Academics and activists call for justice and peace
We are researchers and teachers in a wide range of disciplines and sciences dealing with human conflicts; organisers and participants in many different social movements struggling to create a better world; and ordinary people suffering along with others and afraid of the future promised by the powerful.
We are horrified and appalled by the atrocities of September 11th, for which no justification is possible; by the build-up to a long and brutal war, which will involve the mass slaughter of innocent people; and by the background of misery and violence against which all of this is taking place.
These make us determined to take action, so that ordinary people do not need to die as pawns in the game of world politics, so that the cycle of revenge and retaliation does not continue to roll, and so that the conditions which give rise to terror as a means of politics can be ended.
Who we are
As activists in social movements around the globe, we have been working for justice, for democracy, for human rights
and for freedom in many different ways, and struggling against violence, terror, dictatorships and intolerance.
Some of us have been engaged in movements for many years; often our work has involved great personal sacrifice,
and some of us have run serious risks to ourselves and our families.
We have learned to our cost how little those who are now calling for a war to defend freedom really care about freedom, in their own countries or in the rest of the world: they have defended dictatorships, armed fundamentalists, supported military coups, and stood by while thousands and hundreds of thousands have died. The world they have built is not a world where freedom thrives.
As academics from many countries, we have devoted our working lives to researching and teaching about issues such as political conflict, social movements, majority world development, structures of inequality, cultural differences and human needs. We are only too well aware of the history and dynamics of political violence and war, of prejudice and intolerance, of ideology and mystification.
We are disturbed when journalists who do not know what they are talking about offer simple solutions to complex problems. We are angry when journalists who should know better join them in forgetting the past, ignoring the real conflicts that exist on our planet and reducing the rest of the world into soundbites and casualty numbers. We look in vain for mass media coverage of the arms trade, of western support for dictatorships or even simply of the everyday struggles of the poor for survival and justice.
As ordinary human beings, we are horrified by the events of September 11th and the threat of further atrocities, frightened by the mobilisation for a long-drawn-out war, the assault on civil liberties and the rise of racism. We have to live in this world, in which the casual murder of civilians has become an ordinary means of politics, from central Africa to the east coast of America and from Iraq to the Balkans. Unlike the powerful, who can usually hope to escape the consequences of their actions, we have no special protection for ourselves or our families.
We do not agree that two wrongs make a right: the atrocities in New York and Washington no more justify devastation in one of the poorest countries on earth than American foreign policy justifies the deaths of thousands of civilians in Manhattan. Similarly, freedom is not defended by the restriction of civil liberties, any more than intolerance is challenged by racism.
What needs to be said
Terror against civilians is not, and cannot be, a means of bringing about human progress and social change. Its
victims are usually ordinary people, with little influence on the foreign policy of their states - something which
is as true in America as in Afghanistan. Terror, in the "West" as well as the "East", provides
an excuse for further authoritarianism, in the form of war, the erosion of civil liberties, and the attack on "aliens",
to the benefit of powerful ruling groups, whether they wear turbans or ties.
The dynamics of terror marginalise social movements which aim to tackle the underlying poverty, inequality, violence and anger that give rise to terror, and replace them with the anti-politics of militarism, rhetoric and fear. We have seen this in the former Yugoslavia, in the Latin America of the death squads, and in the "strategy of tension" in western Europe.
Warfare is an ineffective means of opposing terrorism. As the conflicts in Northern Ireland and Israel / Palestine among others have shown, it breeds yet more martyrs and grievances, through which new generations are recruited to paramilitary organisations. It involves funding and training those who will later be classed as terrorist (Hamas, the Taliban, Saddam Hussein and bin Laden have all been supported by western powers at different periods in the past).
Warfare in turn becomes a form of terrorism when directed (as it usually is) against civilian populations. The terror that has struck America is no justification for directing terror against ordinary people in the Middle East. As people have emigrated to America, so many people around the world feared or are mourning for their relatives in New York. Now, with 6.2 million Afghans already refugees, people around the world are afraid for their relatives in Kabul, Herat, and Kandahar.
The assault on freedom by governments undermines the very liberties it is supposed to defend. Political opposition is muzzled: the EU Council of Ministers has agreed new rules under which opponents the current political, social or economic order may become "terrorists" if they so much as cut a wire at an anti- nuclear protest or break a lock during an occupation. The very movements which seek to bring justice, peace and human rights are criminalised.
Media freedom is curtailed: the head of the BBC had to apologise for a radio programme in which the ex- American ambassador was challenged over Middle Eastern policy. Freedom of movement is restricted with increased border controls everywhere, and surveillance of ordinary citizens increased (emails are to be tapped in Britain). The largest political participation by ordinary people for decades, the anti-globalisation movement, is increasingly treated as a criminal activity by European police forces.
Intolerance and prejudice, racism and nationalism breed their own mirror images. Religious fundamentalism and fanatical hate of other religions speak loudly in the US as well as in Afghanistan. The cult of violence is as visible in public calls for mass destruction and the gory fascination with the techniques of terror and the maps of wars to come as it is in public calls for a jihad and the gory fascination with "martyrs".
While the Taliban blow up Buddhist statues, violently oppress women and force Hindus to wear distinguishing marks, people who look "Arab" are attacked on the street and mosques are threatened in Europe and America. The immensely diverse populations of huge countries and whole continents are squeezed into a single mould by hate and fear.
What needs to be done
Wars are not only won or lost, as in the Hollywood fantasies where all that exists is soldiers, generals and politicians.
Wars can be opposed, undermined and on occasion even stopped. In recent history, we have seen popular opposition
help to bring the Vietnam war to a close and contribute to the ending of the nuclear arms race at Reykjavik. At
other times, military policy has been dictated by fear of such opposition (as in the second Gulf War and the war
on Serbia), and the US administration has made clear its need to prepare both its own population and its allies
for the coming war.
The drift to war, authoritarianism and racist violence is not inevitable. It can be stopped at any point when enough ordinary people are ready to do so. Although shock at what happened on September 11th, fear of the consequences of saying "the wrong things" and unfamiliarity with social movements are keeping many people from taking action, it is clear from many sources that the opposition to this war is greater than what is currently being expressed.
Talking to people
The very first things that any of us can do are to break out from this feeling of being isolated, of being unable
to say what we think, and of fear at what others will say. We have to speak up, not only for ourselves and for
those who will die in the coming war, but also for all those other people close to home who are feeling the same
fear we feel. If we can reach out and make contact with one another, find out that we are not alone, and help each
other express what we actually think and feel, we are making the first step towards a movement that can stop a
war.
This means above all talking to people: at home and in work, on trains and buses, in mailing lists and chat rooms, to whoever our ordinary, everyday lives bring us into contact with. People who know us will think differently about what we say than about what they hear on the news, and it will have an effect.
Our isolation is linked to the fear felt at present by many Muslims across the western world. The history of ethnic conflict makes it clear how easy it is to isolate people, and how important everyday interaction is for basic safety and well-being. If we know people who we think may be at risk from racism - a local shopkeeper, a neighbour, a fellow-student - we can take the time to check that they are OK and offer company if people feel unsafe making daily journeys or at risk in their own home or workplace; or we can offer our help to local refugee support organisations.
We can also of course speak out in public. All of us can contact politicians, phone talk shows and write to newspapers to oppose war, defend civil liberties and combat intolerance. In particular, we ask our academic colleagues to join us in including issues of development, war and racism in our courses and to make space for real debate in our classrooms. We ask our fellow-activists to offer their skills to groups who will have to learn how to do a press release, how to put a magazine together or how to do a poster run.
Building peace
In our everyday work, we can think how far our practice supports or hinders what we are trying to develop. As academics,
for example, we can ask ourselves how much our professional activities enable the development of a pluralist and
tolerant atmosphere on our campuses, how far we can contribute to the development of international links, exchanges
and volunteer programmes, and what we can do to support students who are trying to oppose racism.
As activists, we can consider how much our practice is genuinely geared towards tolerance of differing opinions and cooperation with others we do not entirely agree with; how far we are reproducing the dynamics of a "heroic few" at the expense of a movement open to ordinary people; and how far we are cooperating in processes of criminalisation and marginalisation of other activists.
From our governments, we call for:
A politics that goes to the roots of terrorism through active measures to deal with poverty and
social inequality on a world scale, through a commitment to nonviolence in international relations, and through
support for movements which enable ordinary people to express their own needs;
The defence of freedom through a refusal to ally with military and non-democratic governments, through a commitment
to the right to political dissent in western countries, and through support for those who risk their lives and
lose their homes because of oppression and war;
Opposition to intolerance and fanaticism through the defence of pluralism, a serious commitment to oppose both
popular and institutional racism, and a public recognition of the faults of the past.
Conclusion
Beyond all of this again, we will find that the dynamics of war require the public opposition of many people if
they are to be stopped. For some people, this may mean petitions and marches; for others, civil disobedience and
direct action; for others again, strikes, Internet actions or support for deserters. We should be wary both of
"raising the stakes" so high that the movement isolates itself, and of condemning each other so violently
as to split the movement.
It is not easy to say what will be the most effective tactic, and important to respect other people's needs and limits, as well as the learning process that everyone goes through as they become active in movements. We encourage each other to bear this in mind and work towards supporting each other, to assert our independence of the way politicians and journalists define "what has to be done", and to act wherever we can - in public and in private - so that terror does not beget terror.
Sign this call for peace
To list of signatories so far
Back to main "Call for peace" page
This call for peace is being organised by Dr Laurence Cox for the "social-movements" academic / activist
mailing list. For offers of help or queries, please get in touch at "lcox@iol.ie".