1). “Welcome to #NoWar2023”, Sept 23, 2023, David Swanson, World BEYOND War, at < https://worldbeyondwar.org/
2). “Growing List of Successful Nonviolent Actions Used Instead of Wars”, N.D., Anon, World BEYOND War, at < https://worldbeyondwar.org/
3). “Congress won’t demand a ceasefire in Gaza, so activists are fighting to force their hand: Medea Benjamin of Code Pink explains what the growing protest movement against Israel’s genocide in Gaza aims to achieve”, Nov 10, 2023, Chris Hedges interviews Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, The Chris Hedges Report, at The Real News Network, duration of video 36:44, Complete transcript provided, at < https://therealnews.com/
~~ recommended by dmorista ~~
An Anti-Veteran's Day Collection of Articles for TCS.
Introduction: The U.S., and other ruling classes, like to commemorate the various horrific wars, always fought by the duped cannon-fodder working class young who are tricked or persuaded to fight and die in those conflicts. The rulers never endanger themselves, though some of their children risk life and limb, generally done to create a heroic personna for later political ambitions. Veterans Day was first known as Armistice Day, and it marked the 11:11 AM on the date of November (the 11th month) of 1918 when hostilities ceased. WW 1, known at first as merely "The Great War", was the deadliest war in human history at the time with about 20 million killed in industrial type slaughter. In just over 20 years that toll was massively surpassed, by WW 2's 100 million deaths. In 1954 under pressure from various veteran's associations the U.S. Congress changed the name from Armistice Day to the more Anodyne Veterans Day.
That was during the administration of Dwight David Eisenhower, a shrewd political General, whose only field command in his entire career was the attack on the “Bonus Army” at their encampment in Washington D.C. Eisenhower was an aide to General Douglas MacArthur at the time and commanded the attack on the Bonus Army in conjunction with General George S. Patton a patrician neo-confederate from an upper class family in Virginia. This is not to diminish the sincere beliefs that Eisenhower presented, in his criticisms of war and spending huge amounts of government funds on armaments.
In Europe the date is still commemorated as “Remembrance Day”, though this year there are large rallies in support of the Palestinians and for a ceasefire in Gaza scheduled. In the U.K. right-wing politicians have moaned and groaned about the chance that the Cenotaph (a war memorial first opened in 1920 to commemorate English and Empire dead and wounded from WW 1, and rededicated to include other wars in 1946) would be vandalized by the protesters, though the scheduled protests are nowhere near that War Memorial. Of course they were mostly looking for an excuse to suppress the demonstrations.
There are three fine articles here. David Swanson has dedicated himself to condemning all wars and looking for non-violent alternatives to armed conflicts. The two items from his website, World BEYOND War, discuss different aspects of this. Medea Benjamin, the long-time peace activist, spoke with Chris Hedges about the realities of war and peace in Israel / Palestine and the difficulty of lining up Democratic members of Congress to oppose a horrific war when the President is a Democrat.
Welcome to #NoWar2023 - World BEYOND War
By David Swanson, World BEYOND War, September 23, 2023
Welcome to NoWar2023, World BEYOND War’s annual conference. This is our eighth annual conference. Though we have existed for almost 10 years, we began these conferences exactly eight years ago. We’ve had two conferences in Washington, D.C., one in Toronto, Canada, and one in Limerick, Ireland. We’ve now had four online.
I’m wearing my sky-blue scarf. If you have one, please wear it. If you requested one when registering for this conference just recently, it is indeed in the mail to you. The scarf means that we all live under the same sky on a planet we are working to rid of all war and bring to a just and sustainable peace. Learn more at worldbeyondwar.org/blue
World BEYOND War is growing, and becoming more effective. But so is war propaganda. Over the three days of this conference, we want to address the most powerful argument for war.
As you know, our website and other publications and countless events have made the case that war is immoral, that it endangers us rather than protecting us, that it erodes liberties, promotes bigotry, wastes our wealth, and threatens our environment, that it is not inevitable, beneficial, or even justifiable.
It’s relatively easy for us to show that war is a choice made by humans, not an outside force, that various human societies have existed without war, and that any particular war could have been avoided with wiser choices in the years leading up to it. Our book on A Global Security System outlines a world in which structures of law and conflict resolution, economics and enterprises could render war highly unlikely instead of — as today — the end goal of vast efforts and energies.
The best answer to “What should people do when a military attacks them?” will always be to create a world in which militaries don’t attack you. But that hardly helps anyone in the moment of the attack. For decades now, in my experience living in the nation that launches the most wars, the mere act of thinking about alternatives to militarily fighting back against an invasion is almost universally frowned upon. In fact, a common argument for militarism by leftists in the U.S. is “How dare you tell victims of the U.S. what to do?” And it’s no step at all from there to “How dare you tell victims of Russia what to do?”
Twelve years ago, Erica Chenoweth came up with data suggesting that nonviolent revolutions are on average far more likely to succeed than violent ones, and the successes far longer lasting. This didn’t mean any of the familiar misunderstandings such as that violent revolutions have never succeeded or nonviolent ones never failed, or that nonviolent revolutions don’t confront violence from the other side, or that nonviolent action cannot be used for evil ends. But what did it mean for “What should people do when a military attacks them?”? Most of the examples were overthrows of domestic tyrants or unjust policies, not responses to foreign invasions.
Well, we started putting together a list of the most relevant examples, which you can find at worldbeyondwar.org/list
When French and Belgian troops occupied the Ruhr in 1923, the German government called on its citizens to resist without physical violence. Through nonviolent noncooperation, people turned public opinion in Britain, the U.S., and even in Belgium and France, in favor of the occupied Germans, and the French troops were withdrawn. In the final years of German occupation of Denmark and Norway during WWII, the Nazis effectively no longer controlled the population. Nonviolent actions led by Mohandas Gandhi and by Bacha Khan’s unarmed peace army were key to removing the British from India. When the Soviet military invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, there were demonstrations, a general strike, refusal to cooperate, removal of street signs, persuasion of troops. Despite clueless leaders conceding, the take-over was slowed, and the credibility of the Soviet Communist Party ruined. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia freed themselves from Soviet occupation through nonviolent resistance. In fact Ukrainian students nonviolently ended Soviet rule over Ukraine. In the first Palestinian intifada in the late 1980s to early 1990s, much of the subjugated population effectively became self-governing entities through nonviolent noncooperation. The Liberian Civil War of 1999-2003 was ended by nonviolent action. Etc.
There are many examples, including the nonviolent ousting of colonial rulers in Africa, and including the nonviolent liberation of occupied towns in Ukraine between 2014 and 2021, as well as of course numerous nonviolent overthrows of military dictatorships — which are what successful military invasions create. Many examples on our list are outright successes. Many are partial successes suggesting the potential of a tactic that in not one single case ever has shown its maximum power as easily imagined but never established. The question “What should people do when a military attacks them?” remains for the moment “What should people who have not been thoroughly trained in unarmed resistance do when a military attacks them?”
Of course the difficulty of what they can do is impacted by what the rest of the world does. If the options available include making use of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of free weapons, then they could include making use of hundreds of billions of dollars for something else. An invaded territory could quickly be provided not only with endless weapons but also, or instead, with a trained team of unarmed peacekeepers and trainers. Money is no concern, as hardly anything can be imagined that would approach the costs of militarism. Teams of many thousands from all over the world could be provided, in combination with diplomatic efforts, mediation, and negotiations, and in combination with the wildest financial incentives imaginable: new schools, hospitals, and sports complexes for every village that commits to nonviolence, tolerance, and democratic decision making. Of course, if governments were pursuing those things and putting money into something other than weapons, we wouldn’t have the wars in the first place. My point is that there are a variety of tools that could be used in response to a military invasion, and unarmed resistance is one of them. It would be better understood, and it would be more effective, if we prepared for it in the way that most of our governments prepare for war. And if the world’s media outlets celebrated it instead of focusing on violence.
It’s quite a high hurdle to appeal to a country that’s been militarily invaded — after decades of military defense (and offense) preparations and the accompanying cultural indoctrination in the supposed necessity of military defense — to appeal to said country to construct on-the-fly an unarmed civilian defense plan and act on it despite near-universal lack of training or even comprehension. We’re finding it to be a high hurdle just to get access to bring in an unarmed team to defend a nuclear power plant in the middle of a war. A more reasonable proposal is for national governments that are not at war to establish departments of unarmed civilian defense. A properly prepared unarmed defense department (something that might require a major investment of 2 or 3 percent of a military budget) could make a nation ungovernable if attacked by another country or a coup d’état and therefore immune from conquest.
This means training an entire society to resist, physically, socially, economically, and psychologically, to block streets, to not cooperate with orders, to dissuade invading and occupying troops from following orders, to shut down infrastructure, to make nothing work. These preparations should be widely publicized and totally transparent to potential adversaries.
The case of Lithuania offers some illumination of a way forward, but a warning as well. Having used nonviolent action to expel the Soviet military, the nation put in place an unarmed defense plan. But it has no plan to give military defense a backseat or to eliminate it. Militarists have been hard at work framing civilian-based defense as subsidiary to and in assistance of military action. We need nations to take unarmed defense as seriously as Lithuania, and then much more so. Nations without militaries — Costa Rica, Iceland, etc. — could come at this from the other end by developing unarmed defense departments in place of nothing. But nations with militaries, and with militaries and weapons industries subservient to imperial powers, will have the harder task of developing unarmed defense while knowing that an honest appraisal may require eliminating military defense.
I’m looking forward over the course of this conference to hearing the stories of unarmed activists from around the world. I expect they will inspire us all with ideas of what is possible and what we should be working to create in the years ahead.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Growing List of Successful Nonviolent Actions Used Instead of Wars - World BEYOND War
Studies find nonviolence more likely to succeed, and those successes longer lasting. Yet we’re told over and over again that violence is the only option. Had violence been the only tool ever used, we could obviously try something new. But no such imagination or innovation is required. Below is a growing list of successful nonviolent campaigns already used in situations in which we’re often told war is needed: invasions, occupations, coups, and dictatorships. If we were to include all variety of nonviolent actions, such as diplomacy, mediation, negotiations, and the rule of law, a much longer list would be possible. If we were to include nonviolent actions for justice unrelated to warlike situations, the list would be unmanageably enormous. If we were to include mixed violent and nonviolent campaigns we could have a much longer list. If we were to include nonviolent campaigns that achieved little or no success we could have a much longer list. We are focusing here on direct popular action, unarmed civilian defense, nonviolence used, and used successfully, in place of violent conflict. We have not sought to filter the list for the duration or goodness of the success or for the absence of malign foreign influences. Like violence, nonviolent action can be used for causes good, bad, or indifferent, and generally some combination of those. The point here is that nonviolent action exists as an alternative to war. The choices are not limited to “do nothing” or war. This fact does not, of course, tell us what any individual should do in any situation; it tells us what any society is free to attempt. Considering how frequently the existence of nonviolent action as a possibility is categorically denied, the length of this list below is rather staggering. Perhaps climate denial and other forms of anti-scientific rejections of evidence should be joined by nonviolent-action denial, as the latter is clearly a disastrous phenomenon.
● 2023 In Niger, a military coup took power and told France to remove its military (1500+ troops). France refused to recognize the new leader or remove troops. Instead, France tried to involve ECOWAS (African NATO) to put down the military coup. Other nations, like Nigeria, were initially aggressive toward the military coup, but demonstrations in their countries pulled them back from that stance. Mass protests at the main French military base led to France pulling its troops out. A western-backed military intervention was thwarted.
● 2022 Nonviolence in Ukraine has blocked tanks, talked soldiers out of fighting, pushed soldiers out of areas. People are changing road signs, putting up billboards, standing in front of vehicles, getting bizarrely praised for it by a U.S. President in a State of the Union speech. A report on these actions is here and here. Some new reports are here.
● 2020s In Colombia, a community has claimed its land and largely removed itself from war. See here, here, and here.
● 2020s In Mexico, a community has done the same. See here, here, and here.
● 2020s In Canada, indigenous people have used nonviolent action to prevent the armed installation of pipelines on their lands.
● 2020, 2009, 1991, Nonviolent movements have prevented the creation of a NATO military training ground in Montenegro, and removed U.S. military bases from Ecuador and the Philippines.
● 2018 Armenians protest successfully for resignation of Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan.
● 2015 Guatemalans compel corrupt president to resign.
● 2014 – 2015 In Burkina Faso, people nonviolently prevented a coup. See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 2011 Egyptians bring down dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak.
● 2010-11 Tunisians overthrow dictator and demand political and economic reform (Jasmine Revolution).
● 2011-12 Yemenis oust Saleh regime.
● 2011 Over many years, leading up to 2011, nonviolent activist groups in the Basque region of Spain played the leading role in eliminating the terrorist attacks of Basque separatists — notably not through a war on terrorism. See “Civil Action Against ETA Terrorism in Basque Country” by Javier Argomaniz, which is Chapter 9 in Civil Action and the Dynamics of Violence edited by Deborah Avant et alia. It may also be worth noting that on March 11, 2004, Al Qaeda bombs killed 191 people in Madrid just before an election in which one party was campaigning against Spain’s participation in the U.S.-led war on Iraq. The people of Spain voted the Socialists into power, and they removed all Spanish troops from Iraq by May. There were no more foreign terrorist bombs in Spain. This history stands in strong contrast to that of Britain, the United States, and other nations that have responded to blowback with more war, generally producing more blowback.
● 2011 Senegalese successfully protest proposal of change to Constitution.
● 2011 Maldivians demand resignation of the president.
● 2010s Nonviolence ended the occupations of towns in Donbass between 2014 and 2022.
● 2008 In Ecuador, a community has used strategic nonviolent action and communication to turn back an armed takeover of land by a mining company, as shown in the film Under Rich Earth.
● 2007-Present: Nonviolent resistance in Western Sahara has brought international attention to Moroccan’s occupation of Western Sahara and human rights violations against the Saharawi people.
● 2006 Thais overthrow Prime Minister Thaksin.
● 2006 Nepalese general strike curtails power of king.
● 2005 In Lebanon, 30 years of Syrian domination was ended through a large-scale, nonviolent uprising in 2005.
● 2005 Ecuadorians oust President Gutiérrez.
● 2005 Kyrgyz citizens overthrow President Ayakev (Tulip Revolution).
● 2003 Example from Liberia: Film: Pray the Devil Back to Hell. The Liberian Civil War of 1999-2003 was ended by nonviolent action, including a sex strike, lobbying for peace talks, and the creation of a human chain surrounding the talks until they were completed.
● 2003 Georgians overthrow a dictator (Rose Revolution).
● 2002 Madagascar general strike ousts illegitimate ruler.
● 1987-2002 East Timorese activists campaign for independence from Indonesia.
● 2001 The “People Power Two” campaign, ousts Filipino President Estrada in early 2001. Source.
● 2000s: community efforts in Budrus to resist the construction of the Israeli separation barrier in the West Bank through their lands. See the film Budrus.
● 2000 Peruvians campaign to overthrow Dictator Alberto Fujimori.
● 1991-99 East Timor: Along with international solidarity campaigns, efforts for East Timor’s independence from Indonesia halted a genocide and won independence. A key solidarity campaign pushed the U.S. Congress to cut off military aid to Indonesia, leading to President Suharto’s resignation, and East Timor’s independence.
● 1999 Surinamese protest against president creates elections that oust him.
● 1998 Indonesians overthrow President Suharto.
● 1997-98 Sierra Leone citizens defend democracy.
● 1997 New Zealand Peacekeepers with guitars instead of guns succeeded where armed peacekeepers had repeatedly failed, in ending war in Bougainville, as shown in the film Soldiers without Guns.
● 1992-93 Malawians bring down 30-year dictator.
● 1992 In Thailand a nonviolent movement undid a military coup. See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 1992 Brazilians drive out corrupt President.
● 1992 Madagascar citizens win free elections.
● 1991 In the Soviet Union in 1991, Gorbachev was arrested, tanks sent to major cities, media shut down, and protests banned. But nonviolent protest ended the coup in a few days. See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 1991 Malians defeat dictator, gain free election (March Revolution).
● 1990 Ukrainian students nonviolently end Soviet rule over Ukraine.
● 1989-90 Mongolians win multi-party democracy.
● 2000 (and 1990s) Overthrow in Serbia in 1990s. Serbians overthrow Milosevic (Bulldozer Revolution).
● 1989 Czechoslovakians campaign successfully for democracy (Velvet Revolution).
● 1988-89 Solidarność (Solidarity) brings down the communist government of Poland.
● 1983-88 Chileans overthrow Pinochet regime.
● 1987-90 Bangladeshis bring down Ershad regime.
● 1987 In the first Palestinian intifada in the late 1980s to early 1990s, much of the subjugated population effectively became self-governing entities through nonviolent noncooperation. In Rashid Khalidi’s book The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine, he argues that this disorganized, spontaneous, grassroots, and largely nonviolent effort did more good than the PLO had done for decades, that it unified a resistance movement and shifted world opinion, despite co-option, opposition, and misdirection by a PLO oblivious to the need to influence world opinion and utterly naive about the need for applying pressure on Israel and the United States. This contrasts sharply with the violence and the counterproductive results of the Second Intifada in 2000, in the view of Khalidi and many others.
● 1987-91 Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia freed themselves from Soviet occupation through nonviolent resistance prior to the USSR’s collapse. See the film Singing Revolution.
● 1987 People in Argentina nonviolently prevented a military coup. See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 1986-87 South Koreans win mass campaign for democracy.
● 1983-86 The Philippines “people power” movement brought down the oppressive Marcos dictatorship. Source.
● 1986-94 U.S. activists resist the forced relocation of over 10,000 traditional Navajo people living in Northeastern Arizona, using the Genocide Demands, where they called for the prosecution of all those responsible for the relocation for the crime of genocide.
● 1985 Sudanese students, workers bring down Numeiri dictatorship.
● 1984-90, Pledge of Resistance: preventing a U.S. invasion of Nicaragua with 42,000 pledge signers and thousands of civil disobedience arrests, blocking gates of training facilities, doing shopping mall demonstrations, putting pressure on elected officials, and using a 40-day hunger strike by veterans. 1,000 people blocked arms shipments to a key base for 2 years.
● 1984 Uruguayans general strike ends military government.
● 1983 in USSR/Russia, Stanislav Petrov refused to fire nuclear weapons after false reports of incoming U.S. nukes, preventing nuclear war.
● 1980s In South Africa, nonviolent actions played the key role in ending Apartheid.
● 1977-83 In Argentina, Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo campaign successfully for democracy and the return of their “disappeared” family members.
● 1977-79 In Iran, people overthrew the Shah.
● 1978-82 In Bolivia, people nonviolently prevent a military coup. See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 1976-98 In Northern Ireland – Peace People (Mairead Maguire, Betty Williams, Ciaran McKeown), marched weekly (w/ 50,ooo people out of a population of 1.5 million – almost exactly 3.5%), petitioned, rallied for an end to sectarian violence between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland and Ireland, ending 30 years of war.
● 1973 Thai students overthrow military Thanom regime.
● 1970-71 Polish shipyard workers’ initiate overthrow.
● 1968-69 Pakistani students, workers, and peasants bring down a dictator.
● 1968 When the Soviet military invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, there were demonstrations, a general strike, refusal to cooperate, removal of street signs, persuasion of troops. Despite clueless leaders conceding, the take-over was slowed, and the credibility of the Soviet Communist Party ruined. See account in Chapter 1 of Gene Sharp, Civilian Based Defense.
● 1959-60 Japanese protest security treaty with U.S. and unseat Prime Minister.
● 1957 Colombians overthrow dictator.
● 1944-64 Zambians campaign successfully for independence.
● 1962 Algerian citizens nonviolently intervene to prevent civil war.
● 1961 In Algeria in 1961, four French generals staged a coup. Nonviolent resistance undid it in a few days. See account in Chapter 1 of Gene Sharp, Civilian Based Defense. Also See account in Part 1 of “Civil Resistance Against Coups” by Stephen Zunes.
● 1960 South Korean students compel dictator to resign, new elections.
● 1959-60 Congolese win independence from the Belgian Empire.
● 1947 Gandhi’s efforts — and those of Bacha Khan’s unarmed peace army — from 1930 on were key to removing the British from India.
● 1947 Mysore population wins democratic rule in newly independent India.
● 1946 Haitians overthrow a dictator.
● 1944 Two Central American dictators, Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez (El Salvador) and Jorge Ubico (Guatemala), were ousted as a result of nonviolent civilian insurrections. Source. The overthrow of the military regime in El Salvador in 1944 is recounted in A Force More Powerful.
● 1944 Ecuadorians overthrow dictator.
● 1940s In the final years of German occupation of Denmark and Norway during WWII, the Nazis effectively no longer controlled the population.
● 1940-45 Nonviolent action to save Jews from the Holocaust in Berlin, Bulgaria, Denmark, Le Chambon, France and elsewhere. Source.
● 1933-45 Throughout World War II, there were a series of small and usually isolated groups that used nonviolent techniques against the Nazis successfully. These groups include the White Rose and the Rosenstrasse Resistance. Source.
● 1935 Cubans general strike to overthrow president.
● 1933 Cubans general strike to overthrow president.
● 1931 Chileans overthrow dictator Carlos Ibañez del Campo.
● 1923 When French and Belgian troops occupied the Ruhr in 1923, the German government called on its citizens to resist without physical violence. People nonviolently turned public opinion in Britain, the U.S., and even in Belgium and France, in favor of the occupied Germans. By international agreement, the French troops were withdrawn. See account in Chapter 1 of Gene Sharp, Civilian Based Defense.
● 1920 In Germany in 1920, a coup overthrew and exiled the government, but on its way out the government called for a general strike. The coup was undone in five days. See account in Chapter 1 of Gene Sharp, Civilian Based Defense.
● 1918-19 German Sailors Revolt: Sailors protested rejoining the front; ringleaders imprisoned and executed, sailors refused to obey orders in the High Fleet, demonstrate, strike, protest. Solidarity actions spread. This led directly to Germany surrendering and thus, ending WWI.
● 1917 The February 1917 Russian Revolution, despite some limited violence, was also predominantly nonviolent and led to the collapse of the czarist system.
● 1905-1906 In Russia, peasants, workers, students, and the intelligentsia engaged in major strikes and other forms of nonviolent action, forcing the Czar to accept the creation of an elected legislature. Source. See also A Force More Powerful.
● 1879-1898 Maori nonviolently resisted British settler colonialism with very limited success but inspiring others over the decades to follow.
● 1850-1867 Hungarian nationalists, led by Francis Deak, engaged in nonviolent resistance to Austrian rule, eventually regaining self-governance for Hungary as part of an Austro-Hungarian federation. Source.
● 1765-1775 The American colonists mounted three major nonviolent resistance campaigns against British rule (against the Stamp Acts of 1765, the Townsend Acts of 1767, and the Coercive Acts of 1774) resulting in de facto independence for nine colonies by 1775. Source. Also see here.
● 494 BCE In Rome, plebeians, rather than murder consuls in an attempt to correct grievances, withdrew from the city to a hill (later called “the Sacred Mount”). There they remained for some days, refusing to make their usual contributions to the life of the city. An agreement was then reached pledging significant improvements in their life and status. See Gene Sharp (1996) “Beyond just war and pacifism: nonviolent struggle toward justice, freedom and peace.” The Ecumenical Review (Vol. 48, Issue 2).
Congress won't demand a ceasefire in Gaza, so activists are fighting to force their hand
Israel’s devastating campaign of collective punishment against the people of Gaza has aroused international condemnation and popular mobilization in support of a ceasefire and an end to Israeli Apartheid. This movement has also spread to the US, where hundreds of thousands of people flocked to Washington D.C. on Nov. 4 for the largest pro-Palestine march in US history. Support for a ceasefire in Gaza is widespread among the US public—with more than half of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike in favor of such a measure, according to Data for Progress. Yet the federal government continues to largely ignore calls for a ceasefire and an end to US aid to Israel, with only a minority of House Democrats willing to back a resolution for a ceasefire. Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, a key organization in the current Palestine solidarity movement, joins The Chris Hedges Report to explain what the movement is demanding from leaders in Washington to stop Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.
Editor’s note: The death toll in Gaza from Israel’s bombardment campaign has now exceeded 10,000—including over 4,000 children.
On Nov. 9, the White House announced Israel would observe a daily four-hour pause in bombing to allow Palestinian civilians to flee from northern Gaza. The Biden Administration continues to resist calls for a full ceasefire.
Studio Production: David Hebden, Adam Coley
Post-Production: Adam Coley
Transcript
The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.
Chris Hedges:
Democratic representatives Cori Bush, Rashida Tlaib, André Carson, Summer Lee, and Delia Ramirez introduced a Ceasefire Now Resolution on October 16 to halt the siege on Gaza. The resolution calls on the Biden administration to demand an end to the Israeli attacks and to send humanitarian aid to Gaza. Eight other Democrats signed on as original co-sponsors and additional five have since sponsored the resolution along with other members of Congress. This brings the total number of sponsors to 26. Compare those numbers with a House resolution passed on October 25 by a 412-10 margin, expressing solidarity with Israel as it “Defends itself against the barbaric war launched by Hamas.”
The resolution made no mention of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza that have killed more than 8,000 Palestinians, 3,000 of them children, and displaced some 1.4 million people. Representative Betty McCollum, the author of congressional legislation, that would impose restrictions on how the Israeli military can use USAID backed the resolution. Palestinian rights advocates and anti-war activists have staged protests and sit-ins at congressional offices around the country demanding a ceasefire. Not only to protect civilian lives and facilitate the release of hostages, but to prevent a regional war. In the Senate, only Bernie Sanders has called for a halt to the Israeli air assault, but even he stopped short of calling for a ceasefire.
Why is there such a tepid response to clear cut Israeli war crimes? Why has most of the progressive caucus refused to call for a ceasefire? Why is the Democratic Party and the Biden administration shut down all discussions of a ceasefire, including vetoing UN resolutions calling for a ceasefire? Are these lawmakers frightened of the Israel lobby AIPAC, which has already targeted Representatives Jamaal Bowman and Ilhan Omar, both of whom are calling for a ceasefire? Are they captive to the war industry which profits from this assault? And yet, a poll released by the progressive firm Data for Progress, found that 66% of likely voters strongly or somewhat agree that the US should call for a ceasefire: A percentage that rises to 80% among Democrats. 53% of Democrats told CBS News pollsters that they oppose the US sending more weapons to Israel.
Joining me to discuss the grassroots effort to impose the ceasefire is Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the feminist anti-war group, CODEPINK. Madea, you’ve been a peace activist for many years. I wonder what this moment compares to. Does it feel like the aftermath of 9/11? Can you draw a historical analogy?
Medea Benjamin:
It certainly has feelings like 9/11 when the country is turned upside down and when there is so much censorship and no room for those who call for an end to violence. And it also is reminiscent of the grassroots opposition in the terms of the huge demonstrations that we found and helped to organize after 9/11. And comparing those with the enormous and really spectacular protests that have been going on now. There was so many good examples of large, large protests in New York City and Washington DC and Chicago and San Francisco, all over the country, even in small towns I have been visiting. And they said wow, we never had 500 people out in our small town as well as the sit-ins and offices. So it is reminiscent of what happened after 9/11.
I would say one of the big differences though is that now there is a Democrat in the White House, and that really changes the alliances that we have in terms of people in Congress and the ability to make those alliances with the grassroots more overt. As you said, there’s only a small number of Congress people in the Democratic Party now, 18 of them that have called for a ceasefire. So it’s very difficult when you have a Democrat in the White House to get the response from Democrats that we should be having when we’re seeing this mass slaughter.
Chris Hedges:
You’ve been very involved with Ukraine. You also saw the Biden administration sabotage a ceasefire effort. It was orchestrated primarily by Türkiye. And I want you to compare. For me it’s stunning to have an active effort on the part of a Democratic administration to shut down any discussion of a ceasefire both domestically and internationally.
Medea Benjamin:
Well, yes, in the case of Ukraine, it’s been constant that the US has tried to stop any peace talks from going on. We saw what happened a month after the Russian invasion and how President Erdoğan from Türkiye was really quite successful in helping to come up with a 15-point peace plan between Ukraine and Russia that was then sabotaged by the US and the UK. And ever since then when there have been efforts for a peace plan, whether it’s coming from the Pope or the six nations of Africa or the heads of states of countries in Latin America like Mexico and Brazil, and then the China effort at a peace plan, the US has nixed all of them.
Here we have another comparison between Ukraine where the US is pursuing that war because it wants to weaken Russia, and then you have the US not calling for a ceasefire in the case of Israel. And instead of making a comparison saying that Ukraine is an occupied country and Palestine is an occupied country, they say that Ukraine and Israel are the two democracies that are fighting for their preservation. When you walk the halls in Congress, Chris, you see many, many congresspeople have a stand with Ukraine and stand with Israel signs right next to each other.
Chris Hedges:
I want to talk about what you look at the cause of, to the extent that perhaps the defense industry or the war industry is pushing this. And also the fact that in no administration at this point can control the permanent war machine, and tie both that into what’s happened in Ukraine and what’s happening in Israel.
Medea Benjamin:
There is such a huge lobby by this military-industrial complex. We don’t really see them in the halls of Congress because they don’t have to go walking the doors like we do. They go directly into the rooms in the capitol to meet with the members of Congress. They even have people embedded in their own offices that come from the different branches of the military. And many of those work previously in the industry itself or will go to work for the industry when they leave. And of course that revolving door we see with members of Congress themselves, we see it with the Secretary of Defense, Austin, who came directly from the board of Raytheon. This revolving door is so insidious and so corrupt that you see that there are more lobbyists for the weapons industry than there are members of Congress.
And so you get both of the Democrat and Republican, the overwhelming majority of them, take money from this industry. And they do the bidding for the industry by keeping this war machine going, whether it was approving billions of dollars for the war in Ukraine or the $4 billion a year for Israel, or the justification for the intensive buildup for a potential war with China. And now we’re seeing the call for another tranche, enormous tranche of money, $104 billion that the administration is asking for that is mana for these weapons companies. So indeed they have a large role to play in keeping the US in a constant state of war.
Chris Hedges:
Is the problem — And of course, many of these voices, the occupation at Grand Central War is Jewish Voices for Peace, J Street. We have all sorts of Jewish groups in the US who have decried the saturation bombing of Gaza and called for a cease fryer — But is the problem that essentially, you’re running into not only the lobby of the war industry, but the Israel lobby?
Medea Benjamin:
Well, yes. It’s important to call out the Israel lobby. There is AIPAC and then there are the lobby groups that are associated with as well as Christian groups like CUFI, Christians United for Israel. And all of these groups are extremely powerful. They have a lot of money and they use their money to primary candidates who have expressed some sympathy for Palestine, to take out members of Congress who have expressed some sympathy for Palestine. We saw that before October 7, but we’re seeing it on steroids and we will in the upcoming election when they are targeting people like Jamaal Bowman, like Ilhan Omar. They tried unsuccessfully to take out Summer Lee in Pittsburgh but I’m sure they will be trying again this time.
And they’ve stopped some very, very wonderful progressives from becoming members of Congress like Nina Turner or taking out Congresswoman Donna Edwards. So they have a very insidious impact. They support a lot of Republicans and they have been seen in more recent years as being a much more of a Republican group, but they try to be nonpartisan and they support about 120 of the House Democrats. They have really divided the Black Caucus by giving a lot of money to people like Hakeem Jeffries to Congressman Meeks while they tried to take out the progressive members of the Black Caucus. They’ve also given money to about half of the progressive members of the progressive caucus in the House.
So they play this role of trying to be bipartisan in their effort to take out any voices of those who call for a ceasefire right now who call for a real resolution to the ongoing problem in the Middle East. Whether it’s Israel and Palestine, or the issue of Iran where they have been pushing for more and more sanctions on Iran and they have been pushing, for example, for the US to not be in the Iran nuclear deal. So it’s not Israel, it’s the whole Middle East where they have a very insidious role.
Chris Hedges:
Let’s talk about the Biden administration’s response. And if you could in particular talk about figures like Jake Sullivan and the Secretary of State Blinken.
Medea Benjamin:
Well, the Biden administration has talked about its rock solid support for Israel and is now calling for another $14 billion to be sent for Israel while the global community is demanding a ceasefire. We see the vote at the United Nations where it was 1,412 nations saying we need an immediate humanitarian pause. And there were only 12 nations, the US, Israel, and a handful of others saying no. So the US is quite isolated and yet you have Biden who acts like he is a leader of the global community, and Jake Sullivan who echoes that rock solid support for Israel. And in general, the White House being out-of-step with the global majority as well as the opinion polls that we see in the US. Which are quite remarkable to talk about because it not only goes against what the Biden administration and the majority of Congress are saying, but it goes against what the mainstream reports in the press are. And yet people see through that and want to see a ceasefire.
Chris Hedges:
What do you think it is that’s driving? The Obama administration had a very uneasy relationship with the Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. In fact, Netanyahu was invited to speak to Congress to denounce Obama’s Iran deal. And yet, you see Biden slavishly in service to this extreme, probably the most extremist Israeli government in Israel’s history.
Medea Benjamin:
Well, from your history in the region and Biden’s history that he’s always been a tremendous supporter from Israel. He is the one that said if it didn’t exist, we’d have to create it. He has been, as you say, more than Obama, going along with Israel, while the Israeli government has become more and more right wing, while these settlers have become more and more vicious. And while the Israeli people, before the October 7 conflict, have been out on the streets calling for the end to Netanyahu and protesting his attempts to take over the government and the courts. So there has been plenty of room there where Biden could have stood up and actually said he is not going to be this slavish supporter to a right-wing fascist Israeli government, but instead, he has continued to support it 100% and of course used our taxpayer money to do so.
Chris Hedges:
And what do you think the motive? Is it political expediency?
Medea Benjamin:
You could say it’s political expediency and yet the tide is turning. It’s becoming more and more of a liability and that’s why we see a little bit of toning down of the Biden administration because they realize that this is one, going against what public opinion is now saying, and two, that there is no strategy that Israel has in terms of its incessant bombing and now the ground invasion. What is it going to do after? If it indeed takes over Gaza, what will it do afterwards? And three, it’s concerned about a regional war. We are seeing a slight shift in the Biden administration because there are people within the administration that are questioning this policy. We have the example of somebody who quit over this but we also know that there are hundreds of people who have signed letters within the administration saying they disagree with this policy.
I was at a demonstration the other day and talking to somebody next to me and she started crying and said that she works in the State Department and she can’t stand what this government is doing and her colleagues feel the same way. So the Biden administration is feeling the heat from many corners.
Chris Hedges:
Well, isn’t “no end policy” what the US has been doing in the Middle East for the last two decades, whether it’s Iraq, Libya, Syria, anywhere else?
Medea Benjamin:
Well, absolutely. And with this whole idea that goes back to the Obama times of wanting to shift from the Middle East and focus more on Asia. Which itself is insanity because they talk about having a war with China but they have not been able to shift from the Middle East because the US has created such a disaster in the Middle East and hasn’t been able to recover from not only the constant support of Israel, but the invasion of Iraq and the destruction of that society that continues to this day; When you see many Iraqis in power that are more Iran than they are pro US and of course things like the instability that we see now in terms of what could break out in Iran with the intense opposition and intense sanctions that the US continues to place on Iran, that has not only hurt the Iranian people, but has given more power to the most conservative elements of Iranian society.
Chris Hedges:
Let’s talk about Gaza. You’ve led delegations to Gaza. Why is Gaza important for you as a peace activist?
Medea Benjamin:
It’s important that people are finally understanding that in the last 16 years, people of Gaza have been imprisoned. Where their every move is really regulated by the Israeli government, even though Israel “pulled out.” We have been involved in the freedom flotillas that try to reach Gaza by land which is impossible to do because the Israelis then board the boat and confiscate them and don’t let the fishermen even go out into the waters to be able to make a living as fishermen. We see that there’s no airport in Gaza, so people cannot get in and out of the country by air. The land borders are controlled by the Israelis, and even the border in Egypt is controlled by the Israelis. And once in a while, the Egyptians will open up that border, but as we see today, they will not do so on a regular basis without the consent of Israel.
So people are locked into that country. They are not able to thrive economically. In fact, horrific rates of unemployment and poverty because Israel controls what goes in and out of that country or that strip of land. And people live in despair. And that’s why we saw what we saw on October 7 when people are not allowed to live decent lives.
We have met with Hamas several times when we went to Gaza because they do control who comes into that country if you get in through the Rafah border of Egypt. They have told us time and time again of their efforts to reach out to the US to actually have diplomatic talks with the US. They did it under Bush, they tried under Clinton, they tried it under Obama. In fact, they gave us a letter to take to Obama when he first came into power saying we would like to talk to you about Israel’s constant violations of international law. And they cited Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, human rights groups in Israel itself, and asked why is the US always siding with Israel as it oppresses us and violates international law? And they never, ever, ever had a response back from the US government.
Chris Hedges:
Let’s talk about the consequences first for Israel and then regionally, potentially if this continues.
Medea Benjamin:
The consequences for Israel are really hard to predict at this point because there is this growing international hatred for Israel. And in the region especially, how can they continue on this path? And yet I don’t see the light at the end of the tunnel, Chris, because I don’t see the two-state solution. I don’t see the Israeli government removing these entrenched settlers from the communities that they would have to be removed from for a real two-state solution to exist. And I have a hard time even envisioning a one-state Democratic country with equal rights for all with the hatred that has been built up, not only over the years, but so intensely in these last few weeks. Of course, we don’t know what’s going to happen to the people of Gaza and the West Bank in the coming weeks as Israel intensifies its land invasion in Gaza and its oppressive tactics in the West Bank. So I find that it’s very hard to predict and that I really do worry about this turning into a regional war.
Chris Hedges:
We have ministers within the government who have long called for what they call “transfer.” That’s the euphemism for ethnic cleansing. They are fanatics. I lived in Jerusalem and covered Israeli politics under the era of Amir Kahana, many of these people are descendants of Kahana. But in those days, Kahana, his party was outlawed, Israeli society had pushed him aside. Now of course, the Kahana and Kahana-like followers, openly racist, calling for violence against Palestinians, essentially run the government. How serious do you take the threats of complete ethnic cleansing, essentially pushing Palestinians out of the country over the Rafah border into refugee camps in the Sinai?
Medea Benjamin:
Well, certainly that is what a number of Israelis in the government would like to see happen. The Egyptian government is resisting that, knowing that it would not only be horrific for the over a million people who have now been pushed out of the north and are homeless but it would be also difficult for Sisi to keep governing internally. There would be so much internal opposition to that. And of course, the people in Gaza know that as they were being pushed from the north to the south, that if they indeed were able to leave through the Rafah border into Egypt, they would never be allowed back again. That is why there is so much resistance to leaving, even though they are sitting ducks right now with the constant bombardments, not only in the north but in the south as well. So I don’t know that this scheme to push the people out of Gaza will be possible in today’s world where there is such opposition to that in the Arab world and such opposition to that globally.
Chris Hedges:
The Egyptian Press has reported that the US has made overtures to the Sisi government. They have a massive debt. The Egyptian economy is very precarious. They have about $168 billion in debt. They have made overtures to pay off all or part of that debt as well as other financial incentives. Essentially buy Sisi out. The other thing that’s important to note is that this blockade now includes water purification plants that are not working, food, of course have looted UN warehouses. The third factor, and I know this from having been in Sarajevo during the wars, the intensity of the bombing. So when I was in Sarajevo, we were being hit with about three to 400 shells a day, along with constant sniper fire. That was about four to five dead a day, two dozen wounded a day. The scale in Gaza where hundreds of people are being killed a day and thousands are wounded, and Sarajevo was awful, I still have nightmares about it, but it’s important to realize the level of bombing is unlike certainly anything we’ve seen in the 21st century. It’s saturation and indiscriminate bombing.
Medea Benjamin:
Well, it is so horrific, Chris, to think of the over 8,000 people that have been killed so far, most of them civilians, 3000 of them children. The lack of food, water, electricity going on — And I want to circle back — While the Biden administration is asking for more money for Israel. And while we can’t get one Republican in the Congress to call for a ceasefire, while we can only get 18, and then there have been some individual calls. So if you add them together, only 27 members of Congress out of 435 in the House that are calling for a ceasefire, you have to ask, don’t they have a heart? Don’t they care about people? Many of them have their own children, their own grandchildren. Don’t they care about the children of Palestinians? And what we understand too is that until the US Congress puts the pressure on the Biden administration and the Biden administration puts the pressure on Israel, these bombings will only escalate.
And the land invasion that we’re seeing right now is expanding. We in the US have horrific blood on our hands. The members of Congress have blood on their hands. The White House has blood on its hands. And the only thing that we can do if we care about these people in Gaza who every day are facing hell on Earth, is to do sit-ins in the offices of our Congress people, is to demand that every single one of them who is supposed to represent us start calling for ceasefire. If they don’t like that word ceasefire, if that’s too difficult for them, then call for a cessation of hostilities. And if that’s too difficult for them, then call for a humanitarian pause. Do whatever you can to stop this bombing, to stop the murder, to stop the killing.
As we move from there, we have to stop the US money from going to Israel because we can’t allow ourselves to be furnishing these bombs that are dropping on the heads of families and wiping out entire families. We can’t allow the US to be complicit in this because we are being hated around the world and I fear for our security as well. When we travel around with US passports, we are not going to be greeted with a smile in many places around the world. In fact, the US State Department is now warning people about being in places like Lebanon and saying that we can’t protect you. So whether or not the elected officials care about the lives of Palestinians, they certainly should be representing us and giving the green light to Israel to continue on this slaughter, on this genocide, on this ethnic cleansing, is not making us safe here at home.
Chris Hedges:
Before I ask you about the regional consequences, I want to ask you about what happened to the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party? Which used to exist. McGovern, Fulbright, these figures.
Medea Benjamin:
Well, they have shrunk down to a handful at this point. It has been very difficult for the first two weeks of this to even get our dear Barbara Lee, who was the leader back after 9/11, of saying no to war, to get her to put her name on this call for a ceasefire, which she finally did. But where is the anti-war sentiment in Congress? As I said earlier, when you have a Democrat in Congress, it’s much harder to get these Democrats to stand up. If this were Trump who were carrying out this policy or another Republican, we would see a large number of Democrats or certainly a larger number of Democrats that were with us. Right now in these massive protests that are happening, all I see is Rashida Tlaib and Cori Bush that come out to address the protestors.
We have been in the offices of very progressive members of Congress on other issues, like Mark Pocan who used to be the co-chair of the Progressive Caucus. He wouldn’t sign the resolution. He finally came out with his own statement calling for a ceasefire. But that was only after a lot of pressure from people in his district and in Washington DC. The same for Ro Khanna who has been very good on so many of these issues, including the war in Yemen. He will not call for a ceasefire in the case of Gaza. So it has been extremely difficult. We talked about the power of AIPAC, we talked about a Democrat in the White House, but we have to talk about the lack of courage and the lack of compassion that is keeping many of these Democrats from joining us.
Then we do have to talk about the Republicans because there was a sizable number of Republicans that still don’t want to send more money for the war in Ukraine. And one of them told me when I asked him, he said, because I hate war, but now he wants to send money to Israel to be killing the people of Hamas. So a tremendous inconsistency. But on the positive side, there is an anti-war movement now around Gaza that we have not seen before and I am very inspired by that movement. It’s not only these very courageous Jewish groups, but very courageous Palestinian groups, because right now it’s actually easier to speak out as the Jew than it is as the Palestinians. So when we see the Palestine youth movement, when we see American Muslims from Palestine, when we see groups like CAIR, C-A-I-R, coming out, they’re putting themselves at risk, and they are facing tremendous attacks for doing that. But I am very encouraged to see the buildup on the grassroots level for stopping the war in Gaza and stopping the US support for Israel.
Chris Hedges:
Let’s close by looking at the potential consequences beyond the borders of Israel. There have been strikes on US bases in Syria and Iraq. Israel has carried out airstrikes in Syria, two airstrikes against the airports in Aleppo and Damascus. Hezbollah has stepped up its activity along the northern border of Israel. The Turkish president has been quite outspoken calling Hamas resistance fighters. And then you have Iran. How could this potentially go horribly, horribly wrong?
Medea Benjamin:
Well, you’ve laid it out, Chris. The Iran is a very huge society with a huge military. Despite all the sanctions that have really hurt the economy of Iran, the Iranians have continued to build up their armaments, their drones, their massive military, and they stand ready. They do not want to get involved in this war. They have made it very clear and they have been quite restrained, but they are ready to do so if needed.
And of course, they have their allies and Hezbollah that also don’t want to get involved in this war, but are being pushed and pushed and pushed. And you talked about the US strikes in Syria. Once again, the Syrian government has been through so many years of war, does not want to get involved in this, and yet is being provoked. And we have many people in the government in Iraq that are furious with the Israelis and with the US support for Israel.
There is a region about to blow. As we have been fighting the war in Ukraine and warning about it turning into a third world war, even a nuclear war. We have to warn about the consequences of this war that Israel is now waging in Gaza, and how it could turn into a regional conflagration that will set the region on fire. And that’s why it is so important that we build up this anti-war movement in the US and link arms with the massive movement that’s happening all over the world, including in Europe, where there have been attempts by governments in places like Germany and France to make it illegal to carry a Palestinian flag or illegal to have pro-Palestine demonstrations. People have come out on the streets anyway.
I do want to end by saying that is our role of citizens right now to try to stop this war and avoid a regional war, to come out in massive numbers to say no to the Israeli attacks, and to say yes to a free Palestine.
Chris Hedges:
Thank you. That was Madea Benjamin, peace activist and co-founder of CODEPINK. I want to thank The Real News Network and its production team: Cameron Granadino, Adam Coley, David Hebden, and Kayla Rivara. You can find me at chrishedges.substack.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment