Categories
Uncategorized

Die Welt braucht Klimakooperation, keinen neuen kalten Krieg

Auf der Klimakonferenz COP26 ist es leider nicht gelungen, einen neuen Weg für die Menschheit einzuschlagen, um eine Klimakatastrophe zu vermeiden. Die UN-Wissenschaftler halten es für notwendig, die globale Erwärmung auf unter 1,5 Grad Celsius zu begrenzen – doch selbst wenn alle Zusagen der COP26 umgesetzt werden würden, wäre die Welt immer noch auf dem Weg zu einer Erwärmung von 2,4 Grad bis zum Ende des Jahrhunderts.

Die Premierministerin von Barbados, Mia Mottley, wies darauf hin, was für die Menschheit auf dem Spiel steht – insbesondere für den globalen Süden, in dem die Mehrheit der Weltbevölkerung lebt –, sollte sich der derzeitige Kurs der globalen Erwärmung fortsetzen:

“Für diejenigen, die Augen haben, um zu sehen, diejenigen, die Ohren haben, um zu hören, diejenigen, die ein Herz haben, um zu fühlen, sind 1,5 (Grad) das, was wir brauchen, um zu überleben (…), die Welt braucht unser Handeln jetzt, nicht im nächsten Jahr, nicht im nächsten Jahrzehnt.”

Die COP26 wurde weithin als »Greenwashingfestival des globalen Nordens« kritisiert, da die wohlhabenden, »entwickelten« Nationen versuchten, ihre Verantwortung für die Klimakrise auf den globalen Süden abzuwälzen, wobei insbesondere China und Indien im Visier standen. Dieser Versuch, die Schuld abzuschieben, ist nicht nur zynisch und beleidigend, sondern auch völlig falsch. Der globale Norden ist in überwältigender Weise für die Klimakrise verantwortlich, da er 92 Prozent der CO2-Emissionen, die die Aufnahmefähigkeit der Erde überschreiten, produziert hat.

Unterdessen versuchten die USA, die COP26 zu nutzen, um ihren neuen kalten Krieg voranzutreiben, indem Präsident Biden China vorwarf, zwar eine Führungsrolle zu beanspruchen, aber dann einfach nicht auf dem Gipfel »aufzutauchen«. Tatsächlich haben die USA bis heute mehr CO2-Emissionen verursacht als jedes andere Land und stoßen weiterhin viel mehr CO2 pro Person aus als jedes andere große Land. Im Jahr 2020 emittierten die USA 14 Tonnen CO2 pro Person – fast doppelt soviel wie China, das 7,4 Tonnen pro Person ausstieß, und fast achtmal soviel wie Indien, das 1,8 Tonnen pro Person ausstieß.

Der Ansatz des kalten Krieges in den internationalen Beziehungen der USA ist ein ernsthaftes Hindernis für die Lösung der Klimakrise. Der Jahreshaushalt des US-Militärs – des weltweit größten institutionellen Verursachers von Umweltverschmutzung – hat inzwischen die Marke von 750 Milliarden US-Dollar pro Jahr überschritten, angetrieben durch Washingtons militärische Aufrüstung gegen China. Unterdessen hat Präsident Biden in seinem Plan »Build Back Better« für das nächste Jahrzehnt nur 555 Milliarden US-Dollar für Klimaausgaben vorgeschlagen. Anstatt riesige Ressourcen für Militarismus und einen gefährlichen neuen kalten Krieg gegen China zu verschwenden, sollten die USA diese in die Finanzierung eines grünen Wandels in den USA umleiten und ihren Verpflichtungen zur Klimafinanzierung und Wiedergutmachung für die »Entwicklungsländer« nachkommen.

Nichtsdestotrotz bietet die Ankündigung einer Gemeinsamen Erklärung der USA und Chinas über die Verstärkung des Klimaschutzes in den 2020er Jahren eine potentielle Grundlage für die Erörterung und den Aufbau von Schritten zur Verstärkung des Klimaschutzes und der globalen Zusammenarbeit im nächsten Jahrzehnt. Die Einrichtung einer US-amerikanisch-chinesischen Arbeitsgruppe ist ein begrüßenswerter Schritt nach vorn, und sie sollte im Rahmen der UNO arbeiten. Diese Vereinbarung zwischen den USA und China kann nicht früh genug kommen.

Die in der Gemeinsamen Erklärung enthaltene Verpflichtung der beiden größten Volkswirtschaften der Welt, »verstärkte Klimaschutzmaßnahmen zu ergreifen, die in den 2020er Jahren im Rahmen des Pariser Abkommens ehrgeiziger werden«, mit dem Ziel, »den globalen durchschnittlichen Temperaturanstieg auf deutlich unter zwei Grad Celsius zu begrenzen und die Anstrengungen zur Begrenzung auf 1,5 Grad fortzusetzen«, ist sehr zu begrüßen.

Die Bedeutung, die die Gemeinsame Erklärung den »entwickelten« Ländern – die in der Vergangenheit am meisten zu den Kohlenstoffemissionen beigetragen haben – beimisst, damit sie ihre versäumte Zusage von 100 Milliarden US-Dollar pro Jahr für die Klimafinanzierung der »Entwicklungsländer« dringend einhalten, ist ebenfalls zu begrüßen. Darüber hinaus stellen wir fest, dass für die Anpassung an den Klimawandel und die Abschwächung des Klimawandels nicht nur weitaus mehr Finanzmittel benötigt werden, sondern auch den Ländern des globalen Südens geschuldet sind, die am wenigsten zur Klimakrise beigetragen haben, jedoch die schwersten sozialen, wirtschaftlichen und ökologischen Verluste und Schäden zu tragen haben.

Diese Gemeinsame Erklärung ist zwar nur ein Schritt auf dem Weg zur Erfüllung der allgemeinen Forderung nach strukturellen, wirksamen Klimamaßnahmen, aber sie bietet ein Modell der Zusammenarbeit, auf dem aufgebaut werden kann, um die dringenden Probleme der Menschheit anzugehen, darunter die Pandemie, die globale Armut und die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Die Welt braucht globale Zusammenarbeit und keinen neuen kalten Krieg.

Categories
Uncategorized

Después de la COP26: El mundo necesita cooperación climática, no una nueva Guerra Fría

Lamentablemente, la COP26 no logró establecer una nueva ruta para la humanidad que evite una catástrofe climática. La comunidad científica de las Naciones Unidas considera necesario limitar el calentamiento global por debajo de 1,5 °C; sin embargo, incluso si se aplicaran todas las promesas de la COP 26, el mundo alcanzaría los 2,4 °C de calentamiento a finales de siglo. 

La Primera Ministra de Barbados, Mia Mottley, destacó lo que está en juego para la humanidad —en particular para el Sur Global, que alberga a la mayoría del mundo— si continúa la trayectoria actual del calentamiento global: 

Para quienes tienen ojos para ver, para quienes tienen oídos para escuchar, para quienes tienen corazón para sentir, 1,5 [°C] es lo que necesitamos para sobrevivir […] el mundo necesita nuestra acción ahora, no en el próximo año, no en la próxima década.

La COP26 ha sido ampliamente criticada como un “festival de greenwashing (maquillaje verde) del Norte Global”, ya que las naciones ricas y “desarrolladas” intentaron trasladar su responsabilidad sobre la crisis climática al Sur Global, apuntando a China e India en particular. Este esfuerzo por trasladar la culpa no sólo es cínico y ofensivo, sino totalmente falso. El Norte Global es el mayor responsable de la crisis climática, al haber producido el 92% de las emisiones de CO2 por encima de los límites planetarios seguros para la humanidad. 

Mientras tanto, Estados Unidos intentó utilizar la COP26 para avanzar en su nueva Guerra Fría, con el presidente Biden criticando a China por “no estar presente” en el tema. De hecho, Estados Unidos ha producido más emisiones de CO2 que cualquier otro país hasta la fecha y sigue emitiendo mucho más CO2 por persona que cualquier otro de los principales países. En 2020, Estados Unidos emitió 14 toneladas de CO2 por persona, casi el doble que China, con 7,4 toneladas, y casi ocho veces más que la India con 1,8 toneladas.

El modelo de Guerra Fría que Estados Unidos plantea en las relaciones internacionales es un grave obstáculo para resolver la crisis climática. El presupuesto anual del ejército estadounidense —la institución más contaminante del mundo— ha superado ya los 750.000 millones de dólares al año, motivado por el despliegue militar de Washington contra China. Mientras tanto, el plan “Build Back Better” (Reconstruir mejor) del presidente Biden sólo ha propuesto un gasto de hasta 555.000 millones de dólares para el cambio climático durante la próxima década. En lugar de malgastar estos inmensos recursos en un despliegue militar y en una nueva y peligrosa Guerra Fría contra China, Estados Unidos debería redirigirlos hacia la financiación de una transición ecológica en el país y cumplir con sus obligaciones de proporcionar financiación climática y reparaciones a los países “en desarrollo”.

​​A pesar de ello, el anuncio de la Declaración Conjunta de Glasgow EE. UU-China sobre el Fortalecimiento de la Acción Climática en la década de 2020 proporciona una posible base para debatir y dar pasos hacia el aumento de la acción climática y la cooperación global durante la próxima década. La creación de un grupo de trabajo entre EE.UU. y China es un paso adelante que se agradece y que debería funcionar dentro del marco de la ONU. Este acuerdo entre EE.UU. y China es urgente y necesario. 

El compromiso de la Declaración Conjunta de “tomar medidas climáticas reforzadas y ambiciosas para la década de 2020 en el contexto del Acuerdo de París” con el objetivo de “mantener el aumento de la temperatura media mundial muy por debajo de los 2 °C y proseguir los esfuerzos para limitarlo a 1,5 °C”, entre las dos mayores economías del mundo es muy bienvenido. 

La importancia que la Declaración Conjunta otorga a los países “desarrollados”  —que históricamente han contribuido con la mayor parte de las emisiones de carbono— para que cumplan urgentemente su promesa pendiente de 100.000 millones de dólares al año en financiación climática para los países “en desarrollo” también es bienvenida. Además, observamos que, para posibilitar la adaptación y la mitigación del cambio climático, no sólo se necesita una financiación mucho mayor, sino que se trata de una deuda histórica con los países del Sur Global, que son los que menos han contribuido a la crisis climática y, sin embargo, están sufriendo las pérdidas y los daños sociales, económicos y ecológicos más graves.

Aunque esta Declaración Conjunta no es más que un paso para satisfacer la amplia demanda de una acción climática estructural y decisiva, ofrece un modelo de colaboración que puede servir de base para abordar los problemas urgentes a los que se enfrenta la humanidad, como la pandemia, la pobreza mundial y el desarrollo económico. 

El mundo necesita cooperación global, no una nueva Guerra Fría.

Categories
Uncategorized

After COP26: The world needs climate cooperation, not a new Cold War

The COP26 regrettably failed to make the breakthrough towards establishing a new pathway for humanity that avoids a climate catastrophe. The UN scientific community considers it necessary to limit global warming below 1.5°C — however, even if all COP26 pledges were implemented, the world would still be on course for 2.4 °C of warming by the end of the century. 

The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, outlined the stakes for humanity — particularly for the Global South, home to the world’s majority — should the current trajectory of global warming continue: 

For those who have eyes to see, those who have ears to listen, those who have a heart to feel, 1.5 [°C] is what we need to survive […] the world needs our action now, not in the next year, not in the next decade.

The COP26 has been widely criticised as a ‘Global North greenwashing festival,’ as wealthy, ‘developed’ nations attempted to offload their responsibility for the climate crisis onto the Global South, targeting China and India in particular. This effort to shift blame is not only cynical and offensive but wholly false. The Global North is overwhelmingly responsible for the climate crisis, having produced 92% of CO2 emissions above the safe planetary boundary. 

Meanwhile, the US attempted to use the COP26 to advance its new Cold War, with President Biden slamming China for ‘not showing up’ on the issue. In fact, the US has produced more CO2 emissions than any other country to date and continues to emit much more CO2 per person than any other major country. In 2020, the US emitted 14 tons of CO2 per person – nearly double the amount of China, which emitted 7.4 tons per person, and almost eight times the amount of India, which emitted 1.8 tons per person.

The US’s Cold War approach to international relations is a serious obstacle to solving the climate crisis. The annual budget of the US military — the world’s largest institutional polluter — has now surpassed US$750 billion per year, driven by Washington’s military build-up against China. Meanwhile, over the next decade, President Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ plan has only proposed up to US$555 billion in climate spending. Instead of wasting huge resources on militarism and a dangerous new Cold War against China, the US should redirect them towards funding a green transition in the US and meet its obligations to provide climate finance and reparations for ‘developing’ countries. 

Despite this, the announcement of a US-China Joint Glasgow Declaration on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s does provide a potential basis for discussing and building steps towards an increase in climate action and global cooperation in the next decade. The establishment of a US-China Working Group is a welcome step forward and should work within the UN framework. This agreement between the US and China could not come soon enough. 

The Joint Declaration’s commitment to ‘taking enhanced climate actions that raise ambition in the 2020s in the context of the Paris Agreement’ with the aim ‘to hold the global average temperature increase to well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C’, between the world’s two largest economies is very welcome. 

The importance that the Joint Declaration places upon ‘developed’ countries — which have historically contributed the most carbon emissions — to urgently meet their missed pledge of US$100 billion per year in climate finance to ‘developing’ countries is also welcome. Further, we note that, in order to enable climate adaptation and mitigation, far more funding is not only needed but historically owed to nations of the Global South — which have done the least to cause the climate crisis, yet are experiencing its most severe social, economic, and ecological losses and damages.

Though this Joint Declaration is but one stride towards meeting the larger demand for structural, impactful climate action, it provides a model of collaboration that can be built upon to address the pressing issues facing humanity including the pandemic, global poverty and economic development. 

The world needs global cooperation, not a new Cold War.

Categories
Uncategorized

Jeremy Corbyn condemns AUKUS

Jeremy Corbyn MP, the former leader of the Labour Party, has put out a strong statement opposing AUKUS and the threat of a new cold war and danger to world peace that it represents. Reproduced from Labour Outlook.


Since its announcement last week, AUKUS has faced growing international opposition, including from Governments often closely allied with the US, UK and Australia on the global stage, with France ending its contract to supply submarines to Australia.

It has also been met with incredulity from peace and disarmament groups across the world.

This international opposition reflects an obvious truth that real security won’t come from starting a new nuclear arms race or new Cold War.

AUKUS is a major new military alliance that makes Australia the key US ally in the region.

The agreement includes cyber warfare, artificial intelligence, and underwater capabilities, as well as long-range strike capabilities. In terms of nuclear weapons, AUKUS includes plans to set up an Australian nuclear powered submarine fleet, brokered with the US and Britain.

This is a dangerous development. Australia’s neighbour, New Zealand, is not participating in the pact, but is also clear that its “no nuclear” policy means that any Australian nuclear-powered submarines will be barred from its ports and waters.

Clearly explaining the position, New Zealand’s Labour Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said “all partners are well versed and very clear on our position on nuclear powered vessels and also nuclear weapons. Our legislation means no vessels that are partially or fully powered by nuclear energy is able to enter our internal borders.”

Earlier this year, the Tories committed to spending £24 billion on defence including even more resources on an expanded nuclear weapons arsenal of up to 260 warheads, against our obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT.)

Now they are breaking this treaty again by supplying weapons-grade uranium to Australia.

Kate Hudson of CND has said, “This is yet another breach of international law by our government, hard on the heels of the nuclear arsenal increase.”

The cost is enormous. There is unlimited money for weapons of mass destruction, yet at the same time the Government claims it can’t afford to keep the £20 uplift to Universal Credit or give nurses a decent pay rise.

Boris Johnson formally denies that Britain is part of a new Cold War with China, yet it is more and more commonly accepted internationally that the UK is the US’ major follower in pushing more hostile relations with China, despite the obvious danger of a cold war becoming an actual war – or series of proxy conflicts – in the future.

In fact, it seems the Government is the most hawkish component of the new alliance – a Stop the War Coalition press release has noted that “US officials have briefed that the UK government has been pushing hard for strong military involvement in the region as part of its push towards ‘Global Britain.’”

After Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and recent speeches, it was hoped by many that the end of the “war on terror” and its policy of regime change under the guise of “humanitarian intervention” would mean a new push for diplomacy and co-operation, but instead the fear is that resources will be re-directed to a military build-up in Oceania.

In 2020 the US spent more on “defence” than the next 11 countries combined, and a real test of Biden’s Presidency will be if he substantially cuts this spending rather than re-directs it.

In Australia opposition is growing, with former Labour Prime Minister Kevin Rudd asked for clarity on whether the new submarines could be deployed in the midst of a conflict with China in the Pacific, as well as expressing grave concerns regarding Australia’s own nuclear NPT commitments.

Another former Prime Minister, Paul Keating, said AUKUS is a “further dramatic loss of Australian sovereignty” and warned that “if the United States military with all its might could not beat a bunch of Taliban rebels with AK47 rifles in pickup trucks, what chance would it have in a full-blown war against China, not only the biggest state in the world but the commander and occupant of the largest land mass in Asia?”

His concerns reflect the fact that Australia will now be dependent on American technology and know-how to maintain these submarines, in the same way that the UK is totally dependent on the US for “our” Trident nuclear weapons system.

In terms of Britain meanwhile, it is vital that we build up the opposition to AUKUS.

Particularly dangerous is that Boris Johnson seems to be hawking back to the days of Empire, turning back from the decision originally implemented under Harold Wilson’s Government to pull British troops from “east of Suez,” in recognition of the fading role of the empire. It’s astonishing that nearly 50 years later Boris Johnson is turning the clock back for reasons that can only be political.

In contrast to the Tory Government’s approach, the whole labour movement and all progressives must make the case clearly that real security will come from international co-operation to tackle the global crises of our time.

In particular, the massive resources being put into the new nuclear arms race could be put to use to tackle climate change, where the UK, US and Australia are three of the Governments that most need to put far more serious levels of resources into green stimulus at home and helping green development internationally.

Whether it be the deepening climate catastrophe, the Coronavirus pandemic which is still raging across the globe, the refugee crises across the world, or the horrendous levels of inequality and poverty that scar humanity, these common challenges can only be met by international co-operation and constructive engagement. Investing in clean water, sanitation, education and healthcare should be our priorities for a safer world.

Whatever the rhetoric of the new cold war warriors, this is the approach that can bring peace, justice and human rights to the world.

Categories
Uncategorized

Urgent! AUKUS puts peace in peril: join Saturday’s Peace Forum on a multipolar world

The announcement last week, on Wednesday 15 September, of the formation of a new anti-China military alliance between Australia, Britain and the US – AUKUS – represents a serious escalation of the new cold war against China, threatening world peace and the development of a multipolar world.

The new alliance will see Britain and the US provide Australia with the technology and capability to deploy nuclear-powered submarines. This is an aggressive move which therefore poses a serious threat to peace and stability in the Pacific region.

No Cold War’s International Peace Forum on Saturday 25 September will discuss and analyse this new phase of US-led aggression towards China and the need to build and strengthen the global anti-war majority.

As the US steps up its belligerence global opposition to this new cold war is growing. Crucially the emergence of a path towards multipolarity, including growing mutually-beneficial cooperation between countries in the Global South, the Global North and China to tackle the urgent common problems facing humanity, offers an alternative.

Register now for No Cold War’s International Peace Forum here on Eventbrite.

Please find full details of the event including our excellent line-up of speakers below.


Our next webinar brings together experts from Bolivia, China, Zambia, South Africa, India, the US and Britain to discuss the path towards multipolarity.

SATURDAY 25 SEPTEMBER 2021

9am US Eastern / 2pm Britain / 9pm China / 6am US Pacific

Register free on Eventbrite.

The West has intensified a conflict against China, despite the need for cooperation to overcome the pandemic. Habits of unipolarity drive the United States – with its G7 allies along for the ride. The natural instinct for humankind, divided into nations and regions, is, however, for multipolarity. This is evident in Latin America, where the Bolivarian process continues to build regional platforms. It is also clear in the Belt and Road Initiative, developed by the People’s Republic of China. The Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter, set up in 2021, brings together these important currents.

Speakers

  • Sacha Llorenti (Executive secretary, ALBA)
  • Fred M’membe (Founder, Socialist Party, Zambia)
  • Issa Shivji (Professor Emeritus of Public Law, University of Dar es Salaam)
  • Li Bo (Professor, China Research Institute, Fudan University, China)
  • Ajamu Baraka (National organiser, Black Alliance for Peace)
  • Jenny Clegg (Author, China’s Global Strategy: Toward a Multipolar World)
  • Radhika Desai (Professor of Political Studies, University of Manitoba)
  • Madison Tang (Organizer, CODEPINK)
  • Mikaela Erskog (No Cold War)
  • Chair: Kate Hudson (General Secretary, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Britain)
  • Chair: Vijay Prashad (Executive Director, Tricontinental Institute)

The event will take place on Zoom. Registered users will receive a link within 24 hours of the event starting. The event will also be streamed to Youtube .

Categories
Uncategorized

No Cold War Britain online rally: Stop Asian Hate – rising racism and the new cold war (6 October)

Join No Cold War Britain’s online rally opposing the rise of racism that is being fuelled by the US-led cold war on China.

WEDNESDAY 6 OCTOBER 2021

7pm Britain / 2pm US Eastern / 11am US Pacific

Register free on Eventbrite


About this event

Join a range of speakers from the Chinese, East Asian and South East Asian diaspora, prominent labour movement figures and representatives of from youth, anti-racist and anti-war organisations in Britain and the US to discuss why we must build the #StopAsianHate movement in Britain and internationally.

This event comes in the wake of an alarming rise of racist hate crime against people of East and South East Asian heritage in the US and Britain and at a time when the US and close allies including Britain are increasing aggression against China in pursuit of a new cold war.

Confirmed speakers

Murad Qureshi, former Stop the War Chair and London Assembly Member

* Jess Barnard, Chair of Young Labour

* Anna Chen, writer, poet and broadcaster

Sheila Xiao, co-founder of Pivot to Peace

Ping Hua, ex-chair of Chinese Association of Southampton

Suresh Grover, Director of the Monitoring Group

Madison Tang, CODEPINK

WahPiow Tan, Human Rights lawyer, Singapore exile and activist

Aidan from Stop Asian Hate UK

Mikaela Erskog, No Cold War


Follow @NCWBritain for updates about this event and other upcoming initiatives.

FAQs

Who are the organisers? This event is hosted by No Cold War Britain, the British section of the No Cold War international campaign.

How do I join the Zoom meeting? We will circulate the Zoom meeting details to all those registered via Eventbrite in advance of the meeting.

How do I find out more about this issue? You can visit the NoColdWar.org website and follow @NCWBritain @NoColdWar on social media for more information.

Categories
Uncategorized

Towards a multipolar world: An International Peace Forum (25 September)

Our next webinar brings together experts from Bolivia, China, Zambia, South Africa, India, the US and Britain to discuss the path towards multipolarity.

SATURDAY 25 SEPTEMBER 2021

9am US Eastern / 2pm Britain / 9pm China / 6am US Pacific

Register free on Eventbrite

The West has intensified a conflict against China, despite the need for cooperation to overcome the pandemic. Habits of unipolarity drive the United States – with its G7 allies along for the ride. The natural instinct for humankind, divided into nations and regions, is, however, for multipolarity. This is evident in Latin America, where the Bolivarian process continues to build regional platforms. It is also clear in the Belt and Road Initiative, developed by the People’s Republic of China. The Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter, set up in 2021, brings together these important currents.

Speakers

  • Sacha Llorenti (Executive secretary, ALBA)
  • Fred M’membe (Founder, Socialist Party, Zambia)
  • Issa Shivji (Professor Emeritus of Public Law, University of Dar es Salaam)
  • Li Bo (Professor, China Research Institute, Fudan University, China)
  • Ajamu Baraka (National organiser, Black Alliance for Peace)
  • Jenny Clegg (Author, China’s Global Strategy: Toward a Multipolar World)
  • Radhika Desai (Professor of Political Studies, University of Manitoba)
  • Madison Tang (Organizer, CODEPINK)
  • Mikaela Erskog (No Cold War)
  • Chair: Kate Hudson (General Secretary, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Britain)
  • Chair: Vijay Prashad (Executive Director, Tricontinental Institute)

The event will take place on Zoom. Registered users will receive a link within 24 hours of the event starting. The event will also be streamed to Youtube .

Categories
Uncategorized

International online meeting: Ending US aggression on Cuba is Key to World Peace

The International Manifesto Group, No Cold War, the Tricontinental Institute and Black Alliance For Peace are proudly co-hosting the following international online meeting.

Ending US aggression on Cuba is Key to World Peace
You can register your place for this zoom meeting here.
Sunday 29 August 2021
9AM Eastern Time/2PM British Summer Time 

This international meeting analyses why Ending US Aggression Against Cuba is Key to World Peace.

Speakers:

  • Iroel Sanchez, Cuban journalist and Director of La Pupila Asombrada
  • Carlos Ron, Venezuelan Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs
  • Chris Hazzard, Sinn Fein MP
  • Helen Yaffe, author of We Are Cuba!
  • Arnold August, journalist and author of three books on Cuba
  • Fiona Edwards, No Cold War, Stop the War Coalition National Officer and writer
  • Manolo De Los Santos, People’s Forum and Tricontinental Institute
  • Camila Escalante,  journalist reporting on the ground in Latin America with Kawsachun News
  • Moderator: Radhika Desai, Professor of Political Studies at the University of Manitoba, Director of the Geopolitical Research Group and author of Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire

The Trump regime’s tightening of the US blockade on Cuba, with 243 new sanctions, has unfortunately been intensified by the Biden administration.

Despite the recent 184 to 2 vote in the UN General Assembly against the US economic blockade of Cuba, the new US Administration had imposed new sanctions going beyond even those of Trump.

These unilateral actions are a threat not only to Cuba but to world peace. They constitute an attempt by a single country to impose its policies on the international system, in pursuit of a cold war, in defiance of the overwhelming majority of other countries. Success in such a policy would undoubtedly lead to further aggression and defiance of international bodies and opinion.

Clearly the aim of this is to increase hardship for the Cuban people and provoke a “colour” counter-revolution – to try to regain control over the island which 60 years ago broke free of colonial control.

The attack on Cuba’s people comes when forces seeking national independence social progress and economic development are strengthening across Latin America – as recent elections in Bolivia and Peru and the US inability to overthrow the Bolivarian government of Venezuela attest. In Brazil, the left’s candidate, Lula, has a 26% poll lead for the 2022 Presidential election compared to the candidate of the right and the US – Bolsonaro.

By punishing the Cuban people, the US clearly intends to send a threatening message in particular to all Latin Americans: this will be your fate if you resist our demands.

Therefore, today is a crucial moment for all those who stand for national independence, for social justice and equality and for a multilateral world as opposed to unilateral diktats of a single country, to understand the importance of this situation for every country and to add their voices in opposition to the US unilateral policy against Cuba.

This international meeting analyses why Ending US Aggression Against Cuba is Key to World Peace.

This meeting is organized by the International Manifesto Group, No Cold War, Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, and Black Alliance For Peace. The Media Sponsor for this event is the Canada Files.

Categories
Uncategorized

Let Cuba Live! End the US cold war against Cuba

The No Cold War international campaign joins over 400 organisations and individuals in calling upon Biden’s US Administration to lift the 243 unilateral coercive measures that were imposed on Cuba by former President Donald Trump.

No Cold War supports the open letter to US President Joe Biden below which was first published in the New York Times. The letter was organised by The People’s Forum, CODEPINK and the ANSWER Coalition.

You can add your name to the ‘Let Cuba Live’ letter here.


Dear President Joe Biden,

It is time to take a new path forward in U.S.-Cuban relations. We, the undersigned, are making this urgent, public appeal to you to reject the cruel policies put into place by the Trump White House that have created so much suffering among the Cuban people.

Cuba – a country of eleven million people – is living through a difficult crisis due to the growing scarcity of food and medicine. Recent protests have drawn the world’s attention to this. While the Covid-19 pandemic has proven challenging for all countries, it has been even more so for a small island under the heavy weight of an economic embargo.

We find it unconscionable, especially during a pandemic, to intentionally block remittances and Cuba’s use of global financial institutions, given that access to dollars is necessary for the importation of food and medicine.

As the pandemic struck the island, its people – and their government – lost billions in revenue from international tourism that would normally go to their public health care system, food distribution and economic relief.

During the pandemic, Donald Trump’s administration tightened the embargo, pushed aside the Obama opening, and put in place 243 “coercive measures” that have intentionally throttled life on the island and created more suffering.

The prohibition on remittances and the end of direct commercial flights between the U.S. and Cuba are impediments to the wellbeing of a majority of Cuban families.

“We stand with the Cuban people,” you wrote on July 12. If that is the case, we ask you to immediately sign an executive order and annul Trump’s 243 “coercive measures.”

There is no reason to maintain the Cold War politics that required the U.S. to treat Cuba as an existential enemy rather than a neighbor. Instead of maintaining the path set by Trump in his efforts to undo President Obama’s opening to Cuba, we call on you to move forward. Resume the opening and begin the process of ending the embargo. Ending the severe shortages in food and medicine must be the top priority.

On 23 June, most of the member states of the United Nations voted to ask the U.S. to end the embargo. For the past 30 years this has been the consistent position of a majority of member states. In addition, seven UN Special Rapporteurs wrote a letter to the U.S. government in April 2020 regarding the sanctions on Cuba. “In the pandemic emergency,” they wrote, “the lack of will of the U.S. government to suspend sanctions may lead to a higher risk of suffering in Cuba.”

We ask you to end the Trump “coercive measures” and return to the Obama opening or, even better, begin the process of ending the embargo and fully normalizing relations between the United States and Cuba.

  • Vermont State Labor Council, AFL-CIO
  • ANSWER Coalition
  • CODEPINK
  • IFCO/Pastors for Peace
  • Andres Arauz (Ecuador)
  • Nnimmo Bassey (Nigeria)
  • Jackson Browne
  • Prof. Judith Butler
  • Jeremy Corbyn (UK)
  • Daniel Ellsberg
  • Danny Glover
  • Wagner Moura (Brasil)
  • Boots Riley
  • Silvio Rodriguez Dominguez (Cuba)
  • Susan Sarandon
  • Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis
  • Marisa Tomei
  • Reinerio Arce, Instituto Superior Ecuménico de Ciencias de las Religiones (Cuba)
  • Medea Benjamin, CODEPINK
  • Rafael Correa, Fmr. President (Ecuador)
  • Manolo De Los Santos, The People’s Forum
  • David Harvey, CUNY Graduate Center (UK)
  • Prof. Raj Patel, University of Texas
  • Bishop Rubin Phillip, Anglican Church of Southern Africa (South Africa)
  • Israel Rojas Fiel, Duo Buena Fe (Cuba)
  • Rev. Raul Suarez, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Center (Cuba)
  • Yanis Varoufakis, (Greece)
  • Rev. Jim Winkler, National Council of Churches USA
  • United States Peace Council
  • PazAmor, Inc
  • Noname
  • Leonardo Boff
  • Glauber Braga
  • Alicia Castro (Argentina)
  • Jandira Fhegalli
  • Luis Hernández Navarro (Mexico)
  • Dr. Robin D. G. Kelley
  • Dr. Gilberto López y Rivas (Mexico)
  • Dra. Josefina Morales (Mexico)
  • Dr. Barbara Ransby
  • Prof Raymond Suttner
  • Ruth Wilson Gilmore
  • Prof. Bruno Bosteels, Columbia University
  • John Cavanagh, Institute for Policy Studies
  • Gabriel Coderch Diaz, Centro Oscar Arnulfo Romero (Cuba)
  • Prof. Costas Douzinas, Hellenic Parliament (Greece)
  • Jorge González Nuñez, Student Christian Movement of Cuba (Cuba)
  • Chris Hazzard, Sinn Fein (Ireland)
  • Bishop Ismael Laborde Figueras, United Evangelical Church in Cuba Lutheran Synod (Cuba)
  • Michael Löwy, French National Center of Scientific Research
  • Eugene Puryear, BreakThrough News
  • Angélica Salazar, Alliance for Cuba Engagement and Respect (ACERE)
  • President David Van Deusen, Vermont State Labor Council AFL-CIO
  • Corporación colectivo CreAcción
  • Anti-Flag
  • The Grayzone
  • Comite 68 (Mexico)
  • RadioMiamiTV y PazAmor
  • Carl Messineo, Attorney
  • New Frame (South Africa)
  • Eve 6
  • Labor Against Racism and War
  • Zackie Achmat (South Africa)
  • Santiago Alba Rico (Spain)
  • Dr. Tom Alter
  • Eduardo Alvares Moreira (Brasil)
  • Dr. Barbara Applebaum
  • Dr. Silvia Arrom
  • Maricruz Badia
  • Leo Bashinsky
  • Dr. Richard Benson
  • Altamiro Borges (Brasil)
  • Ricardo Bracho
  • Noni Brynjolson
  • Dr. Larry Busk
  • Lee Camp
  • Dr. Chuck Churchill
  • Prof. Jean Cohen
  • Ana Cortes
  • Peter Coyote
  • Edevaldo de Medeiros (Brasil)
  • Derek DePratter
  • Osvaldo Doimeadiós (Cuba)
  • Dr Jean Dreze
  • Jennifer Duprey
  • Max Elbaum
  • Liza Featherstone
  • Alon Feuerwerker (Brasil)
  • Prof. Carlos Forment
  • Morgan Glaze
  • Prof. Emeritus Karen Graffeo
  • Chris Gude
  • Prof. Peter Hallward
  • Prof. Donna Haraway
  • Michael Hardt
  • Chris Hedges
  • Prof. Anasa Hicks
  • Bruno Jaffré
  • Esteban Jimenez
  • Prof. Cedric Johnson
  • Prof. Sujung Kim
  • Dr. Tomomi Kinukawa
  • Flávia Lacerda (Brasil)
  • Greg LaMotta
  • Vivien Lesnik Weisman
  • Prof. Ania Loomba
  • Prof. Clayton Lust
  • Verónica Lynn (Cuba)
  • Dr. Richard MacMaster
  • Dr. Curry Malott
  • Professor Emeritus, SUNY Cortland John Marciano
  • James Martel
  • Aaron Maté
  • Dr. David McNally
  • Dr. Magali Menezes (Brasil)
  • Camilo Molina
  • Prof. Daniel Mosquera
  • Julio Munoz
  • Prof. Michael Neocosmos (South Africa)
  • Ben Norton
  • Dr. Marcos Oliveira (Brasil)
  • Hypatia Ostojic
  • Prof. Tanalís Padilla (Mexico)
  • João Paulo (Brasil)
  • Dr. Jacques Pauwels
  • João Pimenta Lopes
  • Beatrice Pita
  • Prof. Claire Potter
  • Lindi Ragon
  • Dr. Josiah Rector
  • Corey Robin
  • Prof. Gabriel Rockhill
  • Thomas Ross
  • Prof. Abra Salazar
  • Prof. Rosaura Sanchez
  • Sanford Schram
  • Dr. Rupa Shah
  • Prof. Beverly Sheftall
  • Prof. Lewis Siegelbaum
  • Alan Singer
  • Greg Smith
  • Samuel Stein
  • Linda Talton
  • Jules Taylor
  • Vladislava Tomova
  • Dario Ulloa
  • Prof. Luis Felipe Ulloa-Forero
  • Orlando Valle “Maraca” (Cuba)
  • Jaime Veve
  • José Villa Soberón (Cuba)
  • Byron Vu
  • Antonio Y. Vázquez-Arroyo
  • Dr Randall Williams
  • Dr. Barbara Winslow
  • Amanda Yee
  • Prof. Rabab Abdulhadi, Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies, San Francisco State University
  • David Adler, Progressive International
  • Dr. Julia Alekseyeva, University of Pennsylvania
  • Rev. Aundreia Alexander, National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA
  • Tata Amaral, (Brasil)
  • Christian Appy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
  • Prof. Guy Aronoff, Humboldt State University
  • Etienne Balibar, Kingston University London
  • Prof. Narciso Barrera-Bassols, Grupo de Trabajo Agroecología Política CLACSO (Argentina)
  • Prof. Joel Beinin, Stanford University
  • Monica Benicio, Vereadora Psol (Brasil)
  • Dr. Cyrus Bina, University of Minnesota
  • Heidi Boghosian, A.J. Muste Memorial Institute
  • Marc Botenga, Parti du Travail de Belgique
  • Prof. Robert Brenner, UCLA
  • Prof. Wendy Brown, U Cal Berkeley
  • Beatriz Cerqueira, (PT) MG (Brasil)
  • Prof. Benoit Challand, New School for Social Research
  • Dianna Cohen, Plastic Pollution Coalition
  • Fray Miguel Concha Malo, Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Francisco de Vitoria (Mexico)
  • Leslie Cunningham, Texas State Employees Union
  • Luiz Carlos da Rocha, advogado (Brasil)
  • Adriana de França, advogada (Brasil)
  • Bruno de Paiva e Souza, Igreja Reina (Brasil)
  • Susana Draper, Princeton University
  • Prof. Sandi E Cooper, CUNY
  • Augusta Eulália Ferreira, Sindicato dos Advogados de São Paulo (Brasil)
  • Dr. Jerise Fogel, Montclair State University
  • Charles Fredricks, Israeli-Palestinian Confederation
  • Rita Maria Garcia Morris, Christian Center for Dialogue & Reflection (Cuba)
  • Adam Gogola, Blind Adam and The Federal League
  • Prof. Van Gosse, Franklin & Marshall College
  • August H. Nimtz, University of Minnesota
  • Prof. Martin Halpern, Henderson State University
  • Dr. Neil Harvey, New Mexico State University
  • Gary Holloway, USW Local 675
  • Prof. Kevin Howley, DePauw University
  • Esther Iverem, Journalist
  • Dr. Katharine Jackson, University of Dayton School of Law
  • Dr. Nazia Kazi, Stockton University
  • Adam Kotsko, Shimer Great Books School, North Central College
  • Ertugrul Kürkçü, Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) (Turkey)
  • Reed Lindsay, Belly of The Beast
  • Scott Ludlam, Fmr. Senator (Australia)
  • Prof. Anastasia Mann, Princeton University
  • Prof. Eric Mar, Asian American Studies, SF State University
  • Teresa Meade, Union College
  • Iago Montalvão, União Nacional dos Estudantes UNE (Brasil)
  • Dr. Jamil Murad, Centro brasileiro pela Solidariedade aos povos e luta pela Paz (Brasil)
  • Frank Padrón, Belly of The Beast (Cuba)
  • Anya Parampil, The Grayzone
  • Prof. Paul Passavant, Hobart and William Smith Colleges
  • Carol Proner, ABJD (Brasil)
  • Paulo Roberto da Silva Lima, Entregadores Antifascistas (Brasil)
  • Dr. Julio Vernon Ruíz, MD, FORNORM
  • Prof. Saskia Sassen, Columbia University
  • Roger Scott, AFSCME Local 2401
  • Cliff Smith, United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers, Local 36
  • Walter Sorrentino, PCdoB (Brasil)
  • Lester Spence, Johns Hopkins University
  • Neal Sweeney, UAW Local 5810
  • Katrina Vanden Heuvel, The Nation
  • Gilberto Vieira dos Santos, Conselho Indigenista Missionário Cimi (Brasil)
  • Prof. Barbara Weinstein, New York Univ.
  • Philip Wohlstetter, Red May
  • Colonel Ann Wright, Veterans for Peace and CODEPINK
  • Kevin Young, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
  • Acácio Zuniga Leite, Associação Brasileira de Reforma Agrária (Brasil)
  • Black Lives Matter Global Network
  • The People’s Forum
  • Landless Workers Movement-MST (Brasil)
  • V (Formerly Eve Ensler)
  • Miguel Barnet Lanza (Cuba)
  • Frei Betto (Brasil)
  • Chico Buarque (Brasil)
  • Noam Chomsky
  • Prof. Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz
  • Jane Fonda
  • Nancy Morejón (Cuba)
  • Manu Pineda (Spain)
  • Eduardo (Choco) Roca Salazar (Cuba)
  • Mark Ruffalo
  • Oliver Stone
  • Emma Thompson (UK)
  • Dr. Cornel West
  • Rev. Dr. Dora Arce Valentin, Presbyterian-Reformed Church in Cuba (Cuba)
  • Rudelmar Bueno de Faria, ACT Alliance
  • Lula Da Silva, Fmr. President (Brasil)
  • Rev. Dr. Chris Ferguson, World Communion of Reformed Churches
  • Gleisi Hoffman, Worker’s Party (PT) (Brasil)
  • Adolfo Perez Esquivel, Nobel Peace Prize (Argentina)
  • Vijay Prashad, Tricontinental Institute for Social Research
  • Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party
  • Dr. Earl D. Trent Jr., Florida Avenue Baptist Church
  • Mark Weisbrot, Center for Economic and Policy Research
  • Alliance for Cuba Engagement and Respect (ACERE)
  • Observatorio Latinoamericano de Geopolítica (Mexico)
  • Democratic Socialists of America
  • Phillip Agnew
  • Atilio A Boron (Argentina)
  • Dr. Charisse Burden-Stelly
  • Roberto Chile (Cuba)
  • Dr. Pablo González Casanova (Mexico)
  • Dr Gerald Horne
  • Gloria La Riva
  • Fernando Morais (Brasil)
  • Alderperson Carlos Ramirez-Rosa
  • G. C, Spivak
  • Estela Vazquez
  • Dr. Enrique Alemán Gutiérrez, Plataforma Cubana Pra el Dialogo Intereligioso (Cuba)
  • Kenarik Boujikian, Association of Judges for Democracy – Brazil
  • Fernando Chavez, Son of Cesar Chavez
  • Prof. Jodi Dean, Hobart and William Smith Colleges
  • Former Assistant Secretary Education and Public Service Smithsonian Institution James Counts Early, Institute for Policy Studies Board
  • Rev. Dr. Carlos Emilio Ham Stanard, Seminario Evangelico de Teologia (Cuba)
  • Prof. Fredric Jameson, Duke University
  • Max Lesnick, La Alianza Martiana/ Radio Miami
  • Dianet Martínez Valdés, World Student Christian Federation – Latin America (Cuba)
  • Prof. Adolph Reed Jr, University of Pennsylvania, Dept of Political Science
  • Rev. Tania Sánchez Fonseca, Moravian Church in Cuba (Cuba)
  • Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Partnership for Civil Justice Fund
  • DISPARADA – Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT) (Brasil)
  • CUBA Solidarity Forum Ireland
  • Denver Peace Council
  • United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS)
  • Get Better Records
  • Associação Intervenção Democrática – ID
  • Historians for Peace and Democracy
  • Dream Defenders
  • Abahlali baseMjondolo Movement (South Africa)
  • Prof. Gregory Afinogenov
  • Jonathan Alingu
  • Breno Altman (Brasil)
  • Prof. Elisabeth Anker
  • Mauricio Arenas
  • Dr. Albena Azmanova
  • Maura Barrios
  • Kenneth Baynes
  • Katiusca Blanco Castiñeira (Cuba)
  • Atilio Boron (Argentina)
  • Peter Bratt
  • Prof. Susan Buck-Morss
  • Prof. Lana Cable
  • Dr. Roosbelinda Cardenas
  • Prof. Joshua Clover
  • Prof. Deborah Cohen
  • Bernardo Cotrim (Brasil)
  • Rubén Darío Salazar (Cuba)
  • Prof. T. J. Demos
  • Richard Dickerson
  • Prof. Elizabeth Dore
  • Dr. David Dulceany
  • Prof. Zillah Eisenstein
  • Ernesto Espinoza
  • Jorge Fernández Souza (Brasil)
  • John J. Fitzgerald
  • Prof. Nancy Fraser
  • Prof. David Theo Goldberg
  • Prof. A. Tom Grunfeld
  • Digna Guerra (Cuba)
  • Nigel Hanrahan
  • Michele Hardesty
  • Dr. John Harfouch
  • Doug Henwood
  • Vanessa and Ted Hope
  • Jon Jeter
  • Esteban Esteban Jimenez
  • Prof. Rebecca Karl
  • Prof. Esther kingston-mann
  • Rachel Kushner
  • Annie Lacroix-Riz
  • Dr. Tamara Lee
  • Jonathan Lethem
  • Susan Luss
  • Prof. Kara Lynch
  • Francisco López Sacha (Cuba)
  • Prof. Geo Maher
  • Bernardo Mançano Fernandes (Brasil)
  • Dr. Nadia Marsh
  • Abby Martin
  • Prof. Peter McLaren
  • Veronika Mendoza (Peru)
  • Prof. Márgara Millán
  • Alexis Moncada
  • Prof. Eshragh Motahar
  • Prof. James Neel
  • Prof. Mary Nolan
  • Luna Olavarria Gallegos
  • Jacqueline Osorio
  • Fraser Ottanelli
  • Scott Parkin
  • João Paulo Souza de Alencar (Brasil)
  • Sandra Pereira
  • Peyman Piran
  • Graziella Pogolotti (Cuba)
  • Prof. Margaret Power
  • Ignacio Ramonet (Spain)
  • Dolores Rintoul
  • Dr. William I. Robinson
  • Tania Romero
  • Vicente Rubio-Pueyo
  • Prof. Josefina Saldaña-Portillo
  • Magdiel Sanchez Quiroz (Mexico)
  • Ellen Schrecker
  • Cindy Sheehan
  • Prof. Francis Shor
  • Prof. Renato Simões (Brasil)
  • Doris Smith
  • Mark Spencer
  • Margaret Stevens
  • Dr. Maria Tamiolaki
  • Niren Tolsi (South Africa)
  • Peter Truskier
  • Maria Ulloa
  • Nadia Valavani (Greece)
  • Lesbia Vent Dumois (Cuba)
  • Henrique Vieira (Brasil)
  • Aldo ‘Bocafloja’ Villegas
  • Roy Vu
  • Ben Wilkins
  • SARAH WILSON
  • Dr. Helen Yaffe
  • Alejandro Zuñiga
  • Darryl Accone, New Frame (South Africa)
  • Christine Ahn, Women Cross the DMZ
  • Luiz Alencar Dalla Costa, Coordenação nacional MAB, Coordenação internacional do MAR, FRENTE BRASIL POPULAR BTASIL (Brasil)
  • Harry Amana, UNC-CH
  • Tânia Andrade, Advogada (Brasil)
  • Valerio Arcary, PSol (Brasil)
  • Ericah Azeviche, A Revolta da Lâmpada, Coletiva ComunaDeusa (Brasil)
  • Ajamu Baraka, Black Alliance for Peace
  • Prof. Ericka Beckman, University of Pennsylvania
  • Douglas Belchior, Coalizão Negra por Direitos e Uneafro Brasil (Brasil)
  • Prof. Daniel Benson, St. Francis College
  • Prof. Martha Biondi, Northwestern University
  • Prof. James Borchert, Cleveland State University
  • Prof. Robert Brenner, UCLA
  • Prof. Howard Brick, University of Michigan
  • Prof. Robert Buzzanco, University of Houston
  • Prof. Beatriz Cerqueira, Deputada estadual (PT) em Minas Gerais (Brasil)
  • Dr. Paloma Checa-Gismero, Swarthmore College
  • Robert Carl Cohen, The film “Three Cubans”
  • Prof. Drucilla Cornell, Rutgers University
  • Prof. Daniel Czitrom, Mount Holyoke College
  • Prof. Bruno De Conti, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil (Brasil)
  • Maria de Fátima Carneiro de Mendonça, (Brasil)
  • Eliane Dias Caffe Alves, Cineasta
  • Prof. Lisa Duggan, New York University
  • Hassan El-Tayyab, Friends Committee on National Legislation
  • Wagner Firmino Santana, Sindicato dos Metalurgicos do ABC (Brasil)
  • Prof. Derek Ford, DePauw University
  • Carlos Gabas, Consórcio de Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Nordeste (Brasil)
  • Dr. Nathaniel George, Harvard University
  • Juan Gonzalez, Democracy Now
  • Prof. Maggie Gray, Adelphi University
  • Rev. Graylan Hagler, Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ
  • Dr. Kenneth Hammond, New Mexico State University
  • Alexandre Henrique Bezerra Pires, Centro Sabia e Articulação no Semiárido Brasileiro (ASA) (Brasil)
  • Srećko Horvat, DIEM, Democracy in Europe Movement
  • Derek Ide, University of Houston
  • Dr. Christina Jackson, Stockton University
  • Ammar Ali Jan, Haqooq-e-Khalq Movement (Pakistan)
  • Prof. Claudia Koonz, History. Duke University
  • Prof. Peter Kuznick, American University
  • Prof. Andrew Lamas, University of Pennsylvania
  • Helmut-Harry Loewen, Canadian Anti-racism Education & Research Society
  • Prof. Sergio Machado Rezende, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (Brasil)
  • Prof. Patrick Manning, American Historical Association
  • Prof. Lori Marso, Union College
  • Dr. Rosemari Mealy, City College of NY (CUNY)
  • Daniel Montero, Belly of The Beast
  • Liz Oliva Fernández, Belly of The Beast (Cuba)
  • Jerry and Koohan Paik-Mander, International Forum on Globalization
  • Commissioner Mariah Parker, Athens-Clarke County Unified Government
  • Dr. Jennifer Ponce de León, University of Pennsylvania
  • Mike Prysner, The Empire Files
  • Prof. Andrew Ross, New York University
  • Alvaro Salgado, Centro Nacional de Apoyo a Misiones Indígenas (Mexico)
  • Lohana Schalken, LOUD (Brasil)
  • Ivan Silveira, Ubatuba/SP (Brasil)
  • Joaquim Soriano, Executiva Nacional do Partido dos Trabalhadores (Brasil)
  • Deyvid Souza Bacelar da Silva, FUP – Federação Única dos Petroleiros (Brasil)
  • Devyn Springer, Walter Rodney Foundation
  • Astra Taylor, Debt Collective
  • João Vicente Caixa d’Água, Sindicato dos Advogados de São Paulo (Brasil)
  • Jeanette Vizguerra, Sanctuary for All Colorado
  • Prof. Suzi Weissman, Saint Mary’s College of CA
  • Patti Woods, Patti Woods Interiors
  • Prof. Emeritus Nicholas Xenos, University of Massachusetts Amherst
  • Orlando Zaccone D’Elia Filho, Movimento Policiais Antifascismo (Brasil)
Categories
Uncategorized

Webinar: The Past 100 Years: China, the West and the World (21 July)

The last 100 years have seen dramatic changes in the relation between the West and China. From 1921-1945 China was chiefly seen by the West as an ally against Japan’s militarist aggression. Then from 1949-1972 the US launched cold, and hot (Vietnam, Korea), wars involving China. In 1972 Nixon made his dramatic trip to Beijing starting 40 years of overall US-China détente. Then, from 2012, the US launched the ‘Pivot to Asia’, a clearly aggressive policy against China. This was deepened under Trump and Biden by an open US new cold war against China.

What lies behind these dramatic shifts in US policy to China? How has China responded? What are the chances to end this cold war and return US-China relations to a path of cooperation?

These are among the questions that will be discussed by leading Chinese and Western experts on China and its international relations at a China-West webinar on 21 July at 9am US Eastern, 9pm China, 2pm Britain.

Speakers include:

  • Martin Jacques
  • Wang Wen
  • Vijay Prashad
  • Liu Xin
  • Margaret Kimberley
  • Radhika Desai
  • Jaya Josie
  • Yury Tavrovsky
  • John Ross

The event will be streamed on YouTube at www.youtube.com/nocoldwar and on Weibo, Bilibili and other internet channels in China.

The event is hosted by No Cold War and Chongyang Institute, Renmin University of China.