All posts by Rob Fairmichael

Editorial: Perseverance for justice, peace and sustainability

Editorials, Nonviolent News, , ,

There are different ways of ‘seeing’ history – as linear, circular, a combination of these, or more scattered or random – and you can take your pick. The ‘progress’ of humanity is sometimes much trumpeted and there have undoubtedly been huge advances in technology which benefit humanity – and huge advances in technology which has the opposite effect. There have also been great advances in human rights while there have been advances in systems to control and corral citizens.

There have been advances made in the rights of women through feminism and in relation to sexual abuse but then along comes the negative-masculinist manosphere, and even apart from that a shockingly low number of rapes end in a court case and guilty verdict. It is not that to every action (change) there is an equal and opposite reaction but there is certainly a reaction and sometimes that reaction takes things backwards – as we have seen in relation to human rights in the USA. The world of the 21st century is a complex place; the world has always been complex but the current polarities are something new or different to those pertaining previously.

The impunity with which a superpower can act is amazing, and it was always thus – think of Britain imposing opium dealing on China in the 19th century. Today the USA can attack, kidnap, kill, bomb, and conduct war with no international legal backing or moral justification and when ‘the west’ does not actively participate it is a matter of a few countries doing or saying something minor but there are no effective international protests or sanctions.

And a state favoured by ‘the west’, Israel, can destroy the entire territory of a whole people, Gaza Palestinians, and slaughter indiscriminately and there are no repercussions; even piracy and kidnap in international waters of citizens from many countries produces a relatively mild reaction from governments. The Irish government response to Israeli kidnapping in international waters in recent weeks and subsequent ill treatment of Irish citizens has been limited to dusting off a limited Occupied Territories Bill which should have become law years ago. And in an autocratic state like Russia, upwards of half a million deaths is considered an acceptable price to pay for a leader who tries to save face after the massive blunder of invading Ukraine.

“Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle” said Martin Luther King.

We – peace, political and social change activists and other – are in for a long haul. Sometimes a struggle is to retain rights which risk being lost as leaders and states try to find new ways to control their people. And even where there is at least a concept of democracy there can be a failure to deliver because vested interests and tribal (in a wide sense) loyalties prevent effective change – think of Northern Ireland.

We can only do what we can do; sometimes that may seem pathetically small, as in relation to the need for green policies and practice to prevent further catastrophic climate heating. But one and one and one do eventually make a million, as in Pete Seeger’s song – “One man’s hands can’t tear a prison down / Two men’s hands can’t tear a prison down / But if two and two and fifty make a million / We’ll see that day come round / We’ll see that day come round.”

There is a cyclical element to political movements, not a simple ‘one decade down, next one up’ kind of thing but something more complex. It is not a matter of holding off on activism until the going is easier because then things are ‘never’ going to change. The activism of a couple of people in getting something going, or keeping something going in adverse times, may be more important in an eventual achievement than a thousand people later on when a change movement is on a roll. (For this see e.g. Bill Moyer’s ‘Movement Action Plan’, word search and https://innatenonviolence.org/workshops/strategising.shtml ) All contributions to change are valuable however.

Celebrating even small achievements can be inspiring to keep going and try new approaches but we are seldom likely to get all we want and must plough on. The Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland was a very significant achievement, imperfect as its working out has been and it did not end divisions or bring about a meaningful way of making decisions on tough questions (not even thinking here of the constitutional issue) or means of dealing with the past. Resting on some of our laurels is not a recommended option.

At the very least we can keep hope for change alive. Accepting our limitations is difficult but means we can act more realistically and, at times, surprise ourselves and a lot of other people too. To think that ‘history is on our side’ can be a cliche and wishful thinking but if humanity is to survive in the longer term without us being slaves or automatons, or both, then justice, peace and sustainability are not optional extras for humanity – they are the basis for meaningful survival. There is of course a kind of power that grows out of the barrel of a gun or the explosion of a drone but that power destroys rather than creates. It is nonviolence and nonviolent struggle that has the power to positively transform our world – and knowing that should quicken our step and give us courage and strength for that – at the moment – uphill struggle.

– – – – –

Eco-Awareness: The conundrum of modernity

Eco-Awareness, Nonviolent News, , , ,

Larry Speight brings us his monthly column –

Although we live in an integrated world, as the disruption to the global oil and gas shipments through the Strait of Hormuz show, we don’t seem to realise that when we buy food, cosmetics, cleaning products and pet food that we are almost certainly contributing to the demise of the ecological sustainability of the biosphere. What this means is that we are in a direct, measurable and tangible way undermining our children’s and grandchildren’s future.

No doubt some readers will feel affronted by this deduction, thinking ‘I would do absolutely anything for my family and those I care about’. Would you, however, forego buying products with palm oil in them? If you want to be thought of as a good ancestor who lived in compliance with the regenerative capacities of nonhuman nature then your response would be affirmative.

What would not using products with palm oil entail? As 72% of the global food market relies on palm oil it would mean not eating most types of biscuit, cake, crisps, breakfast cereals, breads, spreads and ice cream. If you already abstain from eating these on taste or health grounds would you forego using most brands of tooth paste, soap, shampoo, facial cream, lipstick as well as many cleaning products? In the case of the latter 18% of cosmetics and cleaning products use palm oil. If you drive a petrol or diesel vehicle will you cease to drive it on learning that legislation requires that petrol and diesel is composed of 10% biofuels and that 10% to 15% of this comes from palm oil?

As our dependency on palm oil shows fossil fuels are not the only commodity that enmeshes us in the web of the global economy and thus widespread ecological destruction and structural injustices.

Palm oil originated in the rainforests of the Guinea coast in West Africa and has been used for millennium by local communities for cooking, healing and rituals. It was also traded as traces of it have been found in Egyptian tombs dating back 5,000 years. It was not, however, until the nineteenth century that European colonialists in Africa realised its versatile properties and transplanted it to Indonesia and Malaysia where it is widely grown today.

Although palm oil is beginning to make its ecologically disruptive presence felt in tropical Africa, central and south America, it is Indonesia and Malaysia account for the vast majority of the palm oil used around the world. Malaysia supplies 25% of the market while Indonesia 60%.

There is nothing ecologically wrong with palm oil per se. (Biologically it is not classified as a tree.) The problem is they are planted in vast regimented formations on land that has been cleared of bio-rich forests either by bulldozing them down or turning them into ash by setting them alight. The loss of these forests is immeasurable as it results in the extinction of flora including some not known to science but familiar to the Indigenous communities who use them in an ecologically sustainable way.

In Indonesia palm oil plantations have led to the catastrophic demise of the Sumatra tiger, forest elephant, forest rhino and the three species of orangutan. It has led to soil erosion and water contamination through the indiscriminate use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers. Indigenous people in Kalimantan, Sumatra and Papua have been particularly affected losing much of the forest that sustained them physically, psychologically and culturally.

Losing a culturally significant site is important as verified by the August 2017 and November 2024 protests in the Sandy Row area of Belfast over the dismantling of the Boyne Bridge as part of the construction of Grand Central Station. Between 2006 and 2008 there were sustained local and international protests against the building of the M3 motorway through the culturally important landscape in the vicinity of the Hill of Tara, County Meath.

To grasp the importance sites of cultural significance are to our sense of identity imagine how you would you feel if a company acquired an iconic site such as Devenish Island in County Fermanagh and without prior and informed consent levelled what is left of the monastic buildings and planted row upon row of gooseberry bushes. Likewise, how would you feel if a graveyard where your loved ones are buried was acquired by a company who bulldozed away the graves in order to use the land to grow a commercial crop.

This is what has happened in Indonesia and Malaysia since the nineteenth century and as Muhamad Isnur informs us in The Jakarta Post, 12 May 2026, it is happening on a large scale today in Papua, one of the 17,024 islands in the Indonesian archipelago. Here Indigenous communities are losing their land to corporations with the active support of the government and military.

Although Indonesia and Malaysia are a long way from Ireland if we use palm oil we are complicit in the suffering caused to the people and nonhuman life forms in both countries even if we are unaware of the devastation caused by the palm oil plantations. Like it or not we are entangled in the web of international commerce simply by spending money.

Is there a way out of the conundrum of enjoying the comforts, conveniences and opportunities offered by modernity which inescapably entails us violating our values and principles? This is something we all need to ask ourselves whilst examining plausible resolutions.

First though we need to see what is wrong with how we live as we won’t attempt to fix what we don’t know is broken. To do this we need to breach the membrane of our enculturalisation and have an idea of what we are looking for in the foliage of the taken for granted.

Education in the sense of training our minds to see the consequences of our behaviour on the disempowered as well as the capacity of nonhuman life forms to live according to their endowments is critical. As all things are connected when we harm others we harm ourselves.

– – – – – –

The Peace Line with Kate Laverty

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

Nonviolent engagement

This weekend, nonviolence found me in a bookshop.

Usually, I encounter it in the natural world — in cliffs and rain, in wind through trees, in the stillness that reminds me I am part of something larger and slower than the urgency of modern life. Nature steadies me. It teaches restraint, interdependence, humility. It is where my spirit recalibrates.

But this weekend, in Edinburgh, it arrived differently.

Among dusty shelves and uneven floors in vintage bookshops, I found myself returning to older roots — history, memory, stories carried through paper. There is something quietly restorative about second-hand books; they hold traces of previous lives, previous hands, previous thoughts. They resist disposability. They ask us to slow down.

And sitting there, reading a history of Arsenal F.C. — because, as any youth worker knows, supporting a football team is essentially a professional requirement — I found myself reflecting on the club’s recent partnership with Deel. Deel is a global HR and payroll platform co-founded in 2019 by French-Israeli entrepreneur Alex Bouaziz who has spoken in support of IDF and the genocide in Palestine.

It would be easy not to think about it too deeply. Football is saturated with corporate sponsorship. We are conditioned to accept branding as background noise. But nonviolence, at least as I understand it, asks us to remain awake to systems — to notice what becomes normal, what becomes invisible, what values are quietly being reinforced.

So I sat with the discomfort.

What does it mean to love a club while remaining critical of the economic and corporate structures around it? What does ethical support look like in a world where identity and consumption are increasingly intertwined? Can you still belong while refusing unquestioning participation?

For me, the answer is yes. Nonviolence is not purity. It is practice. It is the ongoing discipline of refusing to surrender moral reflection simply because something is popular, profitable, or culturally embedded. It is recognising that we are always participating in systems, but still asking how we might do so more consciously, more ethically, more humanely.

So no, I won’t buy the new kit. Not because I reject the club, but because I care enough to remain attentive. To hold affection and critique together. To resist the idea that loyalty requires silence.

Youth work teaches this too. Young people do not need adults who perform certainty. They need adults willing to think critically, act ethically, and model that belonging does not require abandoning conscience. And perhaps that is part of what nonviolence really is, not withdrawal from the world,
but deeper engagement with it. A refusal to stop asking questions. A refusal to let comfort replace ethics. A commitment to living gently and truthfully within systems that often encourage neither.

This weekend, I found that reminder not on a mountainside, but between old books, in the quiet turning of pages, and in the strange grace of paying attention.

Community – the past is present

This week, I met a man who once imagined something into being. Not an idea in the abstract, but a place. A meeting point. A vision that would eventually become Forthspring — the community I now have the privilege of helping to lead. https://www.forthspring.org/

What struck me most was not nostalgia. It was continuity.

The Reverend Sam Birch is a prominent Methodist minister in Belfast known for his extensive peacebuilding work during and after the Troubles. During the height of the Troubles, Rev. Birch gained recognition for his quiet but vital cross-community work, which famously included partnering with Redemptorist priest Father Gerry Reynolds to reach out to grieving families across sectarian divides.

The vision Sam Birch had has not dimmed with time. It remains bright, rooted in people, sustained by relationship, animated by the belief that community matters deeply. As he spoke, he returned constantly to others — to connection, to encounter, to the importance of creating spaces where people can belong across difference.

And I realised how much of that vision still lives. Not only in the building itself, but in the daily practice of what happens there: tea shared across divides, young people finding safety, communities choosing relationship over retreat. Forthspring was never simply about services. It was — and is — about sustaining human connection in a world that increasingly fragments it.

That feels profoundly linked to the principles of nonviolence. Not nonviolence as passivity, but as intentional, relational work. The understanding that peace is not merely the absence of conflict, but the presence of justice, dialogue, participation, and shared humanity.

Nonviolence begins in how we see one another. It is built through spaces where people are listened to, where dignity is practised, where fear does not get the final word. It asks us to resist the easy pull towards isolation, suspicion, and dehumanisation, and instead to remain committed to relationship — especially when it is difficult.

That is what I heard in his reflections this week. A belief that communities are not sustained through control or performance, but through care. Through ordinary acts of welcome. Through people willing to hold open spaces where others can gather, speak, disagree, heal, and imagine differently together.

In many ways, sustaining Forthspring now feels like inheriting not only a building, but a practice of nonviolence. A commitment to connection in a culture of division. A commitment to encounter in a time of withdrawal. A commitment to hope that is active, not naïve. And perhaps that is why his vision still feels so alive.

Because the need for places like Forthspring has not disappeared. If anything, it has become more urgent.

– – – – –

Overcoming obstacles to mediation

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

Workshop and training materials

Introduction:

We are adding some new workshop materials to that section on the main INNATE website.

Mediation at all levels is a desirable process for dealing with conflicts which have either not been resolved by discussion or never reached proper talking between the parties. However many people are suspicious or ignorant about mediation, even if it is now mainstream and recognised at official level as a desired way of dealing with conflicts. This handout looks at some of the reasons people may not be willing to engage in mediation – and possible responses in favour of using it.

The worksheet as a 2 sides of A4 handout is available as a PDF at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Obstacles-to-mediation.pdf with the general Workshops and nonviolence training materials section being at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/workshops/

This handout can be used in a workshop setting with participants having a copy, and sharing of situations where mediation has been (or could be) impossible or difficult to arrive at, and how people in conflict can be persuaded it is ‘a good idea’. Of course it can also be used by individuals in conflict to try to persuade another party to engage but that is likely to be more difficult; having ‘a carrot’ to offer (a possible gain for the other party) in relation to a possible successful outcome could be helpful.

Obstacles to mediation

– and possible ways to overcome them….

Mediation is a voluntary process so no one can be forced to engage in a mediation process….. while they can be encouraged or even gently cajoled (if that is felt to be appropriate…), it should be a free decision by all parties involved to engage. Getting people ‘to the table’ may even be the most difficult part of it all and many mediations never take place because one party says a very clear ‘no’. Here are some of the obstacles to people engaging and possible arguments to dispel such opposition…….

l1. Misunderstanding of the mediation process

There are many possible misunderstandings of the mediation process. One fear is that engaging with the other party/parties is already handing over power and losing control. While not a misunderstanding, the need to listen to the other side can be felt to be unnecessary and/or painful (this also relates to 3 below).

q Your can state clearly that at all stages the process remains voluntary and participants can withdraw at any stage until a possible final agreement or agreements made in stages.

You can make sure prospective participants understand the stages a mediation goes through, if necessary giving them written material on this; it may also be necessary to talk about the role of the mediator(s) themselves and the fact that they cannot force anyone into anything.

l2. Power imbalances

This can work both ways. A party which is powerful may not be willing to engage because they feel they have the power and shouldn’t have to talk to anyone. A party which is powerless may feel they could not ‘win’ or gain because of the power of the other party.

q It is a mediator’s job to ensure a ‘level playing field’ in a mediation. This may mean doing some work individually with one – or both – parties so they can fully engage with each other.

In terms of persuading a ‘less powerful’ party to engage you can emphasise the equality in the process and the fact that they can withdraw at any stage. In trying to persuade a more powerful party to engage you can emphasise relationships and how things might look if they refuse to engage.

l3. Fear of losing by engaging

Anyone who has ‘an asset’ or advantage which would be put under question through mediation may fear losing out. People who have erected a high fence, trees or a hedge (which is objected to by their neighbours because it spoils their view and/or light) may not be willing to engage because they feel they can only lose out by talking about it. Obviously this relates to the issue of power in number 2 above.

q You can again emphasise relationships and the voluntary nature of the process at all stages and that if they do not want to concede or change then they are not obliged to so do. You can also talk about the generating of different possibilities (a breakthrough in one mediation on a ‘blocking of view’ issue came when the party who raised the issue offered to pay for a professional to look at, and if necessary pay for, different possibilities which would be mutually acceptable or advantageous). The aim is a ‘win win’ solution.

l4. “I am/we are right, they are wrong”

Certainty in being right can lead to the idea that engaging is pointless. This can also lead to point 6 below.

q While some people may believe opponents on an issue raise it because they want to stir up trouble, you can emphasise that different people can see the same issue very differently, and the importance of maintaining good relationships even if they are not (at that stage anyway) willing to compromise.

l5. Acceptability of the opponent

This is different to, but has links to the issue of power imbalances. It is where ‘the opponent(s)’ is/are not seen as worthy of engaging with.

This could be because of a variety of factors – social, religious, political. In one Northern Ireland example, the case of the Drumcree marching dispute in Portadown the Orangemen who want to march down the Garvaghy Road may be unwilling to engage in a process with Catholic residents because of who might be included in those they would be engaging with, e.g. republican ex-prisoners, and also feel they should be entitled to go where they want. And there may be people on the Catholic side might be unwilling to engage with those they see as political enemies or even bigots.

q To get a resolution, people may have to engage with others they would prefer not to. It is their choice – but you can emphasise the possibility of a ‘win-win’ solution.

l6. Dismissiveness

The other side’s concerns are dismissed as trivial with the feeling the other party is getting worked up over ‘nothing’.

q A small issue can loom large in someone’s life, in fact small issues that irritate can be distressing if not dealt with. If one party is dismissive of someone else’s concerns, try to get them to think about things that might irritate them. One side’s views of the other (point 5 above) can also lead to such dismissiveness – “they’re always getting worked up about something….”

l7. Timing

There are a wide variety of issues in regard to timing which can mean one or more parties in a dispute are not interested in negotiating/being involved in mediation. It may ‘never’ be the right time. Or a situation may be temporary or seen as temporary leading to an unwillingness to engage.

q While choosing the right time is important, as a potential mediator or person trying to move the conflict on, you can emphasise that starting engagement – and building at least a working-with-the-issue relationship – is more important than doing nothing and waiting for an ideal time that may never come. However it is also possible that you do have to wait for a time when the sides are willing to engage; the time frame on this could be long and there is nothing you can do except wait.

– – – – – –

Billy King: Rites Again, 340

Billy King, Nonviolent News, , , , ,

Billy King shares his monthly thoughts

Hello, I was hoping that this Colm [I think you are trying to be Uncle Colm from Derry Girls? – Ed] would be a TFZ – a Trump Free Zone – but it proved impossible. However I will keep it short and sweet and not mention the Donald again, this issue, I promise. You may have read that according to Atlantic magazine, the occupant of the POTUS post has stopped comparing himself to Abraham Lincoln and George Washington and decided he is more in the league of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Napoleon. Maybe that makes him a bit of a dick-tator but on a serious note it also makes him incredibly dangerous when in his last few years of insuperable military power he can obliterate what he wants to destroy with no repercussions for him personally.

So we may be in for a rollercoaster ride at best and a downward spiral at worst. Lets hope he gets wrapped up and obsessed with his boorish monuments to himself so he can’t be obnoxious and violent to others. He is a walking illustration of the perils of militarism (the egotism perhaps goes without saying though I have just said it) – as have many US presidents before him. Actions can have a myriad of consequences; for example, the US blockade of Cuba has doubled of even tripled the infant mortality rate there, with much other hardship too.

Meanwhile here we are into meteorological summer which in Ireland means the rain is warmer, or if you are logical and look at a clear night sky long enough you are likely to see a meteor. Well, you never know what will be thrown at us. Cue the old old story about someone from Norn Iron trying to book holiday accommodation in Britain by phone “for the Twelfth fortnight in July” and wondering why they were getting an incredulous response…. The longest day comes later this month and it always strikes me as strange – though obviously not meteorologically – that ‘summer’ comes when the days are already getting shorter. Mind you we have had a few days of record heat in late May which for most people in Ireland were pleasant – but not as a harbinger of ongoing global heating, and not in some places in Europe where temperatures were 10°C or more hotter than in good old Atlantic facing Ireland – tourist slogan “Come for the craic and stay for the cool”….

Own goal

There are own goals and own goals, and would you like to own a goal? [I will keep you goal posted on that – Ed] But the biggest own goal of the last month in relation to Northern Ireland was scored by Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservative Party in Britain. Her office issued a social media post on the usual – and totally discredited – theme that there is a vendetta against British army personnel, veterans, who operated in the North and that Labour government proposals would facilitate that. In fact the number of cases taken show that this is a non-issue but it has become an English/British nationalist shibboleth (as well as a means to try to avoid state culpability).

However the post carried film footage of British soldiers in Derry during Bloody Sunday in 1972 when 14 unarmed people were shot dead by the British army. Her post was withdrawn when it was pointed out that this was what the clip showed. But by including this what it unintentionally said is that the full rigour of the law should be applied to soldiers who were involved in shootings and violent activities outside of human rights law. This was bad enough for her and it was the opposite of what Badenoch and her office were trying nothing should exonerate those much higher up the military and political chains of command who set the parameters for engagement and sent the soldiers in, but that isn’t how these things work, is it? If anyone gets done it is the people at the bottom and in the Norn Iron case that hasn’t even been happening.

Dream time Fianna Fáil

As the two recent by-elections in the Republic show, it is not a dream time for Fianna Fáil, even losing their deposit because their vote was so low in the Dublin election. As regular readers will know, I try to take an interest in polly-ticks on both sides of the border [Shouldn’t that be ‘regular reader’, singular, rather than ‘regular readers’? – Ed] [That is just you being singularly unpleasant again – Billy]. However I was surprised by a recent dream and its vividness in remembrance of it on waking; in the dream I was responsible for putting up an exhibition about Fianna Fáil with various panels and these included accounts of FF misdemeanours and mishandlings – but activists from said political party had stolen the panels which were especially critical of them. I had to threaten that I would publicise their theft if they didn’t return them – which they did, considering that that was the lesser of two evils.

Well, how do you interpret that dream? Where did it come from? I consider said party should have gone out of existence entirely after the economic crash debacle of 2008; Bertie Ahern and the powers that were in Fianna Fail (sic) stupidly did nothing to rein in the property and housing bubble and they made the boom times boomier – which then led to the crash times being crashier and very significant hardship for many different kinds of people.

Their current embrace of NATO and EU militarisation is, I feel, a negation of the positive foreign policy which it has undertaken at various times in its existence, and also a betrayal of what soul it possessed – if a political party, especially a populist conservative one like FF, can have a soul. Micheál Martin being friendly with, and to, unionists is a Good Thing – but not at the expense that he refuses to plan for what a united Ireland would look like. On the latter, let the people decide, as is their right – but they need to know what they are deciding on and such thinking is best done outside the febrile atmosphere of a referendum vote or votes (north, south, east and west) on a u-nighted Ireland.

I am a political animal but not a party political one and I don’t think I could toe the line to be in a political party; I made that choice while (just) still a teenager. So I could do the same critique of many’s another political party. But that was what I dreamt about (see also my next two items which concern FF…) and I have provided a dream interpretation which is not dreamy. Maybe I should dream on. [Are you sure it wasn’t a large dram you had rather than a dream, even a bottle of Dreambuie? – Ed] [That would make me sic – Billy]

T-shock* and nuclear power

Micheál Martin has said Ireland should think seriously about nuclear power, e.g. Irish Times 4/5/26. I have a one word response to this; ‘Rubbish’ – nuclear rubbish or waste that is. Would he like nuclear waste in his back garden needing to be guarded for ten millennia? Of course fossil fuels need to be eradicated from Ireland’s energy mix but the idea that Ireland with its wind, waves, water and sun (yes!) might need to rely on what is the dirtiest fuel of all (and not all it is cracked up to be in terms of carbon dioxide emissions too) is unimaginative and extremely expensive nonsense. High tech junkies keep coming up with their feeling Ireland needs nuclear power – when what it needs is green energy and devolved green energy at that.

*In this case the ‘T’ is for ‘Threat’. I have told you before about a mention of the word ‘Taoiseach’ in the British Parliament many decades ago, at the start of the Troubles, before the word was known on that island; it could have been Gerry Fitt but anyway a Norn Iron nationalist mentioned “a speech given by the Taoiseach in Sligo” – and this was reported in Hansard, the official parliamentary record, as “a speech given in a tea shop in Sligo”!

There has always been hype and spin about nuclear energy from the very beginning. The attractions of small modular reactors is the latest in that hype. There remains the dangers of accidents, environmentally or humanly caused, or even sabotage or attack. Costs can go through the roof. Waste issues haven’t even begun to be resolved. We would do well to steer clear of dangerous white elephants even if that dangerous white elephant is smaller than previously proposed white elephants.

INNATE’s photo album on nuclear power issues, much of it on the 1970s anti-nuclear power movement, is at https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/albums/72157607158367565/with/53807053772 See also Caroline Hurley’s article in this publication https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/2024/02/01/nuclear-power-is-a-regrets-industry-some-facts/

Proud of lethality

Irish people in general have been proud of the role the Irish army has played in international peacekeeping of the military variety. This has been as part of a contribution to peace in the world and has been done without fear or favour and for altruistic reasons. Those of us of a nonviolent persuasion would of course like to see support for unarmed civilian protection (UCP) and other involvements in creating and maintaining peace – including urgent work at home to prevent further climate change which is likely to cause so much conflict on a global scale in the next century.

However the Irish government has been changing tack to align the Republic much more with NATO and with EU militarisation. This has been done by a process of stealth moves so that it does not look like neutrality is being affected – but each chip at the block of neutrality wears it away; removing the Triple Lock on the deployment of Irish troops overseas is just one ingredient in the stage we are at with this. Part of this has been active and increasing engagement with NATO while not formally being a member – to the extent it won’t or doesn’t matter whether we are formally a member of not, that it makes no difference.

While public opinion is clearly in favour of neutrality, the government and Irish elite (sic) have usually been skilful in moving things in their direction; ‘Nothing to see here’ they continually opine while they know damn well they are not just gilding the lily but actively deceiving the population because they, stupidly, imagine that to be a ‘good European’ you have to be a good European militarist. This has repercussions for the Irish army and for expenditure on the military which has, thankfully and rightfully, until now been low by international standards.

But one illustration of the change that has happened appeared in that paper of establishment record, The Irish Times of 21/5/26 https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2026/05/21/it-was-embarrassing-for-them-irish-army-crew-beats-us-military-teams-at-their-own-game/ An Irish army team is proudly recorded as beating the USA in military ‘games’ in the USA which was defined as a “lethality competition”. And you know what ‘lethality’ is – killing people, and in war or military engagement that usually includes women, children and men who are not engaged in armed action, i.e. those traditionally labelled as ‘innocent’.

The Sullivan Cup after a week of military competition was won by an Irish army team and, as the IT proudly recorded, “In the end, the most “lethal” team came not from the US military but from Ireland”. This was despite the Irish team never having previously operated the M2 Bradley, a 35-tonne tracked vehicle, used for the exercise. Yes, armies are trained to be able to kill people but in a neutral state like Ireland which has not been under threat the main active role, international peacekeeping, has been the prevention of lethality. Taking part in a ‘lethality’ competition is a new and unwelcome departure and just one sign of a changed role for the Irish army, and taking part in one organised by the army of the most belligerent – and unlawfully belligerent – country on this planet is disgraceful.

–

That’s me for now as summer is a-comin’ in and in a short while it will be July, aye, and holliers for many. But if you are a peace or political activist there is never a shortage of things to do at any time of the year….which is why we all need a break. Cue Christy Moore’s ‘Lisdoonvarna’ which emphasises that we all do need a break….and which I usually quote around this time of year with the best description of a holiday ever – “When summer comes around each year / They come here and we go there”. See you soon, Billy.

News, May 2026

Nonviolent News, ,

Chornobyl Mother sculpture, 40th anniversary of nuclear disaster

There has been significant publicity about the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl/Chornobyl (the latter being the now UN recognised Ukrainian spelling) nuclear disaster. Events included the unveiling in Cork of a Chornobyl Mother sculpture marking the work of Chernobyl Children International (CCI) based in Cork which was founded by Adi Roche. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/55236435943/in/dateposted/ At a commemoration ceremony at Áras an Uachtaráin, President Catherine Connolly said “€110 million in aid delivered to children, families and communities still living with consequences they did not choose. 26,500 children given rest and recuperation with host families in Ireland. Neither pandemic nor war has interrupted that work. I want to say to Adi, and to every staff member and volunteer of CCI: what you have built matters. What you do matters. This country is proud of you, and I am honoured to stand with you.” The CCI website is at https://www.chernobyl-international.com/

Big boosts for arms production in the North: Thales, government

The largest arms company in Ireland, Thales, has announced that their ‘third site’ will actually be a development at their existing second site near Crossgar, Co Down; this is in addition to their existing, primary site at Castlereagh, Belfast and total employment will increase to around 900. Meanwhile the British government is ploughing £50 million (more than £26 per head) into a Northern Ireland ‘Defence Growth Deal’; this will help small and medium enterprises and start ups to enter the ‘defence’ supply chain and in addition to that funding they will work with industry and colleges to provide potential workers with ‘defence-based skills’ in engineering and technology. Word search for more sad details.

l Regarding Northern Ireland historical exports to Israel of security-related equipment, in a company backed by Invest NI, see e.g. https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2026/04/22/invest-ni-israel/ and https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1257824469899516&set=pcb.1257824516566178

Afri Doolough Famine Walk

The moving and memorable Doolough Famine Walk organised by Afri in Co Mayo takes place on Saturday 13th June, meeting in Louisburgh from 10am where the opening ceremony will take place before participants are bussed to Delphi Lodge to walk the 18 km back to Louisburgh (shuttle car will pick up those unable to walk the whole way). This event commemorates a real and tragic famine walk in 1849 but linking this with realities in the world today. See https://www.afri.ie/category/afri-doolough-famine-walk-2026/ for more info and booking link.

Glencree is recruiting

The Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation in Co Wicklow is recruiting for a financial controller, and a couple of posts for the NextGen4Peace joint project with Mediation Northern Ireland to be partly based in Belfast – a Programme & Communications Administrator and a Monitoring & Evaluation/Assistant Programme Manager. They are also looking for volunteer Trustees to support and guide the work of the Glencree Visitors Centre. Details on all these are on the website at https://glencree.ie/

Triple Lock fact sheet / Galway Triple Lock meeting

A clear and concise factsheet from Keep Ireland Neutral (KIN) on the Triple Lock is available at https://keepirelandneutral.ie/knowledge-base/ including a dissection of government claims on the need to get rid of it. If you want an excellent summary on the issue this is it. See also https://www.instagram.com/neutrality_now/

l Galway Quakers have organised a meeting at 8pm on Thursday 7th May on Neutrality, the Triple Lock and the Quaker Peace Testimony; this takes place at the Mechanics Institute, Middle Street, Galway with speakers Éamon Ó Cuiv, Karen Devine, and John Lannon. Donations accepted for Quaker Faith in Action work in Gaza.

MNI training: Mediation and more

Mediation Northern Ireland have published their open training schedule for the next year which includes multiple courses on Constructive Professional Dialogue (1 day, online), Principled Negotiation (3 days, online and in person), Workplace Conflict Management (1 day, in person), Mediation Training and Practice (8 days, online and in person). Full details are available on their website at https://mediationni.org/ where you can also find out about the mediation services they offer.

Financial Justice Ireland: New director, wealth tax webinar

Hilary Darcy is the new director of Financial Justice Ireland (FJI) she was formerly FJI’s Global Citizenship Education Coordinator; she has replaced Thomas McDonagh. FJI (formerly Debt and Development Coalition Ireland) is a global financial justice organisation working for a financial system that serves the needs of all people, rather than just some people, and which does not take the planet for granted. They have a webinar entitled “Who owns the future? Wealth taxes, fairness and power” taking place 1-2pm on Wednesday 13th May; this is aimed primarily at teachers/educators and the speaker will be Dr. Tom McDonnell, co-director of the Nevin Economic Research Institute (NERI) and a lead researcher on Oxfam Ireland’s recent report on wealth inequality. https://www.financialjustice.ie/

ICCL: National identity card question, encryption

Issues which ICCL/Irish Council for Civil Liberties are continuing to deal with include the move by the government to turn the Public Services Card (PSC) into a national identity card – despite last year the Data Protection Commission (DPC) finding that the Department of Employment and Social Protection unlawfully processed the facial biometric data of up to 70% of the population over a 15-year period. On 14th April the government announced that it wanted to expand the use of the PSC. As ICCL says, “There has been no public debate about introducing a national identity card and no clear plan has been outlined for how such a system would be developed or governed, or how it would impact Irish society.”  See https://www.iccl.ie/press-release/public-services-card-expansion-national-id-card/

l On encryption, “ICCL understands that encryption presents a challenge for law enforcement but this position” [referring to a report by Independent Examiner of Security Legislation Judge George Birmingham] “misunderstands the issue and what’s at stake. Creating “appropriate safeguards” won’t solve the fundamental problem – any piercing of encryption on the supposed basis of creating pathways solely for An Garda Síochána introduces vulnerabilities that would be exploited by others, ultimately undermining the security and privacy of everyone.” See https://www.iccl.ie/news/we-cant-safeguard-problems-breaking-encryption/

CGE – Responses to the meta crisis; IDEA – Education for liberation

A new edition of CGE’s Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, has just been published on the theme “Pedagogical Responses to the Meta Crisis: The Role of Development Education”.  The entire issue is available in an open access format at: www.developmenteducationreview.com CGE/Centre for Global Education website is at https://www.centreforglobaleducation.com/

l The Irish Development Education Association’s 2026 Annual Conference will take place in The Grand Hotel Malahide, Co. Dublin, on Wednesday 24th June. The theme this year is Education for Liberation: GCE* in an age of Crisis. *Global Citizenship Education. See https://www.ideaonline.ie/idea-annual-conference-2026

Feasta: Finding steady ground in a time of crisis

Feasta has an online workshop Thursday 14th May  2026 from 7pm-8:30pm which aims provide a space to understand our predicament in relation to current world crises, to process our emotions and to explore how we can cultivate courage, and emotional resilience to act constructively in response. The format consists of two short inputs, from John Sharry and Oana Marian, and two small supportive breakout discussions. Participation is free. See https://www.feasta.org/ or book at https://tinyurl.com/bdfcbxvp

Judgement later in Supreme Court Shannon Airport case

It may be some months before the five judge Supreme Court makes a judgement in an appeal concerning the case of Dan Dowling who with Edward Horgan was involved in an action at Shannon airport nine years ago. The two men had been acquitted of criminal damage but found guilty of trespass. The issue in the appeal is whether the defence of necessity, to protect lives, applies to the charge of trespass with alleged intent to cause criminal damage. https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2026/04/16/peace-activist-tells-court-trespass-at-us-aircraft-in-shannon-was-to-protect-lives/

Amnesty on NI human rights, journalist murder case

Human rights protections came under severe strain in Northern Ireland during 2025, according to Amnesty International’s annual report, The State of the World’s Human Rights, published in April. Legacy issues, unlawful PSNI surveillance, attacks on press freedom and record levels of racist violence have contributed to what Amnesty described as a shameful year of human rights failure.  See https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/0320/2026/en/ Meanwhile there has been a call on the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland to release its long-delayed report into the investigation of the brutal murder of journalist Martin O’Hagan in 2001.  AI’s 2025 report on threats against journalists in NI is available at https://www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/occupational-hazard-protect-journalists-in-northern-ireland-report/

Global appeal to nine nuclear states

World Beyond War has a global appeal addressed to the presidents, prime ministers, and legislatures of China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

It is an appeal from the people of the world to these nine nuclear governments to each commit to a nuclear policy of no first strike, not ever, not for any reason; and to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and to collectively agree to immediately begin disarming on a schedule to completely eliminate all nuclear weapons from the earth no later than August 6, 2045. https://tinyurl.com/4v7nwby6 https://worldbeyondwar.org/

Dalradian gold mining enquiry ongoing

The public enquiry concerning Dalradian’s gold mining plans in the Sperrins began on 13th April and may extend for a couple of months with a decision stretching into 2027. You can keep up to date with community scrutiny through https://linktr.ee/saveoursperrins and the podcast at https://dontmineus.com/the-sperrins-podcast/ From the latter we quote from the 25th April report which laments the lack of information; “There is no current feasibility study underpinning this project, none, none at all. Instead what we are told is the entire economic case is based on a detailed planned mine which turns out to be a spreadsheet – a spreadsheet that hasn’t been published, hasn’t been independently tested, and hasn’t been seen by most people in the room.” It goes on to detail the lack of detailed scrutiny by the government department and that “There is a serious gap right across the board. We are talking about missing reports, incomplete environmental statements, data that hasn’t been available to the public, and even reference to a report from the University of Edinburgh which simply doesn’t exist.” It questions about confusion on whether gold is 99% of the value of extracted materials, or multiple minerals, and mentions waste that lasts in perpetuity but a closure plan that only lasts for 15 years. Another question is how many jobs would be local. INNATE’s A4 mini-poster on goldmining is available in the poster section of the website https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/posters/

Editorials: Blockades and nonviolence, European security

Editorials, Nonviolent News, , , , , , ,

Blockades and nonviolence

The recent fuel price blockades by some farmers and hauliers in the Republic raise a significant number of questions about what constitutes peaceful and nonviolent action. There have been very variable, and mixed, reactions and emotions involved and these are understandable. The government chose to negotiate with official, existing bodies representing the sectors involved rather than the protesters themselves and there were concessions made. The protests were in that regard partly successful, even if the concessions were rather less than protesters wanted. There has been a contrast between the strength of the protests in the Republic, dealing with a local and sovereign government, and the lack of protests in the North where the chances of influencing the government in London, who decide on fuel duties, are very slim.

The first thing to say is that the blockades were peaceful but they were blockades. Some protesters refused to use the term ‘blockade’ but they clearly were that; preventing people going about their normal business and stopping traffic by placing vehicles in the way is clearly a blockade. But it is important also to distinguish between what is ‘peaceful’ and what is legal; something can be illegal but peaceful and indeed something can be legal but not peaceful or it may even be violent. What is legal is defined by the laws of the state. What is ‘positive’ socially and economically is another question.

The issues involved include matters to do with fossil fuels, the right and need to make a living, the right of people to go about their normal workday lives, and questions about what is democracy as well as the role of government. Ireland has not moved away from fossil fuels in the way it should have done and that is largely the fault of the government – and the people who elected them. If we were less dependent on fossil fuels then the issue of a considerable jump in fuel prices would not have been the issue it became. On the other hand, if people were unable to make a living because of the cost of fuel then something needed to be done – either government subsidies (by way of reduced fuel tax) or an increase in prices by those using the fuels, or both.

The main issue or problem was people being unable to get where they wanted or needed to be because of their form of transport being blockaded. This was obviously frustrating even if those stopped were supportive of the protesters – and infuriating if they were not, feeling they were being ‘held to ransom’. Did the protesters have the ‘right’ to do what they were doing? In nonviolent theory – except in cases of authoritarian regimes where protesters need to have their identity hidden – the general rule is that nonviolent protesters doing illegal acts ‘take the consequences’ and this is part of the protest, being willing to stand up and deal with what is thrown at them by the state while still challenging the state on it. After a partial victory in concessions being made by the state, and the army being called in to remove blockades, the protesters went home however the possible use of the army in such circumstances is a dangerous move regarding dealing with protests.

But were the protesters justified in causing severe inconvenience to other people​? This is a value judgement. ‘Nonviolent tactics’ can be used in negative ways – e.g. if racists organised a boycott of black and minority ethnic businesses that would be using a ‘nonviolent tactic’ for a negative and indeed violent cause. So it depends on whether you consider the protesters to be ‘right’ in their demand for government action on fuel prices. However in terms of positive nonviolent action by the protesters, other tactics could have been chosen which were more interactive with government and other citizens.

There is no category for the kind of blockade engaged in by the fuel protesters in Gene Sharp’s classic analysis of nonviolent tactics in his book “The Politics of Nonviolent Action” perhaps because such blockades were not much a feature of action when that book was written in 1973. Sharp’s category of ‘Nonviolent interjection’ (using human bodies) is rather different and involves people putting their bodies on the line – not their tractors and trucks.

However other analysis, e.g. https://www.nukeresister.org/2024/07/13/blockades-block-liberation-how-blockades-obstruct-nonviolence-and-democratic-revolutions/ condemns blockades as a nonviolent tactic – “Blockades replace the uncertainty of democracy and the vulnerability of nonviolence with military notions of politics: win and lose, strength and dominance, tactics and strategy.” “Blockades are reactive rather than proactive” and “The blockade becomes part of an order of power that strengthens the one who is already strong.”

A look at disruptive protest activities https://commonslibrary.org/disruptive-protest-tactics-helpful-or-harmful/ has a comparison table of costs and benefits. However its point of “Little evidence of impact on policy change” does not apply in the fuel protests as clearly the government did change its tune. The question is whether that was democracy in action, extortion and holding others over a barrel, or something in between. In 1974 in Northern Ireland the loyalist ‘strike’ or stoppage against the Sunningdale agreement power-sharing government succeeded in bringing down the new political arrangement; blockades were a prominent part of this but there was also a substantial threat of violence behind them.

And this brings us on to the question of what responsibility the government holds. Clearly action was needed of some kind. Should they have negotiated or changed policy faster? Should they have acted earlier to clear blockades? Would that have inflamed feelings? What about the possible or threatened use of the army in this situation? And what is the government’s responsibility in relation to an economic matter like this which is clearly beyond their control (the international market price for fossil fuels); is giving away money the answer? The extent to which the government could or should take action to subsidise fuel prices is a moot point, and using a comparison like still getting the same overall ‘take’, despite higher prices, is one possibility for arriving at a just solution or at least a measuring stick. A windfall tax on increased fossil fuel profits in this situation could also be a possibility which could be used to subsidise fuel prices, even if retrospectively.

Democracy is far more than the workings of a parliament or assembly and elections every number of years. The workings of civil society and NGOs is an important part of democracy and its health (just look at how Putin has hollowed out the civil society which had developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union). Citizenry are entitled to protest whether that be for progressive or reactionary causes and reasons; they have that legal and civic right. When there is a heartfelt issue where the government’s actions are not in accord with the views of a significant number of citizens then there is almost bound to be ongoing protest. The majority of citizens in the Republic are in favour of neutrality and opposed to US military use of Shannon but the craven politicians in the government have been too afraid of US economic power to take positive action – hence ongoing protest and actions at Shannon airport, some of which have been ‘illegal’ but they have also been morally just. This is part of democracy too and it can be argued that it is the government that has been acting undemocratically and in opposition to peace and neutrality.

How you judge the justice issue involved in the fuel blockades will determine how you see the rightness or the wrongness of the actions involved and the disruption to the rest of the population. The protesters were entitled to protest. The state was entitled to react. How civil society saw the issue was an important factor in the equations involved. Some commentators have pointed to the right wing sentiments of some of the protesters and this may be an issue but the overall question is one of justice and fairness to all, protesters and those affected by the protest. Nonviolent theory does of course include the need to disobey unjust laws – but, if need be, it also includes the possibility of disobedience of ‘neutral’ laws which are not immediately connected with the issue at hand.

The lesson in all this is, of course, to have urgent transition from fossil fuel use and prioritising local green energy supplies rather than being dependent on large corporations for either fossil fuels or the provision of clean energy. Decentralised systems are much more difficult to be abused by the powerful and more difficult to disrupt when things are falling apart.

Just like the mixed sentiments of many in the population regarding the fuel blockades, nonviolent theory does not provide an immediate and clear answer on the fuel protests however questions of justice and equity should be to the fore in any analysis. And imagination and positivity in protest is part of nonviolence.

European security

Taoiseach Micheál Martin has said (e.g. in Berlin) that security will be one of the key issues of the Irish EU presidency, coming up shortly for the second half of the year. He has also previously said, last December, that there was too much “squeamish debate” about Ireland working with other countries’, including NATO, militaries. He is quite right about an emphasis on security but not in the way he thinks – which evidently only concerns military security against Russia including EU-NATO cooperation. Here are the security issues which need tackled on an Irish, European and world level:

Human security:

The idea that ‘security’ is about military security is dangerous and deluded. Covid 19 was the greatest threat to world wellbeing for a long time and it had nothing to do with military security. Global heating is the largest endemic, global threat. Human security includes the right to life and freedom from violence, adequate food and housing, and civil freedom. The following issues of security all contribute to ‘human security’.

Ecological security:

Global heating is already a monumental disaster and stabilising global temperatures is of paramount importance. For Ireland there is the danger, analysed in a couple of recent reports, that the chances of the Atlantic AMOC current (Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation a k a Gulf Stream) shutting down are greater than previously thought, which would leave Ireland with similar weather to Newfoundland and heightened sea levels. But this would affect the rest of northern Europe too and disastrously change weather patterns on a wider scale with likely catastrophic consequences for food production and wellbeing.

Food security:

Ireland is a net exporter of food but it is only in a few fields like dairy and beef. Most other food is imported. The island nature of Ireland and being on the western extremity of Europe adds a complicating and dangerous factor to food importing in times of chaos. At the very least contingency plans need to be in place for emergency times; at the moment the ‘just in time’ nature of food importing leaves countries very vulnerable but an island like Ireland especially so.

Security against war:

The arms build up in Europe is unsustainable in different ways, both economic and in terms of risk. The war in Ukraine, partly caused by NATO expansionism, is brutal but a wider European war, including the possible use of nuclear weapons, would be suicidal. The way to get rid of enemies is to turn them into friends; this is obviously easier said than done but current policies keep upping the level of threat. Ireland in particular, with its positive history of neutrality, should be working flat out on conflict mitigation and transformation. Standing up against the warmaking of the USA should be imperative.

Economic security:

The world is using its resources at an unsustainable rate. Apart from any questions of national and global equity, financial and trade justice are needed to help stabilise migration and avoid the chaos of migration beyond what is bearable for both sending and host countries. Obviously this relates closely to ecological security but it is much more. And developments in AI threaten both the economic and social wellbeing of many workers and would be workers; new parameters and paradigms need to be set for people’s involvement in economic activity and wage-earning. And relative economic prosperity does not guarantee the right to housing, for example, as people in Ireland, especially Dublin, and other places have been finding out.

We all deserve to feel secure. Current economic, military and international relations policies are creating massive insecurity. Emphasis on military security rather than human security is is part of a downward spiral of negativity and violence.

Eco-Awareness with Larry Speight: The militarist mindset

Eco-Awareness, Nonviolent News, ,

The statistics presented to us through the various media outlets about the war in the Middle East fail to convey the full horror of its impact on human and nonhuman life and the commentary tells us little about the negative consequences for the descendants of those who suffer from the violence as well as the harm done to the biosphere which will last for millennia.

Our lack of exposure to the full horror of the war is not entirely the fault of the media as much of what is happening is not seen by them. Although the visuals aired for a few minutes on our screens and the brief accounts that are broadcast of the anguish and inconsolable grief felt by those whose loved ones have been injured and killed resonate with most people, we living far from the suffering have no voice in the war cabinets of the United States, Israel and Iran. Nor do we have a voice in the war cabinets in Ukraine and Russia or the desert camps of the warring parties in Sudan. No one on our rain-soaked island can declare that a war in a faraway land is over.

What we can do is educate ourselves about the horror and the consequences of war which might lead to a mass opting out of the militarist mindset which holds that there is no alternative to organised violence, a view that the 1998 Northern Ireland Peace Agreement firmly rejected.

The militarist mindset is dangerously flawed as it is based on a fractured view of humanity. On the one hand it depicts an entire people, in the case of the United States’ war on Iran, 93 million humans, as undeserving of the essentials of life such as water, food and energy as well as freedom from anxiety and fear. This is underscored by President Donald Trump saying that he will bomb the Iranian people “back to the Stone Ages where they belong.”

The word ‘belong’ is telling as it reveals that in his cosmology there are the deserving and the undeserving, those who have entitlements ascribed by divine providence and those that don’t. This view of the so-called enemy is prevalent amongst all warring groups. It was articulated by Pete Hegseth, the U.S. Secretary of War, who in a religious service at the Pentagon on the 25 March said that the wicked should be eliminated and called on God, with reference to Iran, to “break the teeth” and kill the “wicked” enemies “who deserve no mercy” and should be “delivered to the eternal damnation prepared for them.”

The militarist mindset can simultaneously consider a whole ethnic group or nation unworthy of life while exalting those of their in-group / country / who cause others enormous suffering and commit mass murder if it is perceived to further the interests of their group.

Aside from the inaccuracy of this fractured view of humanity and the indifference to the suffering it causes, which is overwhelmingly borne by women and children, there is an additional ecological and human cost even if not a single person receives a scratch in the war zone. Both arise out of military spending.

The projected global sum that will be spent on the military in 2026 is $2.9 trillion. The United States is expected to spend in excess of $1 trillion while the European Union is expected to increase its spending by 60 billion Euro bringing the total to an estimated 460 billion Euro. This is money that could be spent on meeting social needs such as affordable housing, health care, education, care of the vulnerable and regenerative agriculture both at home and abroad.

A positive outcome of redirecting the enormous amount of money spent on the military towards social need is that it lessens the potential for social conflict thus helping neuter the perceived need for military hardware and trained killers.

As the 30-year long period of political violence in Northern Ireland reveals there is the phenomena of inter-generational trauma which carries a litany of wellbeing issues including chronic ill-health as revealed by the 2025 report ‘The Prevalence and Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences in Northern Ireland’ which was commissioned by the N.I. Executive. In the case of the violence and destruction of civic infrastructure in Palestine, Sudan and other war zones the children not only experience deep trauma but as their schools have been destroyed and many of their teachers killed they will likely grow up without receiving a formal education.

With few exceptions media coverage of wars neglect to examine their impact on the biosphere including the ecosystems in the war zones. When the ghastly plumes of black smoke rise into the sky from bombed buildings, oil storage tanks and ships an easy reference could be made by the commentators that the smoke and dust emitted from the bombed structures contribute to the warming of the planet and that the fallout will poison water, soil and plants and likely be inhaled by the human and nonhuman population causing chronic health problems.

The amount of global warming gasses emitted by war is substantial. The Guardian reports that in the first two weeks of the U.S.-Israel war on Iran the global warming emissions exceeded the amount emitted by Iceland in the course of a year. In February 2025, Earth.org reported that the global warming emissions from Russia’s war on Ukraine was the equivalent of the annual emissions of Austria, Hungry, Czech Republic and Slovakia combined. Globally, the military’s annual emission of global warming gases totals approximately 5.5 percent of the annual global total emissions. If the military were a country they would rank as the fourth-largest national emitter.

The militarist mindset not only wages war against people, in particular women and children who are the main causalities of war, but on the biosphere itself. To undermine the ability of the biosphere to sustain life robs us of the right to call ourselves Homo sapiens – the wise ape.

The Peace Line with Kate Laverty: Just War, Just Peace?

Nonviolent News, Readings, ,

Reclaiming nonviolence in a time of political noise

Recent political commentary in the United States has brought the concept of “just war” back into public debate. Criticism directed at the Pope — alongside interventions from figures like Donald Trump and JD Vance — has framed Christian nonviolence as naïve, even irresponsible, in the face of global threat.

But this framing misunderstands both the history and the depth of the tradition it seeks to invoke.

The idea of “just war” did not emerge as a justification for violence, but as an attempt to restrain it. Rooted in the writings of Augustine of Hippo, it was a moral framework designed to limit when and how force could be used — insisting on necessity, proportionality, and last resort. It was, at its core, an ethic of hesitation.

Over time, however, what was intended as a brake has too often become a permission structure.

The Pope’s recent emphasis on nonviolence is not a rejection of moral responsibility — it is a return to a deeper question: what does it mean to follow a faith rooted in love, dignity, and the refusal to dehumanise?

And Christianity is not alone in grappling with this tension.

In Islam, principles of just conduct in war (jus in bello) emphasise protection of civilians, restraint, and accountability. In Judaism, the concept of milchemet mitzvah (obligatory war) is tightly bound by ethical conditions. In Buddhism, the commitment to non-harm (ahimsa) sits uneasily but persistently alongside historical realities of conflict. Across traditions, there is a shared discomfort — a recognition that violence, even when justified, leaves a moral wound.

So where does that leave us?

The question is not simply whether war can ever be “just,” but whether justice can ever truly be achieved through violence.

Nonviolence does not ignore harm. It confronts it differently. It asks what it would mean to build systems, relationships, and politics that prevent violence long before it becomes thinkable. It shifts the focus from reaction to prevention, from dominance to dignity.

To reconcile just war and nonviolence may not be about choosing one over the other, but about recognising their tension.

Just war says: if force must be used, it must be constrained.

Nonviolence says: we must build a world where it is no longer needed.

In a time when political rhetoric rewards certainty and strength, the harder path is moral complexity — holding the line that human dignity cannot be conditional, even in conflict.

Iran and nuclear weapons by Lawrence Wittner

Nonviolent News, Readings, , , ,

How the international community obtained a nuclear weapons-free agreement with Iran―and lost it thanks to Donald Trump

By Lawrence S. Wittner – TRANSCEND Media Service

If the objective of the U.S. war upon Iran is to ensure that that country does not develop nuclear weapons, that goal was attained more than a decade ago through a far different approach than the one now being followed by the Trump administration.

Iran, as a signer of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1970, had agreed to forgo the development of nuclear weapons.  Even so, fears grew during the early 21st century that Iran’s uranium enrichment program, used for peaceful purposes, might be diverted to the development of the Bomb, thereby throwing the volatile Middle East into yet another crisis, including a frenzied nuclear arms race.

As a result, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France) and Germany began lengthy negotiations with Iran, offering it various incentives to halt uranium enrichment.  A key incentive was the lifting of international sanctions, which were having a severe impact on sales of Iran’s oil and, thus, its economy.  After the election in 2013 of an Iranian reformer, Hassan Rouhani, as president, the negotiators came to a preliminary accord to guide their talks toward a comprehensive nuclear agreement.

The final agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, was negotiated by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Germany, and the European Union.  Signed in July 2015, it granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for significant restrictions on its nuclear program.  These included Iran’s agreement to ban production of highly enriched uranium or plutonium, ensure that its key nuclear facilities pursued only civilian work, and limit the numbers and types of centrifuges that it could operate.  In addition, Iran agreed to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, unfettered access to its nuclear facilities and undeclared sites.

In the United States, the Iran nuclear agreement was strongly supported by the Obama administration, which played a key role in securing it, and by Democrats, but denounced by Republicans.  Jeb Bush, then a leading presidential contender, called it “dangerous, deeply flawed, and short-sighted,” while U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham claimed that it was a “death sentence for the state of Israel.” Indeed, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, lobbied ferociously against U.S. acceptance of the Iran agreement, furiously attacking it as a “historic mistake.”

Despite the opposition, the agreement went into effect in January 2016 and, initially, had smooth sailing. The IAEA certified that Iran was keeping its commitments, nations repealed or suspended their sanctions, Iran’s oil exports surged, and the United States and European nations unfroze about $100 billion of Iran’s frozen assets.

In May 2018, however, Donald Trump, Obama’s successor as President, breaking with America’s European allies, unilaterally withdrew the U.S. government from the Iran agreement and announced the reimposition of oil and banking sanctions.  “It is clear to me that we cannot prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb under the decaying and rotten structure of this deal,” Trump announced.  Assailing the Iran agreement as “defective to its core,” Trump condemned it for failing to deal with Iran’s ballistic missile program and its proxy warfare in the Middle East, as well as for the agreement’s 10-year sunset provision.

In response, Iranian President Rouhani. stating that the U.S. government had failed to “respect its commitment,” declared that he had “ordered the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to be ready for action if needed, so that if necessary we can resume our enrichment on an industrial level without any limitations.”  Even so, he promised, he would wait to speak about this with allies and the other signatories to the agreement.

Thereafter, things went downhill.  Although France, Germany, and Britain sought to keep the agreement alive by evading the U.S. banking sanctions through a barter system, this effort eventually collapsed.  Meanwhile, Trump got into a verbal brawl with Rouhani, threatening Iran with what he called “CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE.”  Ultimately, Iran began exceeding the agreed-upon limits to its stockpile, enriching uranium to higher concentrations, and developing new centrifuges.

Although Joe Biden, as a 2020 presidential candidate, promised to rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement and “to work with our allies to strengthen and extend it,” by the time he was in office the relationship with Iran had deteriorated too far to make this feasible.  Coming under a new, more reactionary leadership, the Iranian regime grew more repressive, as well as more distant from the United States and more politically toxic.  As a result, a new agreement was increasingly out of reach.

In retrospect, are there any lessons that can be learned from these events?

One is that, to the degree that the development of nuclear weapons by Iran is a currently a problem, it is a problem of Trump’s making.  Or as Biden put it years ago, Trump’s pullout from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement was “a self-inflicted disaster.”

Another is that getting a country to forgo nuclear weapons development is easier to accomplish through international―and especially UN Security Council―action than through unilateral action.  A threat from one nation to another can easily be viewed and dismissed as bullying.  But pressure from a worldwide organization representing the community of nations has greater impact.

More generally, if nations are going to be asked (or pressured) to forgo development of nuclear weapons, it is useful to have a framework that treats nations equally.  The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty fosters this equality through a bargain, in which the non-nuclear nations forgo building nuclear weapons in exchange for the nuclear nations eliminating their own nuclear arsenals.  The next time Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu threaten to annihilate Iranian civilization, someone might remind them of that.

–

Lawrence S. Wittner ( https://www.lawrenceswittner.com ) is Professor of History Emeritus at SUNY/Albany and the author of ‘Confronting the Bomb’ (Stanford University Press).

Article taken from Transcend Media Service, 27 April – 3 May 2026. https://www.transcend.org/tms/