Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Future of the Global Peace Movement
In opposition to the US-UK invasion of Iraq, activist groups from around the world formed the largest global peace movement in history, prompting the New York Times to dub the movement the world’s “other super power.” Few activists were surprised that the US ploughed ahead with invasion and occupation, but now the movement faces the challenge of redefining its goals and setting a new long-term agenda against violence and imperialism. This section looks at “what’s next” for the global peace movement.
Back to: NGOs
Also See GPF's page on: Movement for Global Justice | Iraq
Articles
Going Global (April 2003)
This article examines the global movement mobilized around the slogan - The World Says No to War. The article argues that this global movement serves as a counter superpower to the US, which surpasses antiwar protests and challenges American unilateralism and empire.(Transnational Institute Institute for Policy Studies)
Noam Chomsky talks about the unprecedented diversity and size of the worldwide anti-war movement and the US administration’s attempts to win public support by using fear tactics. (Voice4change)
This article documents the achievements of the anti-war movement and how lessons learnt in opposing war on Iraq will promote peaceful conflict resolution in the future. (ATTAC)2007
Waging Peace (October 3, 2007)
This article discusses the book ‘Waging Peace’ by Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector in Iraq. As a republican he voted for George Bush in the US elections in 2000, but has consistently opposed the war in Iraq. Commenting on the recent surge in opposition to the war, Ritter says that “Americans are not against the war in Iraq because it is wrong; they are against it because we are losing.” As an active participant in the anti-war movement, Ritter says it lacks both a clear message and effective organization. It also lacks the determination of the powerful US ‘military-industrial-congressional complex’ and a future vision for the US. Ritter argues that patriotism is the way forward and asks his readers “to love America enough to change it.” (Michigan Citizen)Walking the Talk of Peacemaking (July 4, 2007)
This Common Dreams article argues that while many people think of peacemaking as a passive endeavor, “the absence of war,” it actually requires action, dedication, and group efforts. The author argues that peace activists are less frequently using public demonstrations as a means of action. This change prevents activists from working with people who are different from them and also lessens the chance that government bodies and the public will respond to their appeals for peace. The author also assigns fault to the Bush administration which has “curtailed peaceful demonstrations” and the media, which often does not cover activism.An Open Letter to Our Movement (June 4, 2007)
This Institute for Policy Studies article argues that US citizens’ efforts to mobilize for the anti-war movement are fading partly because the Bush administration has continued the Iraq war despite dissent and protests. To advance the movement, the author suggests that we educate the public, pressure the government, and work with resistance organizations and the international community. Though the US government continues to disappoint its constituencies, it must know that “we are still here.”How the Peace Movement Can Win (May 4, 2007)
Despite "vigorous and widespread" mobilization, the US peace movement continues to struggle to restrain the Bush administration from escalating the war in Iraq and Democrats do not seem committed to "pulling the plug" on war funding. According to this Foreign Policy in Focus article, the anti-war movement needs to do more than just gain popular support in order to have longer lasting effects on public policy. The author calls for solidarity and unity among activists to strengthen their common agenda for peace.2006
What Does an Anti-War Movement Look Like Today? (August 7, 2006)
This AlterNet article presents a new dimension to the movement against the Iraq war, since “mass national protests did not sway the Bush administration.” The author discusses the “counter-recruitment” campaign, an initiative by war resisters to discourage youth from enlisting in the US Army. Anti-war activists aim to tackle the military’s so-called “poverty draft” by providing alternative economic opportunities to low-income groups and underprivileged youth.Opponents of Iraq War Rally around Lt. Watada (June 27, 2006)
While courting the press to shield himself from the army’s potentially stiff punishment for refusing to serve in Iraq, Lieutenant Ehren Watada has emerged as a new figure for the anti-war movement. Organizations such as Courage to Resist seek “to stop the Iraq war by focusing on those ordered to wage it” and mobilize army resisters. Although military dismiss the influence of the Watada case, peace activists observe that the number of deserters has grown tremendously since the Iraq war began. (Seattle Times)Why So Little Protest on Iraq? (May 30, 2006)
According to this CBS article, staunch opponents to the war in Iraq, especially students, have not rallied together in protest as much as many have done, for instance, against the atrocities in Darfur. The columnist speculates that perhaps images from Abu Ghraib and Haditha as well as the decline in citizens joining the military have disengaged the US audience from the war.Have Peace Activists Ever Stopped a War? (January 16, 2006)
The author of this article briefly looks at the role of the peace movement throughout recent history – from early US colonial wars, to the conclusion of the Cold War. In some instances movements have not proved effective, however some others have brought an end to US wars. The author writes that during the Vietnam and Cold Wars, public pressure was so great that it impacted significantly upon US foreign and military policy, particularly on nuclear weapon use. (History News Network)2005
The Politics of the Anti-War Movement (December 2005)
Although opposition to the war in Iraq is growing, the organizational leadership of the US movement against the war is fracturing. The two major organizing factions, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) are increasingly at odds: UFPJ sees itself as a “true coalition,” representing many different political views, whereas ANSWER is closely aligning itself with the radical World Worker’s Party. Their disagreements are causing a leadership vacuum, and many veterans groups and “rank and file marchers” are as a result stepping up to continue the momentum of the global peace movement. (World War 4 Report)Disappearing Anti-War Protests (September 27, 2005)
Although the September 24, 2005 anti-war demonstrations were a numerical success, many observers lamented the shortcomings of US media coverage, which paid hardly any attention to the over half million protestors. The global peace movement now faces the challenge of gaining momentum in the face of such media silence. (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting)Far Cry From Vietnam - New Silent Majority Sets Pace for Anti-Iraq War Movement (September 19, 2005)
Although many social commentators have drawn parallels between the war in Iraq and the Vietnam War, twenty-first century “antiwar activists find themselves in a very different position from their Vietnam War counterparts.” In contrast to the student protesters of the 1960s, who relied on unabashedly radical tactics to convey their message, the individuals spearheading the modern global peace movement focus on “the middle of the political spectrum” in order to highlight that anti-war sentiments are in fact mainstream ideals. (Pacific News Service)Anti-War America (August 30, 2005)
Drawing parallels between the anti-war movement of the Vietnam era and contemporary mobilizations, this piece examines the choices that protestors of the war in Iraq face, particularly in the wake of the renewed anti-war activism spearheaded by Cindy Sheehan and Camp Casey. In order to become a viable movement with legitimate public backing, the author argues, the protesters must be disciplined and employ tactics that are embraced by the mainstream. Otherwise, the public will consider the protests to be “confrontational revelries and symbolic anti-Americanism on the left,” and the global peace movement will once again lose momentum. (TomPaine)Where Have All the Anti-Warriors Gone? (May 2, 2005)
Though more than ever US citizens disapprove of the US-led war in Iraq, the anti-war movement has steadily declined. This author believes the re-election of George Bush in November 2004, the relatively small number of casualties in Iraq compared to that of Vietnam, and the ambivalence on what to do next have kept activists confined to local arenas and small gatherings. This anti-war movement will likely not swell, says the author, until the urgency returns. (TomPaine)How to End the Occupation of Iraq (April 4, 2005)
This Foreign Policy In Focus article compares the current occupation in Iraq to the Vietnam occupation of the late 60s, and calls upon the antiwar movement to learn the historical lessons by promoting a negotiated peace settlement in Iraq. Noting advantages of the current peace movement, such as access to more information and communication, the author believes insurgents would surrender if troops withdrew and that Republicans could agree to such a deal if faced with a unified and strong popular movement.The New Face of Protest? (March 28, 2005)
This author from The Nation contends that the military must serve as “a major pillar” of the peace movement in the United States, by protesting recruitment efforts and making it more acceptable for troops to speak out against the war. Though the movement’s embrace of the military helps citizens understand that they can support the troops while opposing the war, the article points out that activists and soldiers may not see eye to eye on the movement’s long-term goals.Iraq and the Challenges Facing the Global Peace Movement (March 18, 2005)
On the eve of the Iraq invasion’s second anniversary, Walden Bello claims the US is losing politically and militarily in Iraq, and that attempts to downplay the insurgency are part of the government’s “third major PR effort.” Given that the occupation has not ended in either Iraq or Palestine, Bello outlines the future tasks for the antiwar movement, including more coordination, alternative protests, militancy and solidarity, to further prevent the Bush administration’s agenda of “global domination.” (Focus on the Global South)What Now For the Peace Movement? (March 9, 2005)
As the second anniversary of the Iraq war approaches, United for Peace and Justice founding member Amy Quinn addresses the future of the US peace movement. While 59 percent of US citizens want an end to the occupation, Quinn says they also must realize there is “no other choice” but action. She calls upon these activists to support military dissenters, highlight the high cost of war and discrepancies in Bush’s democracy policy, and establish better relations with Iraqi civil society so that the peace movement can offer genuine alternatives to the current situation in Iraq. (TomPaine)Shelter Under the Anti-War Umbrella (February 18, 2005)
“People power” is the answer to the anti-war movement’s recent failures, says this AlterNet article. By banning together and offering alternative solutions, activists can weaken the “pillars” of the war—troops, corporate profiteers, and mainstream media—and thus stop the occupation of Iraq. But this author warns that getting out of Iraq is only the starting point; the movement must go beyond the Bush administration’s rhetoric and win the “battle of the story.”A Turning Point for the Anti-War Movement? (February 2005)
The possibilities of a draft have infiltrated the public, yet this Peacework author says “neither a draft nor aggressive recruiting can sustain the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.” As US spending on the war rises and troop recruitment levels fall, the antiwar movement must “reverse the decades long growth of militarism” in the US by focusing on counter-recruitment organizing rather than “symbolic protest.”2004
Getting Out of Iraq: A Letter to the US Peace Movement (December 14, 2004)
A US Air Force veteran offers what could be an extremely unpopular way to end the occupation in Iraq: undermine President George Bush’s “pillar of support,” the military. The author suggests, among other things, that the peace movement should educate youths and military personnel on options such as conscientious objection, leaving the country to avoid deployment, and campaigning against the war. (Common Dreams)The Bush Victory, Fallujah, and the Republican Right’s Challenge to the Global Peace Movement (November 8, 2004)
This Focus on the Global South article calls for “militant solidarity among world’s peoples” as a solution to the US Bush administration’s “global domination” agenda. The author believes the global peace movement must engage in more aggressive methods such as integrated responses with the Arab world, civil disobedience and boycotts to bring the right-leaning center in the US closer to the stance of the rest of the world.Anti-War Movement: The Centrality of the Palestinian Question (October 31, 2004)
This letter to participants of the anti-war movement draws parallels between Israeli policy and the US Bush administration’s unilateralist policies. It intends to show that “the Palestinian question” has central importance in Bush’s war to establish “global apartheid”. The author suggests that the anti-war and global justice movements must stand by Palestinians to avoid further devastation in the region. (As-Safir)Where Is the Urgency? (October 7, 2004)
CounterPunch suggests anti-war organizations should focus less on simply removing US President George Bush from office and more on exposing the failures of occupation, holding the media accountable for unbiased reporting, educating voters on candidates' intentions and, above all, "telling the truth." According to the article, "voting for the lesser evil only demobilizes movements and moves the political spectrum to the right."Are the War and Globalization Really Connected? (October 2004)
Foreign Policy In Focus believes the connection of the peace and global justice movements “is an article of faith on the political left” strengthened by protesters who oppose recent US militarism and overuse the term “globalization.” The author says links between the war and corporate globalization, such as Halliburton contracts and tax cuts, may just demonstrate the Bush administration’s “opportunistic behavior.” Instead, movement advocates need to focus theoretically on how war affects the global economy.A Milestone in the Global Struggle Against Injustice and War (September 17, 2004)
In a speech to the Beirut International Assembly of Anti-War and Anti-Globalization Movements, Walden Bello says the “perpetual peace” that globalization supporters once envisioned in the past does not reflect the world today. Instead, he says, global peace depends on the world freeing itself from the grasp of empire states, removing corporate self-interest from the economy, and including Arab contingents in the global justice movement. (Transnational Institute)Ranks of the Peace Movement Grow, Enlisting a Number with Military Ties (June 1, 2004)
Soldiers and their relatives give new depth and moral weight to the movement against war and occupation by joining existing groups or forming their own organizations. (Philadelphia Inquirer)The Movement's Momentum (March 17, 2004)
One year after the invasion of Iraq the United States peace movement has difficulties in maintaining a sense of unity and purpose. This TomPaine article suggests that peace activists collaborate in disallowing the White House to “portray its Iraq conquest as a victory for freedom and justice in the world.”A Global Peace Movement Revival (January 19, 2004)
This AlterNet article argues that the war in Iraq has not weakened the global justice movement but has altered its agenda. The movement demands an end not only to the military intervention in Iraq but also the US takeover of the Iraq economy and its natural resources.2003
Iraq Is not America's to Sell (November 7, 2003)
Since the US-UK led invasion of Iraq began, the global peace movement lacks a common cause. In this Guardian article Naomi Klein suggests a new focus for the movement: End Iraq’s economic colonization!The Future of Our Movement (October 24, 2003)
The antiwar and occupation movement suffers from the lack of a common goal, the inability to provide solutions and a general demoralization after the prewar protests. Yet activists believe that the movement merely enters a more mature phase. (Socialist Worker)Hope Out of Quagmire -- New Peace Movement Opportunities (July 30, 2003)
The swift fall of Baghdad left many anti-war activists demoralized, but the veneer of US military success has rapidly worn down to reveal a deep and enduring quagmire. US activists should seize the opportunity to push for an international authority under UN command to replace US control. (CommonDreams)The Racist War at Home (July 16, 2003)
Global opposition to the war in Iraq catalyzed the “anti-racism/anti-war/anti-occupation movement.” However, extending activists’ efforts to domestic issues such as immigration, refugees and discrimination issues requires further organization.(OneWorld)Announcing the Baghdad-Based International Occupation Watch Center (July, 2003)
United for Peace and Justice, a US anti-war coalition with more than 600 member groups, backs up an international watchdog in Iraq that will provide information on the reconstruction of the country, and keep a continuous focus on Iraq even when the world’s attention shifts to the new “hot spot.” (Iraq Occupation Watch)Courting the "Middle Class" (July 9, 2003)
Peace activist Cynthia Peters discusses a strategy the peace and justice movement should adopt for the 2004 US elections. Instead of gaining credibility from “institutions that safeguard elite interests,” the movement should gain the support of middle-class professionals, says the activist. (ZNet)Press the Press (March, 2003)
The global peace movement confronts “imperial policy or imperial institutions that will surely bring more wars.” Lydia Sargent makes the case for the importance of winning media support through a “Press the Press” campaign. (ZNet)Letter from Ground Zero (June 5, 2003)
Jonathan Schell addresses the future role of the anti-war movement in the post-war environment. Schell tackles pertinent questions that the anti-war movement must deal with, such as, what should the target of protest be? And what is its role in the 2004 US elections? (Nation)Iraq War Critics Gather to Continue Their Fight: Bush Policies Targeted at Crowded Teach-In (June 1, 2003)
A recent protest at the National City Church Center has attempted to revitalize the opposition to the war on Iraq, which they say is not finished. The protesters were united against, what they called, “the imperialistic US intentions.” (Washington Post)Strategy Conference of the Global Peace Movement (May 21, 2003)
A coalition of anti-war groups from 24 countries met to evaluate the peace movement and to assess the current global conjuncture. While focusing on Iraq, the coalition set an agenda to condemn other ongoing wars and to stand against globalization. (Transnational Institute)Grading the Peace Movement (May 5, 2003)
This article assesses the peace movement’s success in opposing war on Iraq. It applauds the movement for influencing diplomatic efforts to avoid war and their inclusive campaign which reached out to people from all walks of life. The movements’ rhetoric was less inspiring, often demonizing Bush rather than encompassing broader issues. (Yahoo)Why the Anti-War Movement Was Right (April 25, 2003)
The war in Iraq still appears rash and unnecessary in hindsight, despite a swift US victory. There remains no proof of weapons of mass destruction, only a swathe of innocent victims and thousands of Iraqis calling for an end to the US occupation of Iraq. (India Outlook)What We Do Now? A Peace Agenda (April 21, 2003)
The peace movement must continue to oppose the Bush administration’s preemptive strike doctrine despite failing to prevent war in Iraq. David Cortright, a key advocate for peace, offers this strategic agenda for the movement’s immediate future with supplementary comments from Phyllis Bennis and John Cavanagh. (Attac)Anti-War Movement Tries to Find a Meaningful Message (April 20, 2003)
Anti-war organizations worldwide are refocusing their efforts to oppose US foreign policy in general now the war in Iraq is over. This article discusses a new challenge confronting the anti-war movement: how to bury the Bush first-strike doctrine in the sands of Iraq? (New York Times)How the Peace Movement Blew It (April 3, 2003)
While the anti-war movement galvanized unprecedented support, activists failed to engage in enough critical discourse on the US government’s plans for the Middle East. (Christian Science Monitor)Keeping Hope Alive (April 3, 2003)
The anti-war movement must make clear that it is not only opposed to war in Iraq but to the entire doctrine of pre-emptive wars and unilateral action. This shift in focus will enable activists to build on the success of worldwide demonstrations, maintaining pressure on the hawkish US government. (The Nation)Bay Area Protests War (January 13, 2003)
Never before has an anti-war movement grown so fast and spread so quickly. This article documents the various methods of activism utilized by a diverse cross section of people in San Francisco and across the US. (San Francisco Chronicle)2002
E-Activism Connects Protest Groups (December 4, 2002)
The anti-war movement’s efficient use of the internet has contributed greatly to its success, but activists worry that it will replace real action. The internet enables people to find out about protests, join grassroots movements, and e-mail congressmen with ease, although overuse of this technology can lead to inefficiency. (Hartford Courant)Antiwar Effort Gains Momentum: Growing Peace Movement's Ranks Include Some Unlikely Allies (December 2, 2002)
The antiwar movement’s great strength stems from its diverse participants. Groups representing millions of US citizens, such as the National Council of Churches and the AFL-CIO, as well as grassroots groups like Mothers Against War and Black Voices for Peace have united against the war. (Washington Post)The Antiwar Movement: A Great Beginning (November-December 2002)
The size, breadth, and diversity of the emerging antiwar movement “reflect the widespread unease about Bush’s war plans across broad sectors of the population.” The International Socialist Review calls for new leaders for the movement, that would reflect the range of opinions and organizations involved.What We Think: What's Ahead for the Antiwar Movement? (November 22, 2002)
Amidst the mass media and Washington’s “war hysteria,” the antiwar movement has grown strong. The Socialist Worker encourages a grassroots approach to building support that welcomes diverse opinions and extensive debate.Let's Join, Not Fight, the Global Coalition Against War in Iraq (November 19, 2002)
Foreign Policy in Focus calls on US citizens to join the global coalition that supports weapons inspections “while simultaneously containing US unilateralism.” To counter terrorism, the US should foster international cooperation, rather than building more weapons, starting wars, opposing the International Criminal Court, and following the “Bush Doctrine” of unilateral action.Who Will Lead? (October 14, 2002)
Todd Gitlin argues that the anti-war movement alienates “the millions of Americans whose honest concerns and ambivalence might fuel it.” To win over a public disenchanted with President Bush’s simplistic worldview, Gitlin argues that the antiwar movement should present a more sophisticated and thoughtful critique than it offered thus far. (Mother Jones)Peace Movement's Diverse Allies Keep the Spirit Alive (October 1, 2002)
A diverse group of trade unionists, religious groups, immigrants and progressives have redefined the peace movement. This multilingual, internet-savvy group champions many of the same ideals as its 60’s predecessors, but with an identity of its own. (Los Angeles Times)
More Information on NGOs
More Information on Advocacy Methods for NGOs
More Information on the Movement Against War and Occupation in Iraq
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
