12:15:00.000-08:00

I just watched C-SPAN 2 coverage of a forum about "Women and African-American" (so labeled by the station) of about 6-8 women at Howard University in Washington D.C. While unenthusiastic before, I now think the cable bill I temporarily split was worth it for at least one day. Women on the panel included Bay Buchanan of American Cause, Hillary (last name?) a pollster, the vice president of NOW, a woman representing a Feminist (self-described as part of the name, but I'm not sure of the rest of the name) organization, a writer for the New York Times, an editor of another publication, and Rosario Dawson. My lack of aptitude with names please forgive me and use it as motivation to find out more details, watch a re-run, read a transcript for yourself. C-SPAN does release archives.

The women talked about issues today and how they are changing and how different generations realize issues such as racism, sexism, economic disparities, and how all of these affected the elections and how politics are viewed today. As women who are top leading figures of their organizations mentioned how they became passionate about these issues, so many similarities struck me with WILPF. We are an organization which is based upon connecting the dots between racial and economic disparities, between political choices and how one overcomes awful situations and gracefully supports others who have to make difficult choices:

"It's fine and well if you can have the debate about whether you are going to work or stay home with your kids, but that's simply not an option in reality for a lot of women."

"It's wonderful that you can have and raise a baby in a non-optimal situation, but this 14-year old girl who was impregnated by her father does not have the choices or the situation that the pharmacist assumes she has."

"Women across social stratification with the same education and work position may get the same pay, and the fact may be that there are now slightly more women enrolled in college, but once you get out into the workforce, what is the reality: Women are still predominantly at the lower-end, lower-paying jobs."

and so much more.

WILPF makes those connections, sees those disparities, AND connects them to what we do not live in: a peace mentality. Instead of going out to get one's own, as one said today, it is so important to create those family structures where they no longer exist. Help your neighbor next door, watch their kids for little while during work or a job interview. Help overcome the fact that there are exceedingly difficult choices to make when someone is trying to do the best they can.

And I was promptly reminded that while taking care of my body this morning and resting was important, so too is it a National Day of Community Service, so excuse me while I shower and go take a walk with a garbage bag. I missed my opportunity on campus, for which you had to make a reservation (and I hope it filled up!), but I can do something simple.

You know, I'm kinda skeptical about politics, but I have a feeling - if we all get in this, it's gonna be messy, but it could be good.

On the coming Inauguration

2009-01-18T08:07:00.000-08:00

The day is approaching quickly, and we all have friends and relatives attending the events in Washington D.C. personally, whether they are traveling WILPF members, personal friends, or those who already live in the DC metro area.

Whenever I hear about the masses of visitors, however, I keep thinking back to a personal blog of a personal friend who lives and works in the non-profit sector in DC, after having done the same in New York. She writes about the masses of self-serving volunteers and how the homeless are being pushed around and out of the city.

While the majority of volunteers are not rude - overall, YEAH! for volunteers (including almost the entire membership of WILPF) - and the pushing around of homeless people is far from a new phenomenon, we have to be conscious of the consequences of our actions. It kind of reminds me of the Live Earth concerts, designed to inform about environmental preservation, yet the crowds and transportation caused some damage itself. Interestingly, Live Earth is sponsoring a Green Inaugural Ball tomorrow:

"Millions of people are heading to Washington, D.C. this weekend to join in on all the festivities surrounding the Inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama and while we can’t do anything about the crowds, we hope to make it easier for you to lessen your impact on the environment with all the travel and excitement."

Still to focus on here is the problem of homelessness.

Please don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with celebrating and making use of a presidential inuaguration. Newton's third law, simply put, applies here: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." However in in society, it is not equal and opposite. Reaction occur on a steadily growing exponential level.

The homeless - already about last in societal hierarchy - are being pushed down further so that those with means can have very expensive parties. The homeless are already homeless because of the corporate power and mismanagement, examples of which are too numerous to count in the past few years. The abuse of the concept of private property literally leaves people allowed to be nowhere, stripped of their access to life-sustaining means. And how ironic that in the nation's capital, there is such a large amount of homeless - and an alarmingly large and disproportionate number of those are military veterans. How clear the metaphor is about the bankruptcy of war! How it protects no one and destroys us all.

I'm not sure what to conclude. I really hope that with all of this "change" kind of energy, people will truly celebrate the new administration by getting down to the roots of the problems in the world, right where they are. Don't move the homeless: change the policies that keep them that way. Feed, clothe, and shelter the one at your door.

A quote from the film "Iron Jawed Angels" (a jewel about women claiming the vote in the United States) echoes through my head. Forgive my forgetting the exact words, but use that as a reason to see the film and find out for yourself:

While being asked about her starvation protest, the main character describes famine in the past in Europe when starving peasants would lay on the doorsteps of the rich and die there. It was motivation enough to get the rich to do something, because as she asks, who wants a stinking corpse on their doorstep?

We all have lots to do to take care of our brethren.

“WILPF and the Willingness to Disarm”

2009-01-17T18:02:00.000-08:00

Wow! What an honor to the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. The article written by Richard Warren of the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development highlights the work and goals of WILPF women from our beginning during World War 1 to today’s endeavors. His writing in the UN publication is not only a kind bit of spotlight but a testament to the infectious spirit of peace activism that is key to the successes of WILPF and sister organizations. The passion of each individual in her or his work sparks change. Two of our own Y-WILPF sisters, Monika and Robin, were able to experience the kind of energy which Geneva exerts in connection with her thousand cities of sisters. They are currently seeing how they can put that energy and their new perspectives into practice – see older posts!

In the ever amazingly eloquent words of Susi Snyder (who gave the best justification ever spoken to the existence and importance of the UN), Warren’s article reminds us that positive spirit has a real place in the gritty reality of acceptance that war is a “normal” international state of affairs. It’s not easy, so much so that it sometimes seems impossible to believe that people could learn to protect human dignity and rights to needs such as food, clean water, a warm enough place to sleep... heck, we still use the word “right” as if someone has to be allocated and be given something that they already have access to by dint of existing! The lies pre-exist in our language.

However, Warren is not deceived. He is convinced by WILPF’s striving that a better world can be ahead of us by the toil of many. We believe in it, and what one believes becomes one’s reality. Join us, and let’s make peace happen that much faster!

A quick evaluation of the various costs of current US wars

2008-11-29T14:38:00.000-08:00

While our economy limps haltingly on (on its misled imperialist legs), we are still engaged in two wars. The US-led coalition occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are killing human beings on both sides every day, and will eventually cost our children and grandchildren well over a trillion dollars. Check out nationalpriorities.org.
_____________

First, we must address the human costs.

There have been between 89,533 and 97,743 documented civilian deaths in Iraq alone (iraqbodycount.org).

4,516 men and women of the US-led coalition have been killed in Iraq, 4,202 of them US soldiers. In addition, two Australians, one Azerbaijani, 176 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Czech, seven Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, five Georgians, one Hungarian, 33 Italians, one Kazakh, one Korean, three Latvians, 22 Poles, three Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians” have died (CNN US & Coalition casualties).

In Afghanistan, "there have been 1,003 coalition deaths -- 623 Americans, six Australians, 124 Britons, 97 Canadians, three Czech, 16 Danes, 17 Dutch, three Estonians, one Finn, 22 French, 25 Germans, two Hungarians, 12 Italians, one Latvian, one Lithuanian, one NATO/ISAF, three Norwegians, eight Poles, two Portuguese, eight Romanians, one South Korean, 25 Spaniards, [and] two Swedes" (CNN US & Coalition casualties).

I was not able to find a reliable source of statistics on Afghan civilian casualties, but it can be safely assumed to be in excess of 10,000 if both direct and indirect deaths are included.

All this death must be for a good reason, right? We're fighting for freedom and democracy, right? I urge you to check out the timeline on the war in Iraq provided on the Mother Jones website (Bush War Timeline), which sheds light on the real motivations behind our invasions of these countries. Or just google "Wolfowitz Doctrine" (1992).
_____________

Next, we must address the financial costs of these wars, and of the overblown militarism of the United States. We must acknowledge that we are borrowing from our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. What will we offer in exchange?

In a CRS Report to Congress, updated October 15, 2008 and entitled "The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11," Amy Belasco (Specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division) stated:

“Congress has approved a total of about $864 billion for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror
operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).

This $864 billion total covers all war-related appropriations from FY2001 through part of FY2009 in supplementals, regular appropriations, and continuing resolutions.

Of that total, CRS estimates that Iraq will receive about $657 billion (76%), OEF about $173 billion (20%), and enhanced base security about $28 billion (3%), with about $5 billion that CRS cannot allocate (1%).

About 94% of the funds are for DOD, 6% for foreign aid programs and embassy operations, and less than 1% for medical care for veterans.

As of July 2008, DOD’s monthly obligations for contracts and pay averaged about $12.3 billion, including $9.9 billion for Iraq, and $2.4 billion for Afghanistan.

The recently enacted FY2008 Supplemental (H.R. 2642/P.L. 110-252) includes a total of about $160 billion for war costs for the Department of Defense (DOD) for the rest of FY2008 and part of FY2009. Funds are expected to last until June or July 2009 well into a new Administration. The Administration did not submit a request to cover all of FY2009.

While Congress provided a total of $188 billion for war costs in FY2008 — $17 billion more than the prior year — this total was a cut of about $14 billion to the Administration’s request, including both reductions in DOD’s investment accounts and substitutions of almost $6 billion in non-war funding. CRS figures exclude nonwar funding.

Congress also cut funding for foreign aid and diplomatic operations for Iraq and Afghanistan by $1.4 billion, providing a total of $4.5 billion. For FY2009, Congress provided $67 billion, close to the request. Earlier, to tide DOD over until passage of the supplemental, the House and Senate appropriations committees approved part of a DOD request to transfer funds from its regular accounts.

In an August 2008 update, the Congressional Budget Office projected that additional war costs for the next ten years from FY2009 through FY2018 could range from $440 billion, if troop levels fell to 30,000 by 2010 to $865 billion, if troop levels fell to 75,000 by about 2013. Under these CBO projections, funding for Iraq, Afghanistan and the GWOT could total about $1.3 trillion or about $1.7 trillion for
FY2001-FY2018" (Congressional Research Service Report).

As acknowledged above, these figures DO NOT INCLUDE the Department of Defense's budget. The White House Office of Management and Budget's figures show “$481.4 billion for the Department of Defense’s base budget—a 62-percent increase over 2001” plus “an additional $93.4 billion in supplemental funds for 2007 and $141.7 billion for 2008” for the “Global War on Terror” (Office of Management and Budget).

When will we realize that nobody wins wars, not to mention occupations?

You get what you pay for.

Economic trouble means good news for recruiters

2008-11-29T11:06:00.000-08:00

Here's good article on the link between economic difficulties and military enrollment.

Day 5, Geneva (sorry)

2008-11-23T12:47:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, we discussed program, and heard reports from the various committees and working groups. During lunch YWILPF met to discuss the way forward. We determined that becoming a sub-committee of the Organizational Development Committee would allow us access to their expertise while allowing for an autonomous, respected, and integral role in WILPF development. The international board on a whole is very supportive of this.

Later we were able to present the proposals that emerged from meetings of the Pan-African and Diaspora Women's Issue Committee (PADWIC) to the board.

Finally, we had a fishbowl discussion on the situation in Afghanistan.

Then we had a social gathering, with wine and dancing and other loveliness.

We spent most of today going over financial matters and working committee matters, and in the afternoon we split off into two groups to discuss the wars in Iraq and the DRC in greater depth. Monika and I stayed with the majority of the group to discuss the conflict in the DRC, which was heated at times but educational.

Unfortunately, that is all we can offer you at this time. We will be posting more specifics for a good long time upon our return, but right now we need to sleep and recharge so that we can begin again in the morning!

Day 3, Geneva

2008-11-21T11:43:00.000-08:00

Fun fact: the menu at the top of this page is in German... ;)

So, Monika and I separated this evening, so I'm posting this one alone. But she will probably want to add a bit of her own later, and most of what I have to write we did together.

We woke up early to get through security at the UN before the panels began at 9:30. The welcome was done by Tim Caughley, director of the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs, followed by a talk by Cynthia Cockburn on Women, Peace work and WILPF. This was especially exciting for me because she is the reason I came to WILPF in the first place. Her research has been an invaluable resource for me. Afterwards I was able to speak with her for a few minutes, which was very exciting.

The next panel was entitled "Resolution 1325 & Human Security: Limiting or Expanding our Political Horizon?" and included Christiane Agboton Johnson of UNIDIR (UN Disarmament Research Institute), International Vice President Felicity Hill, PeaceWomen Project Associate Sam Cook, and Eugenia Piza-Lopes of the UN Development Programme. They spoke about UNSCR 1325 in the context of how it can be used to serve "human security" as an alternative to the current focus on "national security." They stressed that the full implementation of this resolution does not mean adding more women to the ranks of the military, but rather the inclusion of women at all levels and in all arenas of conflict resolution and prevention, recognizing that all areas of security (economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community, and political security) are interconnected.

Did you know that the global military expenditures in 2007 amounted to 202 dollars per capita? That is, the world spent $1339 BILLION on militarism in the last year alone. Just to get a feel for what a billion means...one billion seconds ago was 1961...one billion minutes ago Jesus was walking around telling us to be nice to each other...one billion hours ago was the stone age...and one billion days ago the world was populated by only a few small squishy things. That is ONE billion. Last year this world spent ONE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED AND THIRTY NINE billion dollars on war.

To meet the millenium development goal of gender parity in education globally would cost approximately three billion dollars. That's how much it costs to occupy Iraq for nine days. How will our grandchildren see us?

After lunch, we heard Kerstin Greback (WILPF International President), Madeline Rees (head of the Women's Rights and Gender Unit at the OHCHR), Maha Muna (currently UNFPA, formerly in UN mission in Sudan) and Annie Matundu Mbambi (WILPF DRC group) speak on the topic of peacekeeping and enforcement. This is a very sticky topic for many peace activists, and it was fascinating to hear the different stories and opinions of so many people, including those who spoke afterwards during the question and answer period. One characterization of the "festival of ad-hockery" that is peacekeeping that stuck with me is this: Peacekeeping missions are in effect putting men with guns between two groups of men with guns. The type of mandate they have determines whether or not they are allowed to use them.

I personally struggle with the ethical dilemma of the reality of peacekeeping troops. On the one hand, I believe strongly in the rights of all people to deal with their own internal problems, without foreign interference. On the other hand, I want human rights to be implemented and enforced. So I am left with a difficult contradiction, which I resolve (like most things) with a metaphor. If you will forgive the well-worn comparison of national structure and family, we can see the government as the parent and its citizens as the children. Different parenting styles are fine, and not my business even if I may not agree with everything. However, if the parent is at all abusive (by, in this case, denying the citizen any of the factors of human security addressed above) the child can not remain in this condition and it is the responsibility of all to either re-educate the parent or provide for a better living situation for this child. A bit of a strained metaphor, I know. But it works for me when I get bogged down in technicalities and the intricacies of human rights law...:). Thus, the international community has a responsibility to our common humanity to intervene. But perhaps it is not taking the proper approach when women are trafficked into the country in conflict for the express purpose of serving the peacekeeping troops. I still strongly believe that solutions can only come from within the community/country/region concerned. But we must help facilitate this process. AHHH!

From there Monika and I went to a meeting of PADWIC, the committee freshly formed to deal specifically with African and Diaspora issues. We spoke for only a few hours, although I'm sure there is much more to come. We came away with a plan for action (which is currently in Monika's notebook, away from me), specifically concerning the conflict in the DRC and the mineral coltan (used in cell phones and many other electronic devices), the mining of which is at the heart of the conflict. More to come on that.

Sorry to write so much. This is only a small slice of what I have learned today. I realize I say this every time, but I never cease to be amazed and honored to be here with so many amazing women. Each and every one of them is a wonder, and posesses an endless wealth of knowledge and experience in everything that I care about! I can't wait to start again tomorrow!

Day 2, Geneva

2008-11-20T13:34:00.000-08:00

So, I will begin by saying WILPF international has some of the friendliest, most lovely and diverse people you could ever want to meet. To honor this, we had a diversity training today. We had workshops all day, with small, intimate group work as well as plenary discussions.

In the morning, we broke off into small groups and discussed our own experiences with racism. This provided a platform for genuine and truthful sharing in confidence, and also helped to bond members who perhaps otherwise wouldn't have interacted. It's hard for us to condense an entire day's worth of deep conversation on sometimes difficult subjects into one small post, but we will try to get more of our detailed notes up at a later date (when we have more time).

After lunch, we broke off into different small groups, to discuss positive ways to address the subject of diversity. We covered subject areas such as self care, recognizing differences, multiple identities, religious pluralism, and more. Afterwards we had the chance to present what we had learned to the whole group.

Later we watched Making Whiteness Visible, a film that was also shown at the US section congress last summer, followed by discussion on our own personal reactions to the theme of white privilege.

Finally, we broke off into issue committee groups, to discuss the work that needs to be done between now and the next international meeting.

Overall, a very productive day. We are tired and looking forward to tomorrow, when we get to go in the UN and hear a talk on 1325! Yippee! Now we're going to sleep.

Day 1, Geneva (partial)

2008-11-19T13:51:00.000-08:00

We began today with the Gertrud Baer seminar, with a number of young members as well as both new and experienced older members. It was quite a large group, actually, but we made a big amoeboid shape (not exactly circular) and listened to presentations on the structure and history of WILPF, followed by discussion and questions.

After a brief break, we split off and YWILPF was able to meet and do some concrete planning. I would love to share it with you but I'm afraid this will have to wait, as Ella Page was the notetaker, and we don't have her here.... :)

Many interesting facts emerged in the discussion today of which we were not previously aware. For example, Susi has a photo (which we will acquire for US use) of Martin Luther King, Jr. speaking at a WILPF rally. Seriously. Also, before the UN charter was adopted, when WILPF had first begun to work in Geneva with the League of Nations, Gandhi came to speak to the countries assembled. He was refused entry, so the lovely women of our organisation set up a conference for him in Victoria hall and within 24 hours he was speaking to an overflow crowd. NOW the UN recognizes him. There's a statue of him outside. In the clothing they found so inappropriate at the time.

Another example of when we were right was during the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. WILPF actually had to meet in Switzerland, and phone in its consensus to representatives in France, because our German members were not allowed to enter the country, and the others refused to meet without them. WILPF denounced the treaty, claiming that it laid the foundation of a renewed conflict, that it was revenge rather than peacemaking. Then, unfortunately, World War II proved them correct.

So basically, WILPF is amazing. More to come.

Day 0, Geneva

2008-11-18T10:17:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow the International Board meeting begins here in Geneva, Switzerland. On that day, Monika and I will participate in the Gertrud Baer seminar, a meeting designated for young members, as well as those new to the organization. We've had time these past couple days to do some sightseeing on foot and by bus (the public transit system here is extensive, lovely, and free for us). We're pretty much in love with Geneva. It's gorgeous and architectural marvels are everywhere.

This afternoon, we met with Susi to update her on the activities of US YWILPF and to get some valuable input on our activities. We also had a wonderful lunch with the interns in the Geneva office, who are very busy and very friendly.

The hostel we're staying in is wonderful (and clean and safe). We'd recommend it. A ton of WILPFers are also staying here--it's completely booked for the week.

That's all the news we have for now, but look forward to a much longer post tomorrow!

Au revoir,

Robin and Monika

Exhale.........OK.

2008-11-05T13:27:00.000-08:00

Last night there was dancing in the street in my hometown of Olympia, WA. Obama T-shirts were everywhere, and my friends and I watched the speeches in a standing-room-only packed bar. There was much screaming and hugging of strangers.

Now it's time for reality. Certainly, Obama was the major candidate who called for an end to the war in Iraq. However, he is not our savior. We are our own saviors. And we must not lose this momentum. The nation has arisen to demand change. We must work incessantly, now more than ever, to channel that historic energy and consciousness into an effective and cohesive peace movement, never forgetting that the President-elect continues to spout the rhetoric of "winning" in Afghanistan.

I believe in his core motivations. I do not think he intends to betray those who facilitated his rise to the White House. But without CONSTANT pressure from activists he will be pummeled into submission by corporate greed, militarism, and their lobbyists and money that saturate DC. We must fight for the future we believe in (non-violently, of course). And we must not stop.

So enjoy this victory. It is truly significant. And it is the first step on a long, long road.

Lets begin.

Ok.. so now what ?

2008-11-04T22:09:00.000-08:00

Bowoto v. Chevron

2008-11-04T19:38:00.000-08:00

I recognize that on this historic day most of us are having difficulty thinking about anything outside of the election, but lets give it a try. :)

On May 25, 1998 a group of more than a hundred local Ilaje tribe members boarded a Chevron barge nine miles offshore in the oil-rich Niger Delta, demanding jobs and more environmental responsibility from the multinational. On the fourth day of the protest, with negotiation apparently ongoing, management called in the notorious Nigerian Navy, who arrived in company helicopters. They then opened fire, killing two and injuring others, including Larry Bowoto who was shot multiple times. Along with eighteen other plaintiffs, Bowoto has brought the case to a United States district court in San Francisco, near Chevron headquarters in San Ramon, California. The suit was made possible under the Alient Torts Claims Act (ATCA), passed in 1789, which allows foreign nationals to file charges in the US court system for human rights abuses perpetrated on foreign soil. Recent use of the ATCA has raised the possibility that multinational corporations and other entities that abuse the rights of people in other countries could be held accountable here at home.

Testimony kicked off on Monday, October 27, with starkly contrasting claims coming from plaintiff and defendant. While Chevron insists that the protesters were armed and taking hostages (despite a contradicting message sent to the US embassy by a company official on the third day of the protest), and that they simply notified the authorities of the unrest, the plaintiffs paint a very different story. This should prove to be a landmark precedent-setting case in the struggle to hold corporations accountable for their actions and abuses overseas, vindicating all people's right to justice. The case is being heard by Judge Susan Illston.

More information is available at:

http://bowotovchevron.wordpress.com/
(This is a good blog following the daily arguments)

http://thechevronpit.blogspot.com/
(This blog focuses Chevron abuses around the world, including the current Bowoto case)

http://justiceinnigeria.wordpress.com/
(Founded by Laura Livoti, this organization was a major driving force behind bringing this case to trial)

http://www.saharareporters.com/www/news/detail/?id=759
(Website run by Nigerian human rights activist Sowore Omoyele)

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/28/drilling_and_killing_landmark_trial_against
(Democracy Now previously released a documentary entitled Drilling and Killing: Chevron and Nigeria’s Oil Dictatorship – you can read the full transcript online at http://www.democracynow.org/2003/7/11/transcript_of_drilling_and_killing_documentary)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/28/BUUC13PITQ.DTL
(A very good article summarizing the opening arguments in San Francisco)

Also, Daniel Firger and Andrew Woods are blogging from the courtroom for the Huffington Post. See his updates at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-firger or http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-woods

Election thoughts on the eve of a new page in history for the US...

2008-11-03T12:57:00.001-08:00

Voices from WILPF Israel: Daphne Banai & Taghrid Shbita

2007-02-25T20:13:00.000-08:00

The women of Los Angeles, recognizing the extraordinary peace work done by Daphne Banai & Taghrid Shbita, members of WILPF Israel, brought them to the US for a mini-tour. They spoke at three events this weekend and are travelling to San Francisco for another engagement. I attended today's lecture and had the pleasure of meeting Taghrid & Daphne at a pot luck after the event.

Both Taghrid and Daphne believe that US citizens must pressure the US government to stop supporting the occupation. They offer no easy cures for the problem, only the hope that working together, we can affect real change in this horrific situation. Both believe in a two-state solution and dismiss the reasons given by the Israeli & US governments for not negotiating with the Hamas-led Palestinian government.

We can start creating this change in US policy by working together to formulate an alternative, feminist policy on Israel / Palestine. The US Section campaign "Women Challenge US Policy: Building Peace on Justice in the Middle East," is close to releasing a tool-kit to help our branches start feminist round tables to examine current US policy and develop an alternative approach.

For more notes from the lecture, visit my political blog, Social Upheaval.

"Fidel's Final Victory"

2007-01-24T21:33:00.000-08:00

[Editor's note: this post was written by Cindy Domingo, Branch Representative on the National Board and member of the Women & Cuba Issue Committee. Cindy lives in Seattle, Washington.]

I would like to recommend folks read an article entitled, "Fidel's Final Victory" in the January/February 2007 Foreign Affairs. It deals with the transition of power that has occurred in Cuba and places it the context of U.S.-Cuba relations. As the article states, the transition of power has occurred and although the U.S. and the media can pretend that chaos will break out and a mass exodus of Cubans to the U.S. will occur - none of that has happened. Cuban society is running smoothly, services are continued to be provided and life continues. The only problem that continues is that the U.S. blockade and the corporate controlled media prevents us from hearing accurate news of what is happening in Cuba or seeing it for ourselves.

The transition for power happened and the Cuban exile community will not be returning home to reclaim anything. The Cuban people won't allow that - it's their country!!!

by Cindy Domingo

Star Wars, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and Human Travel to Mars

2007-01-22T19:41:00.000-08:00

[Editor's Note: the following post was written by Mort Frank, member of the WILPF Philadelphia branch Military Affairs Committee in response to "Look Up! Is It a Threat? Or a Plea for a Ban?," by William J. Broad in the Sunday NY Time's Week in Review.]

William J. Broad discusses only the first of these in The New York Times Week in Review of January 21, 2007, but he might well have been discussing all three. What they have in common is that they are all Government-sponsored crackpot ideas consuming huge amounts of money. SDI has already demonstrated it can't work. Steps to enable human travel to Mars, which are just getting under way, face insurmountable technical pitfalls. "Star Wars," – which refers to the preparation of missiles or other satellites, to destroy the satellites of an enemy, such as China – presumes large scale war with that enemy.

The impossibility of SDI has been evident for decades, and big money still continues to get spent. Even if human travel to Mars were to work, data collection by human explorers could not be nearly as useful or efficient as what is already accomplished by robots. The problem of insecurity of our satellites could readily be resolved by signing and monitoring a space treaty.

What these three programs have in common is their pork barrel nature. They are expensive make-work for the aerospace industry. At the most, failure of the space travel adventure would cost a dozen lives. SDI doesn't scare anybody anymore, but the prospect of effectively targeting the satellites of an adversary is real and carries the possibility of destabilizing international relations. As William J. Broad makes clear, the United States stands to lose more than any other country by having its satellites destroyed in war. It is clear that Broad doesn't support preparations for "space war," but I fear that he treats the issue a little too solemnly. Broad would have done a service if he had examined the pork barrel aspect of antisatellite weapons. Business for the aerospace industry is the only way that the space war project makes sense.

by Mort Frank, WILPF Philadelphia Branch

A Modern History of Cuba by Lisa Valenti, member of the Women & Cuba Issue Committee

2007-01-22T19:24:00.000-08:00

[Editor's Note: This post is a reaction to the article "After Castro: What Was Once Theirs," by Anthony DePalma that appeared in The Week in Review section of the Sunday NY Times yesterday. Lisa Valenti is a member of the WILPF Pittsburgh branch and the Women & Cuba Committee of WILPF US.]

When the revolution came to power in 1959, the majority of resources were owned and controlled by foreign interests, the majority U.S. individuals and corporations from the United States owned two-thirds of the arable land in Cuba and controlled most of the commerce. At the same time, political corruption in Cuba was rampant under the US supported dictator General Fulgencio Batista. Fidel Castro led a revolution, which overthrew the dictatorship and declared Cuba for the Cubans, severing its status as a U.S. satellite, or virtual colony, making the island a self-determining, independent, and sovereign nation.

In order to address the profound economic inequities, the new government had to undertake fundamental resource allocation and nationalized all foreign held companies along with fifty percent of the land, including all farms over 400 hectares, 380 firms, 36 sugar mills, and all of the banks, with nationalization and expropriation of foreign owned land holdings.

Cubans with property, mainly the 'managerial class' or 'loyalists' to US interests, fled to the US, fearful of retribution from landless farm workers. However, no personal property or homes were seized where the owners remained, although some farms over 400 hectares, had 'excess' land given to landless farmers to live on and grow food.

The new Cuban government offered compensation for all nationalized resources, but at the declared tax value of the property, which was based on the purchase price, and of course, was undervalued, and thus the US corporations refused to accept, thinking they would, from the safety of Miami mount a counter attack and return Cuba as a client state to the US. (Bay of Pigs, etc.)

Every other country that had property that was nationalized, has been compensated for their property. The US has refused to negotiate.

On the matter of 'individual' homes, no homes were seized unless they were abandoned by their occupants, as was the case of the NYT article. Cuba doesn't let foreigners own property, that would sit around perpetually abandoned and unmaintained, like we do in the U.S., which are blights in our communities. (Although foreigner's may RENT/lease property or enter into 'joint' ventures, developmental partnerships with Cuba.)

Surprisingly, Cuba has one of the highest home 'ownership' ratios in the world. In Cuba, people 'own' their homes, they have paid off small loans and they cannot be evicted for any reason for their entire lives. But they do not own the land the homes sit on, and may not sell them for profit, or to foreigners. All land is retained by the state in public trust. However Cubans have an ingenious method of 'exchanging' homes, not exactly bartering, but moving in ways that allows them some freedom, in obtaining more or less space.

However, housing is in crisis in Cuba because the US blockade does not allow for building supplies to be easily purchased or transported to Cuba, and every year Cuba loses thousands of homes to the many natural disasters, hurricanes, etc.

For people thinking they will get rich on property abandoned by their relatives, they will be sorely disappointed.

by Lisa Valenti. More information on the Women & Cuba Issue Committee of WILPF US can be found on our main website.

Citizen's Hearing on the Legality of US Actions in Iraq

2007-01-22T19:04:00.000-08:00

[Editor's note from Carol Urner, Co-Chair of the WILPF Disarm Committee: MacGregor Eddy and Linda Richards are representing the WILPF Disarm Committee at the Citizen's Hearing on the Legality of US Actions in Iraq. A carload from the WILPF Ashland, OR branch also drove up -- a two day trip for them and will be reporting back to us when they return.]

Hello, this is MacGregor from the Citizens' hearing in Tacoma, this is a moving event, dignified, detailed and clear. Here is a blog that has more details than I have time to send, it is amazing:

Today's post on WashBlog

An Interview with Darrell Anderson, Iraq Vet Against the War, on WashBlog

Blogging from the Citizen's Hearing, Saturday on WashBlog

Jeannette Rankin Film in Post-Production!

2006-12-12T21:31:00.000-08:00

One of WILPF's greatest members, Jeannette Rankin, has been immortalized by one of our national board members, Jeanmarie Simpson. Jeanmarie wroted, directed, and starred in the play "A Single Woman," about Jeannette's life. The play was performed off-Broadway and around the country, including at our WILPF US Triennial Congress in 2005, our WILPF West Gathering in 2006, and at several branches. Through the hard work of Jeanmarie and WILPF Life Member Cameron Crain (Producer / Actor), the film version of "A Single Woman" is in post-production. Thanks to Jeanmarie's generosity and dedication to WILPF, a portion of the proceeds from this film will be given to WILPF. Check out this sneak peek at the making of the film -

Experiencing "Gender & Disarmament" Panel @ the UN

2006-11-30T21:34:00.000-08:00

On September 23, 2006, the International WILPF UN Office co-sponsored a panel on "Gender & Disarmament" with the Global Network to End War. Below is feedback from Anastasia Shown, the Project Coordinator Intern at the WILPF US office.
---------
This was my first visit to the United Nations. I was very excited just to see the building and witness the daily activities. I traveled from Philadelphia with Jody Dodd, Leadership and Membership Coordinator, Kate Zaidan, Program Coordinator and Jessica , Development intern. The WILPF UN office made us great badges and welcomed us when we arrived. Anita Pulier, WILPF US Representative to the UN, met up with us for lunch. I was overwhelmed with the food choices and ended up being so full; I needed coffee to stay awake the rest of the afternoon. Anita caught us up on what the voting would be about that day, disarmament issues, nuclear weapons threats, biological weapons use, etc. We attended the panel on Gender and Disarmament, hosted by WILPF UN and Global Network to End War. I was amazed at the clarity and organized structure of the meeting. All the presentations were presented in a timely manner and all questions were answered thoughtfully, yet to the point. The meeting didn’t go on too long and no one strayed from the topic. This must be how the United Nations functions?! I point this out only because it impressed me. I have been to countless meetings in the workplace environment and at the university where the talks stray from the main goal and everyone ends up losing focus. While the gender and weapons discussion is not new to me, I was able to gain information regarding new concerns in the discussion. We spent the rest of the afternoon watching the voting. I was amazed at how defiant the United States was about their votes, often voting NO when 98% voted YES. I wondered how that guy (the U.S. rep) hangs out with the others in the cafeteria. Do they talk to him? While the others voted the promise not to threaten use of their nuclear weapons, is it awkward that he represents a country that blatantly refused to make that promise? At lunch are they able to put it all behind them and chat about their kids or their annoying commute? I was there only one day and I felt like I had to talk about it to everyone I encountered. I called my Dad on the way home and told him about the votes, I talked about it in my classes at school and I vented to my friends. I was impressed with the organized structure of the United Nations, but at the end of the day I had a hard time reframing my attitude from the“But these are real human lives!” to the, “This is business as usual.”

More WILPF Material from the BioWeapons Conference

2006-11-28T10:12:00.000-08:00

Several WILPFers are observing the Sixth Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention. US WILPFer Joan Ecklein, from the Boston branch, joined Carol in Geneva to do a presentation on the Boston activist community's response to the National Biocontainment Laboratory planned for Boston University. WILPF Boston has been at the forefront of the effort to stop the building of this dangerous lab. The presentation was held yesterday, based on a paper written by Joan and Claire Gosselin, Boston branch co-chair. The paper is available on the WILPF international website as a pdf file.

Our Geneva-based Disarmament team, Beatrice Fihn and Katherine Harrison, wrote an official report on the first week of the conference available at wilpf.int.ch.

Fifth Dispatch from Carol in Geneva

2006-11-28T01:54:00.000-08:00

From the Bio-Weapons Treaty Sixth Review Conference
Fifth dispatch from Carol Urner at the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland: 11/24/06

NOTE: Contact me with questions or comments at carol.disarm@gmail.com. Geneva UN has wireless and I will try to respond.

The first week of the review conference ended with formal discussions still moving along at a fast pace, subjecting the treaty to the first article by article review since 1991. Sessions are still private but I talked with the delegate from Argentina at lunch, herself a biologist, who indicated the tone is still upbeat and hopeful, with areas of agreement continuing to emerge. All decisions must be made by consensus, and the delegates have not yet moved to that stage.

The noon forum, presented by Amy Smithson, PhD of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, surveyed 52 U.S. policy makers regarding their current perceptions on the dangers of biological weapons to the US, and on policy and counter measures required . Those surveyed included four former Secretaries of Defense, a past CIA Director, national security experts and current top decision makers Of these 52 75% believe bioweapons are a major threat, and 48% think they are a greater threat to the U.S. than nuclear weapons. 83% felt the threat of attack is on the increase, although 59% do not think it is very likely in the next 5 years. 81%, however, believe an attack is somewhat or very likely in the next ten years. Most (71%) thought any such an attack would be made by a "lone wolf" or deranged individual. (Yes, methinks, probably by someone with access to a hi-level U.S. military lab!)

I think the study would have been much more helpful if she had broken down the groups of respondents. I would have expected a higher perception of threat among current decision makers than among those who had been in power 1992 to 2000, but would like to have seen this confirmed or denied. I also wonder how perceptions of experts compared with those of policy makers.

The second half of the study was more heartening than the first. 98% support vigorous biosecurity measures and. 94% support oversight of genetic engineering involving highly infectious pathogens and want criminalization of biological weapons related activities. The oddest result, however, was that 54% thought bioweapons should be a policy priority, but a whopping 77% made it a spending priority. And spend, spend, spend is what the government is doing with bioweapons now accounting for 44 billion in appropriations since 2001.

The writer did include a range of unattributed quotes in response to each section, and these added life to the pages of charts and percentages. Of course my favorites were ones like "Since this treaty does not have monitoring provisions, there ought to be a major U.S. initiative to inspire them. We should be at the negotiating table on this, leading the way!" Right on! But, unfortunately, that doesn't sound like the response of a current policy maker.

The most heartening finding for me was that a full 69% believed monitoring provisions should be added to the bioweapons ban treaty, but there was no breakdown among classifications of respondents. So out with John Bolton and his friends in the Administration and let's go for it!

Show Solidarity with Israeli Activists: Sign Petition to Stop the Siege on Gaza

2006-11-25T00:58:00.000-08:00

WILPF Israel, along with others in the Coalition of Women for Peace, called for a month of action to Stop the Siege! Stop the War! As part of this month of education and action, they have created an online petition. Here is the text:

To the Israeli government and world leaders:

GAZA: Stop the Siege! Stop the War!

The situation in Gaza has reached emergency levels - inadequate water, electricity, and medicine; widespread hunger, poverty, and unemployment; schools and other services rendered inoperative; constant bombardments and attacks by the Israeli military.

This humanitarian catastrophe is man-made: It was brought on by the ongoing siege of the Gaza Strip by Israel and the sanctions imposed by the international community on Palestine, made worse by repeated IDF attacks. If this situation continues, we will see spreading disease, malnutrition, and more violence. Under these conditions, negotiations - the only way to reach peace between both peoples - also become an impossibility.

We call upon Israeli leaders to end the siege of and war on Gaza. We call upon world leaders to end the political and economic sanctions of Palestine.

The siege and sanctions are sowing chaos and death in Gaza. They must come to an end.

Sincerely,
[your name]

Sign the petition through this link.

Here's the comment I left with my signature:

As the Program Chair of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, US Section (WILPF US), and an American Jew, I urge you to stop the seige. Endless occupation, land appropriation, and killing makes both Israel and Palestine unsafe. Israel's security depends on an independent Palestine. US security depends on making our foreign policy more just and being more open to criticizing Israeli government actions.

Learn more about this month of action, culminating on December 2 at the gazaseige.net website.

Learn more about the WILPF US campaign, Women Challenge US Policy: Building Peace on Justice in the Middle East (WCUSP) at our website.

Fourth Dispatch from Carol in Geneva

2006-11-25T00:42:00.000-08:00

From the
Bio-Weapons Treaty Sixth Review Conference
Fourth dispatch from Carol Urner at the United Nations, Geneva, 11/24/06 NOTE: Contact me with questions or comments at carol.disarm@gmail.com.

Today the lunch time seminar was presented by the Center for Biosecurity. The presenter gave good basic information on the civilian high containment laboratories (like the controversial Level-4 lab opposed so vigorously by Boston WILPF) but glossed over the questionable aspects. She was young, personable and, I think, sincere, but her presentation reminded me of the upbeat promotion of Three Mile Island I heard from their public relations specialist just a few days before a nuclear accident shut down the plant. She was willing to answer my questions, however. Check DISARM UPDATE at http://disarm.wilpf.org/NovDec06/BWCconference1.htm for more details. I regret I didn't ask her about BARDA, the new legislation that now exempts bio-defense research from inquiries under the Freedom of Information Act. Our government has been moving in the direction of much greater secrecy, rather than transparency, and that trend must be reversed if we are ever to rid the world of bioweapons.

Here is the URL for the Verification Matters text which I reported on so enthusiastically yesterday. Explore it yourself. I was pleased that Kathryn Nixdorff of the INES Working Group on Biological and Toxic Weapons Control sought me out to provide a better answer to my question two days ago about genetic specific weapons. She clarified that specific gene markers do exist in some ethnic populations that could be targeted. They usually appear in less that 10% (or as little as 1%) of the population but that could be enough to disrupt a society and sow terror in the populace. We agreed that this is the kind of research that should not be allowed to happen. It reminds me of that telltale sentence in the New American Century Rebuilding America's Defenses Report (page 60): And advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biowarfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.

Third Dispatch from Carol in Geneva

2006-11-23T11:06:00.000-08:00

From the
Bio-Weapons Treaty Sixth Review Conference
Third dispatch from Carol Urner at the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland: 11/22/06

NOTE: Contact me with questions and comments at carol.disarm@gmail.com. The UN chambers have wireless and I will try to respond.

Oddly, this third day seemed the most productive yet, even though NGO reps and other non-official delegates can no longer access the official sessions. This is because the daily seminar (described below) was, for me, fantastic. I was again only able to spend a half hour in the WILPF office but met more delightful young interns. I plan to introduce at least some of them to you before I cease sending these dispatches next week.

You can find a longer report of the third day at the BWC at the Disarm Committee website. This was the most fruitful day yet in many ways even though the sessions of the BWC are now closed to all but official delegates. The seminar presented by three NGOs on the huge briefing book they have provided at the conference turned out to be very exciting. The book is almost two inches thick and has all the background documents needed to understand what is going on here. I have picked up an extra copy for the WILPF office since this will be a basic reference book for years to come. But most useful was the presentation by one of the three NGOs which compiled the book, VERTIC, and the presentation of another smaller document they have prepared on steps that can be taken now, even without an inspection protocol, to begin developing transparency and the verification necessary. It concentrates on steps to be taken by nation states themselves, and I think we can encourage some of our committee chairs in the new Congress to begin taking steps in this direction. I picked up only two copies of the book before the supply was exhausted, but Angela Woodward, the presenter, has promised to furnish with a web link where the entire document can be viewed or downloaded.

The Human Consequence of the Israeli Government's Discrimination

2006-11-22T21:28:00.000-08:00

I was forwarded a letter from Professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian via a Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) listserv. Professor Shalhoub-Kevorkian was humiliated at the Ben Gurion airport. After ransacking her personal belongings, the Israeli security officers decided she could not board the airplane with her laptop (which she needed to write a lecture for the “Women and Sexual Reproductive Rights” conference she was trying to attend in Tunis.)

The letter can be read in its entirety on Margaret's Wanderings blog. I urge you to read it to understand the human consequence of the State Fear of Others.

Dr. Nadera Shaloub-Kevorkian's website at the Institute of Criminology at the Hebrew University of Jersusalem

cross-posted from Social Upheaval. Also check out my blog for a round up of Israel / Palestine news from the New York Times.

2nd Dispatch from Carol in Geneva

2006-11-22T09:43:00.000-08:00

From the Bio-Weapons Treaty Sixth Review Conference
Second dispatch from Carol Urner at the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland: 11/21/06

NOTE: Contact me with questions and comments at carol.disarm@gmail.com. The UN chambers have wireless and I will try to respond.

This second day was more exciting for me since it was my first chance to talk in depth with other NGO reps like Edward Hammond of the Sunshine Project and Loulena Miles, legal representative for Tri-Valley Cares. I've posted a longer report on our DISARM UPDATE at http://disarm.wilpf.org/NovDec06/BWCconference1.htm. My mind was clearer today though my own bio-clock is still upside down (I could only manage 4 hours of sleep), but by tomorrow I hope to be a fully functioning human being.

One of the most interesting items today was the seminar on rapid advances in bio-genetics that will make weaponization even more scary and also harder to detect. The presenters confirmed that it should soon be possible to target specific ethnic groups with bio-weapons agents just as our neo cons suggested in their New American Century Rebuilding America's Defenses report. Adds even more urgency to the work to get inspection and verification underway. But there is much in this review conference to give hope -- a general willingness to cooperate in moving forward, albeit in new and novel ways. And NGOs present are helping to illuminate the path.

I am thinking again of Emily Greene Balch and Jane Addams. The work they started could not be finished in their generation, nor will it be in ours -- this is a task for generation after generation of committed women to carry forward. It is exciting to find here in Geneva all the young WILPF interns at work in the office (I'll introduce you later to some from the USA). Those of us in the older generations must find more of them to join us before we pass on.

Dispatch from Carol Urner at the Bio-Weapons Conference in Geneva

2006-11-21T10:25:00.000-08:00

Bio-Weapons Treaty Sixth Review Conference
Dispatch from Carol Urner at the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland. Carol is the co-chair of the WILPF US Disarm! Dismantle the War Economy Committee. She is also the co-chair of the WILPF International Peace & Security Working Group. This dispatch was written regarding yesterday's proceedings.

NOTE: Contact me with questions and comments at carol.disarm@gmail.com. The UN chambers have wireless and I will try to respond.

These are my personal observations after watching the first day of general debate. I am, like all WILPFers, dismayed that the present U.S. Administration has rejected inspection and already invested $44 billion in very questionable "defensive" biological weapons research. However, I am also now heartened by positive efforts of the international community to bring the U.S. back into compliance with and support for the treaty.

Kofi Annan opened the Sixth Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) Review Conference today on a positive note, five years after the last one ended in disarray. He congratulated all governments present for keeping the Biological Weapons Convention alive, and for their determined efforts to remedy short comings, including their own. The positive note became a symphony as delegate after delegate expressed his/her nation's determination to continue on a forward path. (I'll admit I read all this as a concerted effort to draw the United States back into the negotiating process, but it was also each nation's real acceptance of responsibility for achieving the treaty's success.)

At the previous BWC Review Conference in November 2001 delegates had gathered expecting to approve an Inspection Protocol painstakingly negotiated over the past seven years. However, the U.S. had a new Administration wary of disarmament treaties and had already expressed dissatisfaction with the protocol in July. In November, two months after 9/11, John Bolton shocked the delegates by announcing the new U.S. Administration would not support the Inspection Protocol and regarded it as dead. He also demanded the following year that the Review Conference adjourn after half a day since there was nothing to discuss.

However, more seasoned diplomats led delegates into innovative and useful annual sessions, and also convened meetings of experts. Together they explored new areas of cooperation in developing universal adherence to the treaty , national legal frameworks supporting domestic compliance, codes of conduct for scientists involved in biological research, education of populations on the necessity of treaty compliance and ways to enhance lab security and control dangerous pathogens.

Today only a few delegates -- including those from Switzerland, Germany, Russia and the non-aligned nations -- spoke openly of the continuing need for inspection and verification. All, however, concentrated on developing a climate of active support for the treaty. In general they seemed in harmony with Russia's request that all stop playing the blame game and concentrate on improving their own compliance and on making acceptance of the treaty universal. True, the U.S. delegate mentioned the possibility that Iran, Syria and North Korea might be developing biological weapons they could pass on to "terrorists," but otherwise also kept to the positive tone. Algeria raised the need for Israel to stop blocking the WMD free zone which all other Middle East nations support for that troubled region, but again there also a more positive note. Israel, though not a party to the treaty, had requested observer status and hopefully will also move toward accession.

I remembered today Emily Greene Balch's conviction that working together in international institutions could help nations learn to cooperate in achieving common goals, and thus abandon making war on one another. I hope we in WILPF can continue to facilitate the process our foremothers fostered almost a century ago at the same time we point out the dangers to all in secrecy, unilateralism and rejection of international law as well as in policies of "full spectrum dominance" and pre-emptive war.

Editor's Note: WILPF International is documenting the proceedings of the Sixth Review Conference on Bio-Weapons. Reports, Documents, Working Papers, and Statements can all be found via the WILPF International website.

WILPF Outraged by Claimed North Korean Nuclear Weapons Test

2006-10-10T11:28:00.000-07:00

Today, WILPF released a statement condemning the claimed nuclear explosion by North Korea and calling on all states to work towards nuclear disarmament through the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

Read the statement on WILPF's International website.

US WILPF Board Meets to Push Forward Peace & Justice Agenda

2006-10-09T22:17:00.000-07:00

The National Board of the US Section of the WILPF met last Friday through Sunday. We struggled deeply with many issues, including passing a budget for 2007.

I'm only 28, and yet I find myself in the position of the crotchety old-timer the more board meetings I go to. When new board members suggested that we simply pledge to raise more money next year to offset our expenses, I tell them "we've been saying that every year, it's time to think realistically."

We need more members. If you're reading this blog and you're not a member, I urge you to join us. Your future, the future of your children, and the future of the world depends on it. For 91 years, the League has been at the forefront of the peace & justice movement. For us to continue in the next 91 years, it is absolutely vital that people support our work - with cold hard cash.

I know others would rather I tell you about the amazing work we're doing. And it's true - we're a fabulous, multi-issue organization. Our hands are stirring many pots for social justice and a path to peace. And I know our contribution as an organization is vital. But that's not the point. The point is that our message must reach more people - and that starts by joining us. WILPF is a membership organization and without members, we'll cease to exist. Further, as a progressive organization on the forefront of change (we've been called the most dangerous women in America; we had an ongoing dialogue with Soviet women at the height of the Cold War; we're challenging US policy on Israel / Palestine and working to preserve water as a human right), we tend to lead with actions and worry about the money later.

Well, I'm worrying about the money now. So join. Or donate. (and in the memo line, say that C.J. sent you via the blog)

All Nine Nuclear Powers Are Violating Non-Proliferation Treaty

2006-10-09T21:59:00.000-07:00

North Korea has perhaps, probably joined the "prestigious" club of out and proud nuke owning countries. That makes eight official world-annihilators and one in the closet. (The closeted annihilator is, of course, Israel. Can't have a gendarmerie in the Middle East without giving it teeth.)

Missing from mainstream news coverage of this auspicious moment in world history is the fact that all nuclear powers - including the US - are violating the NPT.

More deets by Scott Galindez, managing editor of Truthout.

article found via portside.

More info on the NPT via Reaching Critical Will, a project of WILPF at the UN.

Defiant WILPFer Demands Action From Senator Santorum

2006-10-01T14:45:00.000-07:00

Marjorie Van Cleef, chair of WILPF's Rapid Response Committee, was arrested last Monday along with 13 other peace activists outside the office of Pennsylvania Senator Santorum. They refused to leave until their senator signed the Declaration of Peace Congressional Pledge.

The group was jailed over night and released pending a November 21 hearing at the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center. They were each charged with three "offenses:" defiant and criminal trespass, and conspiracy. I urge all available Philadelphia activists to attend their hearing in support of the right to peaceful protest.

Have you been involved in a congressional sit-in? Please let us know!

More information available from the Philadelphia Inquirer: "Antiwar protesters arrested outside Santorum office: The 14 activists with Brandywine Peace Community allegedly refused to leave the Center City building." by Joseph A. Slobodzian

Habeas Corpus

2006-09-29T15:21:00.000-07:00

This post was written by Jody Dodd, WILPF's Leadership and Outreach Coordinator.
-------------------
Yesterday, our elected officials voted to throw out Habeas Corpus….. a fundamental right. A right that is often cited as the difference between tyranny and democracy. The very simple right to demand that when one is being held by a government, that you have the right to go before a court and demand to know why? What charges are being made against you? And what evidence there is to hold you? This right is not only enshrouded in our Constitution, but in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

By voting to deny detainees the right to habeas, our elected officials committed an act of treason. I say this because when they were sworn in as our representatives, they swore to UPHOLD and protect the Constitution. These scoundrels moved to suspend habeas for the most cynical of reasons. First, to protect a President who a court had ruled had violated the law and second, because they think it will enhance their efforts to be re-elected. They want to argue that they are "protecting us from terrorism."

Most of us were taught in our schooling, from elementary school throughout our entire education that we are a nation of laws, not men. We were taught that the Constitution was a brilliant roadmap to democracy and protection of rights. We liked to cite this document as proof of our superior way of governing over communism or dictatorships. In fact, during the cold war, one of the examples of the difference between Us and the Soviets was the fact that under Communism, the government jailed people indefinitely, with no charges, while we professed our faith in our Constitution and due process, the rule of law.

Our elected officials, by their action, have exhibited that they do not believe in the strength of the rule of law. They do not believe that our system of justice can hold up in today’s current climate. They do not believe in the Constitution.

Now, we, the American People, have an obligation. In order to protect and defend the Constitution, we must throw these scoundrels from office. They have violated their oath of office and therefore no longer deserve our support.

Below is a link to the roll call vote on this act of treason. I encourage you to find your representatives’ name. I urge you to call him or her today and let them know that this act of treason will not stand. I urge you to write letters to newspapers and speak out. And then I urge you to join me in voting in November to throw these traitors out!

House Vote

Senate Vote

-- Written by Jody Dodd, WILPF US Leadership & Outreach Coordinator

Horrifying News: Seattle Jewish Center Targeted

2006-07-28T22:55:00.000-07:00

It is with sadness that I report that the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle was the target of a hate crime yesterday. One woman was murdered and five other women were wounded when a man claiming to hate Israel forced his way into the center. The shooter called 911 and was arrested on the scene.

6 Shot, 1 Fatally at Seattle Jewish Center, by AP via ABC News

"Fatal Seattle Jewish center shooting a "hate crime"," by Daisuke Wakabayashi of Reuters, via Yahoo News

"One dead in hate-crime shooting at Jewish center. Suspect in custody; three women in critical condition," by CNN

Online Activists Calling for a Cease Fire

2006-07-27T20:06:00.000-07:00

In my travels through the blogosphere this evening, I found a link to http://www.ceasefirecampaign.org

I encourage everyone to sign the petition (site sponsored by Res Publica) in support of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's call for an immediate cease fire and the deployment of an international force to stabilize the situation. (I would add that it is imperative to head UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security in all aspects of conflict resolution.)

While I admire their desire to publicize their campaign through newspaper advertisements, I must encourage you to donate to WILPF if you feel impelled to make a financial contribution to this cause. Trust me when I say you have never seen an international advocacy organization do so much on so little. (And if you don't believe me, I'd be happy to discuss our finances with sister WILPFers.)

Returning to the crisis at hand, the Jews of Lebanon have started a blog. While it is relatively new, it offers a glimpse into the frustrating history of Israeli - Arab relations. The blog's mission statement begins:

It is the intent of this blog to reestablish a connection between Lebanese of the Jewish faith around the world with their country of Lebanon. The message of coexistence and genuine national unity is not applicable so as long as a fragment from Lebanon’s mosaic of minorities is missing. If religious coexistence fails in Lebanon it will ultimately fail throughout the world.

It is the intent of this blog to provide a venue to express an adamant rejection of the intertwining of politics and humanitarian and moral endeavors. We reject the discriminatory and ignorant tendencies to equate the religion of Judaism to the politics of Zionism.

I know that a lot of people in the United States have difficulty understanding WILPF's position that Israel has the right to self defense but that it's actions in Lebanon and Gaza are disproportionate acts of aggression and that all sides should accept an immediate, unconditional cease fire. My hope is that by offering these alternative perspectives, people will have a richer understanding of the crisis.

First site found via Continental Ops' blog on The Progressive Blog Alliance HQ. Second site found via Jews sans frontieres.

US Speeds Up Arms Delivery to the Israelis

2006-07-22T08:54:00.000-07:00

US Speeds Up Arms Delivery to the Israelis, by David Cloud and Helene Cooper in the NYT

WASHINGTON, July 21 — The Bush administration is rushing a delivery of precision-guided bombs to Israel, which requested the expedited shipment last week after beginning its air campaign against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, American officials said Friday.

The decision to quickly ship the weapons to Israel was made with relatively little debate within the Bush administration, the officials said. Its disclosure threatens to anger Arab governments and others because of the appearance that the United States is actively aiding the Israeli bombing campaign in a way that could be compared to Iran’s efforts to arm and resupply Hezbollah.

Tell me again how the US can be an impartial peace negotiator in this conflict. The US government is supplying weapons to the Israelis - why would anyone look to it to stop the war? And what can we as individuals and members of WILPF do to stop this insanity?

Action Alert! Demand US Urge Israel Declare a Cease Fire!

2006-07-16T15:11:00.000-07:00

WILPF MEMBERS! TAKE ACTION NOW!

DEMAND US URGE ISRAEL DECLARE

A CEASE FIRE

END THE ASSAULT ON GAZA AND LEBANON!

Take Action Now!

The Women's International League for Peace and Freedom urges its members to take action now regarding the escalating violence in the Middle East. We demand an end to the violence and negotiations under U.N. auspices.

The massive humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and the war between Israel and Lebanon calls for our immediate attention. The civilian deaths are rising as the United States Government remains complicit in Israel’s attacks. The Israeli Army is using weapons provided by the United States to carry out this aggression, and US support of this assault is allowing Israel to act without accountability to international law, The Geneva Convention, the Road Map to Peace, or any previous treaty or negotiation.

We must oppose our government's unquestioning support of Israeli policies. This recent escalation of violence and civilian casualties is a direct result of 39 years of occupation of Palestinian land. We must demand that members of Congress, the State Department, and the President end our military support of Israel on the basis of its consistent violation of human rights and international law. Our leaders must demand that Israel end attacks on civilians, end attacks on infrastructure and immediately cease all human rights violations.

Israel is using weapons supplied by the United States to target Palestinian and Lebanese civilians and civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon in violation of the US Arms Export Control Act and the Geneva Conventions.

The mainstream media coverage of this crisis is unbalanced and biased, and we must change the discourse and work to influence the general public through our media outlets. Visit http://wilpf.org/letter-editor/ to write a letter to the editor of all your local papers, and be prepared to challenge radio and television talk show hosts on their language.
*****************************************************

I am mystified by the failure of the mainstream media to acknowledge that Israeli military actions in the Gaza and southern Lebanon are targeting civilians and other non-military targets. The destruction being wrought on the Palestinian people, and now the Lebanese, has largely been ignored while all attacks - whether on soldiers or civilians - carried out by a Palestinian militant receives significant attention.

The silence of the vast majority of the mainstream media and political leadership in the USA regarding Israel's actions and the blind-eye taken toward Israel's continual failure to respect the United Nations' resolutions to withdraw from the Occupied Territories, makes a mockery of any concern regarding human rights and international law.

I ask that [THE NAME OF NEWSPAPER] provide more balanced coverage of the situation in Palestine, and offer a forum for legitimate debate on the issues at hand. Years after an atrocity, the people of the world look at themselves and ask '…why were we silent?' It is not too late to preempt that question.

Sincerely,
********************************************************************
1. Call, email, fax the White House:
White House comment line: 202-456-1111
Email: comments@whitehouse.gov
FAX: 202-456-2461

2. Call or email the State Department:
Phone: 202-647-5291
Website: http://contact-us.state.gov

Demand that the U.S. be accountable for its violations of the US Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act and urge that military aid to Israel be cut off.

3. Write Letters to the Editor

4. Join sister activists in protests in front of federal buildings, Israeli consulates, and Israeli embassies.