Archive for the 'Violence' Category

Radikala nätverket: Historiska perspektiv på politisk radikalism

Stellan Vinthagen March 28th, 2012

Ur Radikala nätverkets program på Lunds universitet våren 2012:

“History from the Inside Out: The Amistad Africans and their Struggle against Slavery while in Jail, 1839-1841”

28 maj, 14.15-16.00, Sal 3, Historiska institutionen, Lund

Marcus Rediker, University of Pittsburgh
This presentation will explore the well-documented experience of thirty-six African rebels who were incarcerated in American jails after a successful uprising on the Cuban slave schooner Amistad in 1839. Against a fiery backdrop of slave rebellion around the Atlantic in the 1830s, how did African insurrectionists and American abolitionist reformers work together, inside the jail, to build a legal defense campaign, a network of support, a political alliance, and a social movement?

Radikala nätverket är en plattform för forskare intresserade av politisk radikalism i det förflutna och idag. Med ”radikal” menar vi alla grupper som försökt att revolutionera – snarare än reformera – hegemoniska sociala och politiska institutioner, vare sig de har befunnit sig till höger eller till vänster på den politiska skalan, eller har verkat för förändring med våldsamma eller icke våldsamma medel.

Radikala nätverket arrangerar två till fyra seminarier per termin. För att bli medlem av Radikala nätverkets e-postlista, kontakta magnus.olofsson [at] hist.lu.se.

Urban Uprisings in Contemporary Europe

Stellan Vinthagen December 18th, 2011

FSSK, CUS and CSM invite you to a conference day:
Urban Uprisings in Contemporary Europe
Paris 2005, Athens 2008, London 2011 – What’s next?

When: Wednesday 15th of February 2012. 9.50am -16.30 pm
Where: Linnésalen, Mediehuset, Seminariegatan 1B, Campus Linné

A Spectre is stalking Europe – the spectre of suburban youth revolts. Europe is a
continent marked by growing inequality, racism and social tensions. In recent years we
have seen battle like pictures on TV from Paris, Athens, Lyon, Rotterdam, Copenhagen
and most recently in London and other British cities. During the last two years different
areas in the metropolitan districts in Sweden has also become a part of this picture.
How should we understand this development, how do we explain these uprisings? Are
there general patterns that could be seen in all cities?
The unit for Contemporary Cultural Studies (Forum för Studier av Samtidskultur -
FSSK), the Centre for Urban Studies (Centrum för Urbana Studier) and Gothenburg
CSM (Forum for Civil Society and Social Movement Research), all at Gothenburg
University, arrange a one day conference on these issues and we welcome you to this first
conference day in a series on urban movements and urban change.
The conference is free (and includes coffee and bun) but has a limited number of seats.
We therefore require that you send us an email if you like to participate before the 8th of
February to ensure your seat.

Email to:
catharina.thorn [at] kultur.gu.se
ove.sernhede [at] gu.se
hakan.thorn [at] sociology.gu.s

COP: A Living Movement: Toward a World of Peace, Solidarity, and Justice

Stellan Vinthagen April 5th, 2011

Joint Conference of PJSA and the Gandhi King Conference

Hosted by the Christian Brothers University, Memphis, TN ~ October 21-23, 2011


The Peace and Justice Studies Association and The Gandhi-King Conference

Jointly present a dynamic conference experience:

“A Living Movement: Toward a World of Peace, Solidarity, and Justice”

The Peace & Justice Studies Association (PJSA) and the Gandhi-King Conference (GKC) are pleased to announce our first-ever jointly sponsored annual conference. The PJSA and the GKC are partnering this year to promote dynamic exchange among individuals and organizations working for a more just and peaceful world. This partnership promises a unique conference experience that combines the best of scholarly and grassroots perspectives on the pressing justice issues in our communities and around the globe.

We invite submissions for the 2011 Annual Conference, to be held on the campus of Christian Brothers University, in Memphis, Tennessee, from Friday October 21 through Sunday October 23, 2011. We welcome proposals from a wide range of disciplines, professions, and perspectives that address issues related to the broad themes of solidarity, community, advocacy, education, and activism as they are brought to bear in the pursuit of peace and justice.

Our goal is to create a stimulating environment where scholars, activists, educators, practitioners, artists, and students can build community and explore interconnections. We invite participants to engage in various modes of exploration, including papers and presentations, hands-on practitioner workshops, and a youth summit. We aim to foster an experience in which attendees will have multiple opportunities to meet and dialogue in both formal and informal settings, against the unique historical backdrop of Memphis, TN.

The deadline for proposal submissions is April 15, 2011. Abstracts are limited to 150 words, and must be submitted electronically through the PJSA website.

For more information, contact: info@peacejusticestudies.org or info@gandhikingconference.org

COP: A Decade of Terrorism and Counter-terrorism since 9/11

Stellan Vinthagen March 30th, 2011

A Decade of Terrorism and Counter-terrorism since 9/11: Taking stock and new directions in research and policy

Call for Papers

Organising body: Critical Studies on Terrorism Working Group (CSTWG) of the British International Studies Association

Supported by: The British Academy, Consortium for Research on Terrorology and Political Violence; Communication Research cluster, University of Strathclyde

Location(s): University of Strathclyde and Glasgow City Chambers, Central Glasgow.

September 11, 2011 will mark ten years since the terrorist attacks on America and the start of the global ‘war on terrorism’. The extensive changes engendered by these processes in the last decade have yet to be fully understood and appreciated. There is consequently a real need for rigorous and sustained retrospective analysis. In a year that will see a wide range of special commemorative and academic events, this conference will seek to assess the widespread impact of terrorism and counter-terrorism since 2001 from a distinctly ‘critical’ perspective. More specifically, the conference will foreground inter-disciplinarity and seek to review what we have learnt in a period of unprecedented interest in the study of terrorism and counter terrorism. There will be a range of debate sessions between ‘critical’ and ‘mainstream’ scholars, and engagement with policy actors, including speakers from the government ‘Contest II’/’Prevent’ campaigns, the police, legal officials, civil libertarians and Muslim community representatives.

Key note speakers include Joseba Zulaika (University of Nevada in Reno), Michael Stohl (University of California Santa Barbara), Michael Scheuer (ex-CIA), Richard Jackson (Aberystwyth) Caron Gentry (St Andrews) and Dr. Bob Lambert (Exeter, ex-Special Branch)

The conference is intended to play a significant role in the expansion of interest in, and the re-orientation towards a more empirically informed and theoretically sophisticated practice of, studies of terrorism and political violence. Subsidiary aims include to foster knowledge exchange between social science and natural science disciplines; and to contribute to the re-evaluation of policy on terrorism and counter terrorism.

Scholarship on terrorism has expanded exponentially in the past decade. The subject itself is clearly of major importance inside and outside the academy. While the conference is an initiative from scholars who are part of an openly ‘critical’ working group on terrorism, the conference organizers are concerned to open up dialogue on the shared problems of data, methods and theory which most observers agree are important issues in ‘terrorism studies’. We will bring together an unusually interdisciplinary group including exponents of both ‘orthodox’ and ‘critical’ terrorism studies, and those from other areas of social and natural science who are often not part of the mainstream discussion of ‘terrorism’.

There will be a strong policy and civil society element to the conference with policy actors and human rights activists debating responses to terrorism, civil liberties, and ‘suspect communities’.  We will also host roundtable discussions featuring those with experience of political violence from a variety of conflicts.

In addition, we will host advanced research training workshops for conference participants, together with interdisciplinary research sessions including a small number of ‘master classes’ where leading researchers will reflect on interdisciplinarity and on their own research methods and practice. We intend  to offer both early career and established scholars an opportunity to discuss practical questions outside the formality of the set-piece keynote addresses and we hope that this will encourage sharing of new and developing methods in the field especially in the context of the new opportunities and issues thrown up for methods by new digital technologies. We hope to use these methods workshops to focus in the interdisciplinary workshops on fostering research networking for the future.

Conference themes
The conference is intended to look back and review how we have understood terrorism and counter-terrorism, and attempt to think through where the study of terrorism and counter-terrorism should go from here. Themes in the conference include, among others:

•    ‘Non-state terrorism’, including but not limited to terrorism as an instrument of power;
•    ’State terror’ and repression, including, but not limited to Western State terror;
•    ’Counter-terrorism’, risk governance and ‘radicalisation’;
•    ‘Advances in terrorism studies’ with a particular focus on data, methods and theory, including the contribution of critical terrorism studies;
•    ‘Communicating terrorism’: cybersecurity, social media, influence agenda, public diplomacy, information operations and strategic communications;
•    Gender and terrorism/counter-terrorism;
•    Historical materialism, terrorism and counter-terrorism;
•    The war on terror and the global South;
•    The ways in which conflict resolution can inform the study of terrorism and counter-terrorism policy.

The conference will include a mix of plenaries, keynotes, panel, debate and workshop sessions.

Abstracts and Expressions of Interest
The organizing committee welcomes the submission of
1.    Abstracts (max. 350 words) on these and related topics;
2.    Panel proposals (with a minimum of 3 abstracts, plus a short overview of the panel (circa 250 words))
3.    Workshop proposals (with either a policy/civil society or methodological/practical orientation max 350 words of workshop description plus max 250 words on any individual elements)
All abstracts will be reviewed by the organizing committee to meet rigorous academic standards. Abstracts will be reviewed for relevance, conceptual quality, innovation and clarity of presentation. At least one author of accepted papers is required to attend the conference in order to present the paper.

Abstracts should be sent to Jan Bissett jan.bissett@strath.ac.uk by Wednesday 1 June 2011.

Publication
Papers from the conference will be selected competitively for inclusion in either:
1.    A special issue of the journal, Critical Studies on Terrorism; or
2.    An edited volume on the conference theme published by a major academic publisher.
These outputs will be edited and overseen by an overlapping editorial team led by the organisers. It is anticipated that the journal will focus on advances in terrorism studies. The book will focus substantively on 9/11 and its legacies incorporating interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary perspectives. The edited collection will be divided into key sections reflecting the conference themes. It is important to note that the papers for the book will be needed in near final draft form in advance of the conference.
Costs: Conference costs  will be announced shortly. It is envisaged that full costs will be around £200 with reductions for student, policy and civil society participation. Accommodation will not be included in conference costs and should be booked separately. It is the responsibility of delegates to book their own accommodation. A list of hotels, hostels and B&Bs will be provided by the conference organizers.

Conference organizing committee
David Miller (Strathclyde) (convenor), Helen Dexter (Manchester), Piers Robinson (Manchester), Dave Whyte (Liverpool), Vicki Sentas (King’s), Bela Arora (University of Wales, Newport), Emmanuel-Pierre Guittet (Manchester), Jessie Blackbourn (Salford), Idrees Ahmad (Strathclyde), Roy Revie (Strathclyde), Steven Harkins (Strathclyde), Rizwaan Sabir (Strahclyde), Tom Mills (Strathclyde), Cyrus Tata (Law, Strathclyde), Rachel Hendrick (Strathclyde), Rani Dhanda (Strathclyde)

Administrative support Jan Bissett:jan.bissett@strath.ac.uk
Conference blog: http://decadeofterrorismandcounterterrorism.wordpress.com/
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/#!/911plus10

Keynote speakers
The conference will hear several keynote addresses from world leading authors on terrorism and political violence.  Each Plenary speaker will also run a Masterclass on research techniques in terrorism specifically aimed at Postgraduate students and early career researchers.

Keynote addresses confirmed so far:
Joseba Zulaika is the Director of the Centre for Basque Studies at the University of Nevada in Reno and an anthropologist by training. Among his research interests are the international discourse of terrorism. His 2009 book Terrorism: the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy was published by the University of Chicago Press. His recent explorations of terrorism focus in particular on the role of intellectuals and reflect on the domain of terrorism studies.

This self-reflexive focus – which is comparatively rare in academic work on terrorism – is the reason why we particularly want Prof Zulaika to deliver a keynote at the conference.
Michael Stohl is Professor of Communication at the University of California Santa Barbara. Stohl’s current research focuses on organizational and political communication with special reference to terrorism, human rights and global relations. Stohl’s foundational work on state terrorism, his focus on Terrorism as communicatively constituted violence, and his current work on terrorism networks and counter terrorism are the key reasons why he is being invited to deliver a keynote. He will also lead a workshop on network analysis in relation to terrorism.

Michael Scheuer (invited) spent 22-years with the CIA in which he held various positions including Senior Adviser for the Usama Bin Laden Department, Chief of the Southwest/Southeast Asia Counternarcotics Operation, and Chief of the Sunni Militant Unit. Dr. Scheuer is the author of Imperial Hubris. Why the West is Losing the War on Terrorism (2004) and Through Our Enemies’ Eyes: Osama Bin Laden, Radical Islam, and the Future of the United States (2003), as well as Marching Towards Hell: America and Islam After Iraq (2008).

Richard Jackson Professor in International Politics (Aberystwyth). He is the founding editor of the journal Critical Studies on Terrorism. Together with Jeroen Gunning and Marie Breen Smyth, Richard Jackson is co-editor of the Routledge Critical Terrorism Studies Book Series. Richard Jackson has published numerous books and articles on terrorism-related issues and international conflict resolution.

Caron Gentry was an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Abilene Christian University in Abilene, Texas and has recently taken the post of Lecturer at the University of St Andrews. Her previous work has been published in the journal Terrorism and Political Violence.  Her research interests are gender, terrorism and political violence.

Music of The Revolution: How Songs of Protest Have Rallied Demonstrators

jj March 9th, 2011

From: Movements.org

Look up the original site and get several of the movies.

Music almost always plays a pivotal role in protest movements, with songs and chants unifying dissidents in their rallying cries. Unlike movements of decades past, however, protest music made popular during the recent revolution in Tunisia, Egypt, and beyond spread virally with the help YouTube and Facebook.

TUNISIA

Twenty-one-year-old Hamada Ben Amor, known as El Général—an underground rapper living in the town of Sfax south of Tunis—uploaded a song he had written called “Rais Le Bled” (“President, Your Country”) to Facebook on November 7. The rap called out then-president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali for the problems faced by average Tunisians trying to make a living, including food scarcity, a lack of freedom of speech, and unemployment with lyrics like: “Mr. President, your people are dying/People are eating rubbish/Look at what is happening/Miseries everywhere Mr. President/I talk with no fear/Although I know I will only get troubles/I see injustice everywhere.”

The Voice of Tunisia

The rap was picked up by local TV station Tunivision and Al-Jazeera and resonated with many Tunisians who quickly began sharing the song. Soon enough, the government blocked the musician’s Facebook page and cut off his mobile phone. Despite the attempt to make his music disappear, El Général’s song quickly became the anthem of the Jasmine Revolution.

El Général then recorded another song of protest call “Tounes Bladna” (“Tunisia Our Country”) on December 22. By that point, Ali’s regime had had enough with the musician. El Général was arrested by state security on January 6, taken to the Ministry of Interior, and interrogated for three days.

He tells The Guardian, “They kept asking me which political party I worked for. ‘Don’t you know it’s forbidden to sing songs like that?’ they said. But I just answered, ‘Why? I’m only telling the truth.’ I was in there for three days, but it felt like three years.” The public was outraged and began demanding his release. The pressure mounted on the government worked and he was soon released from detention.

Since Ben Ali left office on January 14, El Général’s tunes have continued to serve as a rallying cry for other demonstrators in the Middle East, and his work has proven to be popular among demonstrators in Bahrain.

EGYPT

Egyptian poet Ahmed Fouad Negm (“Uncle Ahmed”), a popular voice for the poor who has spent 18 of his 81 years in Egyptian prisons, wrote “The Donkey and the Foal,” a commentary about then-president Hosni Mubarak and his son Gamal. Musician Ramy Essam, who had taken to playing in Tahrir Square during the protest, set the poem to music and sang the song as Negm stood beside him.

Essam then penned the song “Leave,” inspired by the slogans and chants being shouted around Tahrir Square:

“We are all united as one,

And what we ask for,

Is just one thing: Leave! Leave! (x3)

Down, down Husni Mubarak! (x4)

The people demand: Bring down the regime! (x4)

He is going away. We are not going anywhere! (x4)

We are all united as one,

And what we ask for,

Is just one thing: Leave! Leave! Leave! (x4)”

The Truth Behind the Egyptian Revolution

Amir and Adel Eid from the Egyptian rock band Cairo-Kee gathered up other artists to record “Sout Al Horeya” (“The Voice of Freedom”), which quickly became another anthem for the revolution. The video for the song was shot entirely inside Tahrir Square during the revolution using a basic digital SLR camera.

“I went down to the streets vowing not to return, and wrote with my blood on every street.

Our voices reached those who could not hear them

And we broke through all barriers

Our weapon was our dreams

And tomorrow is looking as bright as it seems….”

Sout Al Horeya

LIBYA

Traditional songs have also played an important role in demonstrations. Libyans in the liberated eastern parts of the country forged bonds by singing the old national anthem while waving the tricolor flag from before Gaddafi came to power in 1969 as “a symbol of the reinvention of the Libyans.”

In this video, the massive crowd in Beghanzi sings the old anthem to share their pride in being liberated.

ARAB RAP DIASPORA

The Narcicyst, an Iraqi-born rapper living in Toronto, joined with other musicians from the Arabic rap diaspora in North America, such as Omar Offendum, Amir Sulaiman, and Canadian R&B singer Ayah, to record a track called “#Jan25 Egypt,” based off the popular hashtag used during the demonstrations in Egypt. In an Al Jazeera English interview, Omar said that it’s a “song of solidarity with the Egyptian people and [a way] to open it up [what’s happening in Egypt] to an audience in the United States.” The song starts:

“I heard ’em say

The revolution won’t be televised

Aljazeera proved ’em wrong

Twitter has him paralyzed

80 million strong

And ain’t no longer gonna be terrorized

Organized – Mobilized – Vocalized

On the side of TRUTH

Um il-Dunya’s living proof

That its a matter of time

before the chicken is home to roost”

Omar Offendum

LOOKING FOR MORE MUSIC?

Check out Mideast Tunes, a hub launched by Mideast Youth for the region’s underground and alternative music scenes. You can browse music by country or genre. The site has highlighted a number of other protest songs coming out of the region for its listeners (1, 2).

Abdulla Darrat, co-founder of the enoughgaddafi.com (Khalas) site run by a Libyan exiles (now found at http://feb17.info), put together a “mixtape” featuring hip-hop artists from the region. The mix, called “Mish B3eed,” or “Not Far,” features songs describing the conditions in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria. It can be downloaded here.

Durrat says, “[These musicians and emcees] very successfully put into words a lot of the sentiments that young people in the area are carrying with them, and they’re voicing really the struggle of…everyday people.”

Are any popular protest songs missing? Share them in the comments below!

Egypt’s Muslims attend Coptic Christmas mass, serving as “human shields”

jj January 13th, 2011

From: Ahramonline

Muslims turned up in droves for the Coptic Christmas mass Thursday night, offering their bodies, and lives, as “shields” to Egypt’s threatened Christian community

Egypt’s majority Muslim population stuck to its word Thursday night. What had been a promise of solidarity to the weary Coptic community, was honoured, when thousands of Muslims showed up at Coptic Christmas eve mass services in churches around the country and at candle light vigils held outside.

From the well-known to the unknown, Muslims had offered their bodies as “human shields” for last night’s mass, making a pledge to collectively fight the threat of Islamic militants and towards an Egypt free from sectarian strife.

“We either live together, or we die together,” was the sloganeering genius of Mohamed El-Sawy, a Muslim arts tycoon whose cultural centre distributed flyers at churches in Cairo Thursday night, and who has been credited with first floating the “human shield” idea.

Among those shields were movie stars Adel Imam and Yousra, popular Muslim televangelist and preacher Amr Khaled, the two sons of President Hosni Mubarak, and thousands of citizens who have said they consider the attack one on Egypt as a whole.

“This is not about us and them,” said Dalia Mustafa, a student who attended mass at Virgin Mary Church on Maraashly Street. “We are one. This was an attack on Egypt as a whole, and I am standing with the Copts because the only way things will change in this country is if we come together.”

In the days following the brutal attack on Saints Church in Alexandria, which left 21 dead on New Year’ eve, solidarity between Muslims and Copts has seen an unprecedented peak. Millions of Egyptians changed their Facebook profile pictures to the image of a cross within a crescent – the symbol of an “Egypt for All”. Around the city, banners went up calling for unity, and depicting mosques and churches, crosses and crescents, together as one.

The attack has rocked a nation that is no stranger to acts of terror, against all of Muslims, Copts and Jews. In January of last year, on the eve of Coptic Christmas, a drive-by shooting in the southern town of Nag Hammadi killed eight Copts as they were leaving Church following mass. In 2004 and 2005, bombings in the Red Sea resorts of Taba and Sharm El-Sheikh claimed over 100 lives, and in the late 90’s, Islamic militants executed a series of bombings and massacres that left dozens dead.

This attack though comes after a series of more recent incidents that have left Egyptians feeling left out in the cold by a government meant to protect them.

Last summer, 28-year-old businessman Khaled Said was beaten to death by police, also in Alexandria, causing a local and international uproar. Around his death, there have been numerous other reports of police brutality, random arrests and torture.

Last year was also witness to a ruthless parliamentary election process in which the government’s security apparatus and thugs seemed to spiral out of control. The result, aside from injuries and deaths, was a sweeping win by the ruling party thanks to its own carefully-orchestrated campaign that included vote-rigging, corruption and widespread violence. The opposition was essentially annihilated. And just days before the elections, Copts – who make up 10 percent of the population – were once again the subject of persecution, when a government moratorium on construction of a Christian community centre resulted in clashes between police and protestors. Two people were left dead and over 100 were detained, facing sentences of up to life in jail.

The economic woes of a country that favours the rich have only exacerbated the frustration of a population of 80 million whose majority struggle each day to survive. Accounts of thefts, drugs, and violence have surged in recent years, and the chorus of voices of discontent has continued to grow.

The terror attack that struck the country on New Year’s eve is in many ways a final straw – a breaking point, not just for the Coptic community, but for Muslims as well, who too feel marginalized, oppressed, and overlooked by a government that fails to address their needs. On this Coptic Christmas eve, the solidarity was not just one of religion, but of a desperate and collective plea for a better life and a government with accountability.

How safe are activists in India?

jj December 22nd, 2010

From OneWorld South Asia

The murder of environmentalist Amit Jethwa for campaigning against forest encroachment exposes the urgent need for legal redressal to protect the voices of whistle blowers in India, who are risking their lives for the cause of social equity and justice.

On 20 July 2010, forest campaigner Amit Jethva was shot dead at point blank range by two assailants on motorbikes as he was leaving Gujrat High Court following a meeting with his lawyer.

Environmental activist Amit Jethva was murdered after campaigning against illegal mining in a national park

Environmental activist Amit Jethva was murdered after campaigning against illegal mining in a national park

In a country facing an acute environmental crisis as it rapidly industrialises, his assassination was no stray incident but one of a rising number of attacks on activists. The headline-grabbing decision to ban the British mining company Vedanta from opening a bauxite mine on tribal land in eastern India was only achieved after an unprecedented amount of national and international media attention.

Elsewhere decisions have not been so favourable. Recently approved plans for a new airport in Mumbai will destroy 170 hectares of critically important mangroves. Conservation groups say alternative sites were not properly considered and that their objections were given little consideration. But being ignored is perhaps better than the fate many environmental activists face in India today.

In January 2010, Satish Shetty, a whistle blower and anti-corruption campaigner, who brought to light land scams in West Indian state Maharashtra, was murdered, while Shanmughan Manjunath suffered the same fate after exposing petrol pumps that sold adulterated fuel. Activists say that in contrast to the image India portrays – of a nation that prioritises environmental issues – the reality is in fact very bleak.

‘Activists in India are constantly at risk. Stories of activists being killed are a moral setback to all of us. Ruffle the wrong person’s feathers and it could be you next,’ says Stalin D, project director at the environmental NGO Vanashakti. Ravi Rebbapragada, executive director of Samata, a tribal rights and environmental NGO, believes that as India continues its rapid industrialisation, things are likely to get worse, ‘as the stakes go higher the risk to the activist goes higher,’ he says.

Anti-mining activist killed

At the time of his death Amit was campaigning to protect against forest encroachment. He was heavily involved in the Gir National park, the only home of the Asiatic lion and a protected forest area in western India that covers more than 1,400 km sq. His efforts to expose illegal mining in the forest were rewarded last week with a special posthumous award. Before his death he had filed a lawsuit (Public Interest Litigation) against illegal limestone mining in the buffer zone around the National Park. His application had named a local MP Dinu Solanki from India’s Hindu Nationalist Party and the case was said to, ‘openly expose his link with illegal mining operations’.

Amit was well-known for standing up for environmental issues and had even taken on Bollywood actor Salmon Khan for shooting an endangered Blackbuck. As such he had many enemies in the government, according to his friend and environmental lawyer Manish Vaidya. His family and friends say he had been under threat ever since he started investigating illegal mining operations in and around Gir National Park.

‘A couple of years back, Dinu Solanki’s men physically assaulted Amit at a family wedding,’ recalls Alpa Amit Jethva, his widow, who says Amit had complained to the police after one incident but nothing happened. Dinu Solanki was unavailable for comment but a police investigation since Amit’s death found that he had ‘no role to play’. The police confirmed to the Ecologist that his nephew Shiva Solanki has been charged with conspiracy to assassinate Jethva and a second man with his murder.

Lack of support from police

Activists in India say support is often lacking from the police when they try and initiate proceedings against their attackers. In March 2010, while exposing illegal sand mining in the state of Maharastra, Sumaira Abdulali, a trustee of the Awaaz Foundation, an environmental NGO, was followed, threatened and physically attacked by mafia linked to sand dredging in the area. Sumaira and her team went out on a boat to photograph illegal sand mining in an ecologically sensitive creek, where they saw over fifty dredgers within a span of one kilometre. After they took the photographs and left, they were followed by thugs.

Anti-flogging protesters arrested in Sudan

jj December 15th, 2010

KHARTOUM, Sudan, Dec. 15 (UPI) — Sudanese authorities have charged 46 women and six men with civil disobedience for protesting the flogging of a young woman by police.

The group, organized by the “No to Women’s Oppression Coalition,” said it had permission from authorities to deliver a protest letter to the minister of justice, the Sudan Tribune reported Wednesday.

Instead of allowing them to proceed, police arrested all the demonstrators.

A BBC correspondent covering the protest was kicked to the floor by plain clothes security officers who seized his equipment.

The protest was organized after several Arab channels broadcast excerpts of a YouTube video showing blue-uniformed police officers taking turns whipping a young woman across her head, legs and feet.

Sudanese officials defended the whipping of women saying it is provided for in Islamic law.

However, they added the way this particular flogging was implemented is under investigation.

Hundreds rally in Moscow to protest attacks

jj November 17th, 2010

The Associated Press via Fort Mill Times

MOSCOW —

About 500 people came out on a rainy Sunday afternoon to protest the beatings of journalists and activists linked to a dispute over a forest just outside the Russian capital.

The protesters on the square in central Moscow held photographs of reporter Oleg Kashin and environmental activist Konstantin Fetisov, who were savagely beaten in separate attacks this month.

Fetisov was among those trying to save the Khimki forest from being cleared for highway construction, while Kashin reported on the controversy. Both remain hospitalized with head injuries. Kashin also had his jaw smashed, a leg broken and his fingers mangled.

Yevgeniya Chirikova, who heads up the Khimki campaign, told the crowd on Sunday: “With our action today we want to say: hands off civil activists, hands off journalists, hands off the people who honestly express their views.”

The bludgeoning of Kashin by two unknown men, which was caught on a security camera and shown on national television, has led to public outrage and demands that the attackers be found and punished.

At the same time, the success of the Khimki campaign in grabbing national attention has helped galvanize similar environmental protest movements around the country.

“Civil activism is on the rise,” prominent rights activist Lev Ponomaryov said at the protest rally. “Society is comprised of two groups of the population: 15 percent who are politically active and all the rest who are the morass, to use a figure of speech. These 15 percent are becoming more active, holding separate actions and, increasingly, joint actions.”

Several of Russia’s disparate opposition groups took part in Sunday’s rally, united in common cause by the attacks.

The movement to save the Khimki forest was first driven by Mikhail Beketov, the founder and editor of a local paper, who wrote about suspicions that officials were set to personally profit from the highway construction.

He was assaulted in 2008, beaten so badly that he was left with brain damage and unable to speak. As with most attacks on journalists and rights activists in Russia, the perpetrators have not been found.

The Kremlin has tried to show that this may be changing. President Dmitry Medvedev has demanded that Kashin’s attackers be tracked down, and prosecutors have reopened an investigation into the attack on Beketov.

A Study in Middle East Nonviolence

jj October 11th, 2010

Movie Review of Budrus from NYT

American audiences watching the documentary “Budrus,” about a pioneering effort in nonviolent protest by Palestinians in the West Bank, will find many of the images familiar. The marching, the chanting, the nerve-racking encounters between protesters and jumpy, heavily armed young policemen and soldiers: it’s “Eyes on the Prize” with olive trees.

The writer and director Julia Bacha has fashioned an engrossing and sometimes inspiring account of the confrontations that took place in the village of Budrus in 2003 and 2004 over the building of the Israeli security fence, relying on footage shot at the time by more than a dozen people. At first she keeps the larger and more intractable issues in the background, focusing on the stark contrasts of unarmed Palestinian women jumping in front of bulldozers and being beaten and gassed by the Israeli police.

As the protests, led by the quiet, tough-minded mayor, Ayed Morrar, and his teenage daughter Iltezam, succeed in stalling construction of the fence (which threatens to destroy 3,000 of the villagers’ olive trees), the Israeli news media take notice, and the situation grows more complex. Mr. Morrar, having invited women to participate — an unusual step — goes further and welcomes Israeli peace activists. Soon both the Israeli army and Palestinian politicians are involved; neither is a welcome presence. The cycle of violence the Morrars sought to end seems inescapable.

Ms. Bacha doesn’t duck the dispiriting aspects of the story: she shows us how young Palestinians eventually began throwing stones, and Israeli troops began shooting. “Budrus” makes a convincing case for the courage of the protesters (while giving ample screen time to the commander of the Israeli border police unit they confronted, who happened to be a very attractive young woman). The ultimate value of nonviolent protest in the occupied territories, however, is beyond the film’s scope.

BUDRUS

Written and directed by Julia Bacha; directors of photography, Shai Pollack, Monalisa Sundbom, Jonathan Massey, Ms. Bacha, Riyad Deis and Mohammed Fawzi; edited by Geeta Gandbhir and Ms. Bacha; music by Kareem Roustom; produced by Ronit Avni, Ms. Bacha and Rula Salameh; released by Just Vision. At the Quad Cinema, 34 West 13th Street, Greenwich Village. In Arabic, Hebrew and English, with English subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 21 minutes. This film is not rated.

University of Gothenburg Resistance Seminars Fall Schedule 2010

Stellan Vinthagen September 5th, 2010

We invite you all to the new semester of Resistance Studies Seminars. For the seventh time we have a full and interesting number of seminars that explore critically the meaning of resistance and its various articulations. All seminars are this time on Swedish.
September 16 with Marcus Regnander and Mattias Ström, International Solidarity Movement – Researchers. Nonviolent Resistance and State Repression in Hebron. Seminar is in Swedish. September 16. Thursday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

October 13 with Tiina Rosenberg, Professor of Gender Studies. Från protest till motstånd: Utgaångspunkt Ulrike Meinhofs text Vom Protest zum Widerstand. Seminar is in Swedish. October 13. Wednesday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

October 28 with Salka Sanden, author. 1990-talet och den autonoma rörelsens framväxt i Sverige. Seminar is in Swedish. October 28. Thursday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

November 11 with Daniel Hjalmarsson, Akademikerförbundet SSR. På jobbet är väl alla hetero…?: Öppenhet och stängda dörrar på sveriges arbetsplatser. Seminar is in Swedish. November 11. Thursday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

November 25 with Mats Adolfsson, historian. Svenska uppror: bondeuppror och gatukravaller. Seminar is in Swedish. November 25. Thursday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

December 9 with Mattias Gardell (or another member of) Ship To Gaza. Seminar is in Swedish. December 9. Thursday 15:15-17.00 at the Annedalseminariet at Room 419.

After the seminar there is a post-seminar gathering at restaurant Gyllene Prag (Sveag. 25) from 17:00 and onwards. We eat, drink and continue the discussions from the seminar in a more informal way. You are welcome to attend even if you was not at the seminar!
Annedalsseminariet, Seminariegatan 1A, close to Linneplatsen. see description how to find at: http://www.globalstudies.gu.se/kontakt
Welcome!

Call for proposals: The Underground Railroad Resistance Against Slavery

Stellan Vinthagen September 2nd, 2010

Abolishing Slavery in the Atlantic World: The ‘Underground Railroad’ in the Americas, Africa, and Europe

The Tenth Anniversary Underground Railroad Public History Conference
Sponsored by the Underground Railroad History Project of the Capital Region, Inc.

April 8 – 10, 2011 at Russell Sage College, Troy, New York

Where there was slavery, there was resistance, escape, and rebellion. The Transatlantic Slave Trade (1400s to 1800s) was a global enterprise that transformed the four continents bordering the Atlantic, and that engendered the formation of a multifaceted and international Underground Railroad resistance movement.

The broad geographic nature of this freedom struggle is the theme of the 2011 UGR Public History Conference. We invite proposals that address capture, enslavement, and resistance within and across borders in Africa, Europe, and the Americas, historically and contemporarily, as well as proposals that address the preservation of the voices of the past and their relationship with us today.

Possible questions to be considered:

  • What were the similarities and differences among the slave systems created by Europeans in the Americas?
  • How did the enslaved and their allies engage in resistance, rebellion and revolution in the four continents and the Atlantic Ocean?
  • What were the forms that global abolitionism took?
  • What roles were played by escaped slaves, inlcuding those who crossed national borders?
  • What is the range of experience captured by slave narratives and testimonies in various countries and on different continents?
  • How did Africans and people of African descent involve themselves with indigenous peoples in the countries and colonies of the Americas and the other continents?
  • What are contemporary manifestations of this international freedom struggle?
  • How can we preserve the voices of the past and relate them to us today?

Proposals on related questions, not directly on this theme, are also welcomed.

Proposals may be for a 60-minute panel session, workshop, cultural/artistic activity, media production, poster, or other exhibit that addresses these questions and this theme. When possible, activities should encourage audience interaction. Proposals should include: title, content description, type of presentation, names and contact information of presenters, target audience, and technology needs.

Proposals should be submitted by July 31, 2010 Via postal mail to:
URHPCR, PO Box 10851, Albany NY 12201 or via email to urhpcr2011@gmail.com

For more information, call 518-432-4432

“The gold standard of Underground Railroad conferences… bringing together an extraordinary spectrum of attendees, ranging from noted scholars and authors to large numbers of interested laymen, in spirited and informative workshops which both bring history alive and open new avenues of research.” — Fergus M. Bordewich, author, Bound for Canaan

Underground Railroad History Project of the Capital Region, Inc. researches, preserves, and retells New York’s regional history of the Underground Railroad, highlighting the role of African-American freedom seekers and local abolitionists

Why Israel Criminalizes Nonviolence

jj August 31st, 2010

This text is copied from http://blog.thejerusalemfund.org/.

An Israeli military court convicted Abdallah Abu Rahmah, the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, of incitement and holding illegal demonstrations. The eight-month long ordeal, during which the peaceful activist was imprisoned, also ended with his acquittal on two other charges: stone-throwing and possession of arms.

Abu Rahmah gained international attention for his leading role in the growing nonviolent protest movement in occupied Palestine. His central West Bank village is the site of weekly protests against the encroachment of Israel’s wall and other occupation policies. The wall was considered illegal under international law by the International Court of Justice in a 2004 advisory opinion.

Quite often, Israeli military forces use violence and coercion against unarmed protesters there. Last week, Israeli soldiers in riot gear injured several of them, as well as a journalist. They detained two activists, one Palestinian and one foreign.

Increasingly, Israel criminalizes Palestinian protest, thereby reaffirming its cause and giving way to only more nonviolent opposition.

His conviction through the machinery of the laws of occupation highlight the fact that he, and other Palestinian prisoners, are processed by an illegitimate court administering an occupation and apartheid structure that contravenes international law and norms of justice. Legal prohibitions and enforcement against nonviolent resistance illustrate the inherent criminality of the system, a point made by purveyors and practitioners of civil disobedience, from Thoreau to Gandhi and King Jr.

Civil disobedience, as suggested by the philosopher John Rawls, is a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies. The organizers of protests in Bil’in, as well as in Nilin, Budrus and other Palestinian areas, are working in the spirit of this definition.

The severity of the case against him demonstrates Israel’s official fear of nonviolent resistance. Abu Rahmah, himself, believes that this illegitimate campaign against him and the Bil’in activists will only inspire further activism:

Israel’s military campaign to imprison the leadership of the Palestinian popular struggle shows that our non-violent struggle is effective….Whether we are confined in the open-air prison that Gaza has been transformed into, in military prisons in the West Bank, or in our own villages surrounded by the Apartheid Wall, arrests and persecution do not weaken us. They only strengthen our commitment to turning 2010 into a year of liberation through unarmed grassroots resistance to the occupation….This year, the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee will expand on the achievements of 2009, a year in which you amplified our popular demonstrations in Palestine with international boycott campaigns and international legal actions under universal jurisdiction…

Elements of the conviction indicate the political motivations behind his arrest. The indictment cited this as evidence of indictment: Abu Rahmah collected spent Israeli tear-gas projectiles and bullet cases from the sites of demonstrations to prove that the violence was being used against demonstrators.

Israel’s military authorities effectively prohibit the collection of evidence against their policies and practices.

Under military law, incitement is “The attempt, verbally or otherwise, to influence public opinion in the Area in a way that may disturb the public peace or public order” (section 7(a) of the Order Concerning Prohibition of Activities of Incitement and Hostile Propaganda (no.101), 1967), and carries a 10 year maximum sentence.

The sentencing of Abu Rahmah, which begins next month, will be premised on the absurd argument that documenting Israel’s use of force against unarmed demonstrators disturbs the public peace. Public order in the case means the security of the military occupation. The prosecution is expected to recommend a two-year imprisonment sentence.

Beyond the criminality of the charges, the evidence presented against him should raise eyebrows. The prosecution presented the testimonies of minors who were arrested in the middle of the night and questioned without access to legal counsel. Under fair judicial systems testimonies by children made under duress would be inadmissible as evidence. The trial itself is testimony to the police state nature of the occupation.

Abu Rahmah’s case harkens back to the intifada that began in late 1987. This prosecution was the first use of the organizing and illegal demonstrations regulations since then. Military ordinances define “illegal assembly” in a much stricter way than Israeli law does (another example of the apartheid-nature of the occupation). It forbids any assembly of more than 10 people without a permit from the military commander.

The hidden charge, the one not expressly conveyed, is that Abu Rahmah was gaining international visibility, and was rising as a powerful voice of conscience against the forty-three year-old Israeli occupation of the West Bank. Israel is well aware of what damage a Palestinian figure of international stature could cause to Israel’s status quo.

After all, how often have western commentators criticized the Palestinians for lacking a Gandhi? This question was more often a function of the questioner’s ignorance than a reflection of the state of Palestinian nonviolent resistance — which has always been ubiquitous. From circumventing checkpoints, to refusing to pay fees to Israel, to building without permits, Palestinians fundamentally disobey Israel’s overbearing authority on a nearly continuous basis.

It is when leaders emerge that Israel targets them. In 2008, exactly a year before the Israeli military arrested Abu Rahmah in the middle of the night, he received the Carl Von Ossietzky Medal for Outstanding Service in the Realization of Basic Human Rights, which was awarded by the International League for Human Rights in Berlin.

The delegation of international figures and statesmen known as The Elders — including Mary Robinson, Fernando Cardoso, Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu and others — visited the memorial of the fallen Bil’in organizer, Bassem Abu Rahmah, in August 2009. Abu Rahmah accompanied them, and is pictured with them in the photo to the left. After his arrest in December, 2009, the South African former archbishop and anti-Apartheid Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu called for his release.

As with other nonviolent political prisoners, such as Mohammad Othman and Jamal Juma’, Abu Rahmah is intended to be made an example. Mubarak Awad was when he was deported by Israel in 1988 for organizing nonviolent resistance campaigns. However, Abu Rahmah’s case is an example of the excesses and authoritarianism of an occupation regime, one that suffers declining political support and increasing international ostracism.

The occupation is so rooted in violence and coercion that its only answer in the face of nonviolence is more of the same repression that inspires the protests. Because Israel’s occupation runs on force, it cannot distinguish physical and ideational threats by criminalizing them both. Its legal system punishes both through detentions, stripping what few freedoms there are, and through programs of state-sanctioned violence. Knowing that nonviolence has a powerful potential to politically shatter the occupation, the authorities see a need to punish it ruthlessly.

The ideological aims of occupation and settler-colonialism are embedded in this legal administration, making the system morally bankrupt.

For more information on Abu Rahmah, see the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee’s website.

Full text.

Beyond violence and nonviolence

jj July 21st, 2010

Ramzy Baroud, Counterpunch.org, July 16, 2010
Resistance is not a band of armed men hell-bent on wreaking havoc. It is not a cell of terrorists scheming ways to detonate buildings.

True resistance is a culture.

It is a collective retort to oppression.

Understanding the real nature of resistance, however, is not easy. No newsbyte could be thorough enough to explain why people, as a people, resist. Even if such an arduous task was possible, the news might not want to convey it, as it would directly clash with mainstream interpretations of violence and non-violent resistance. The Afghanistan story must remain committed to the same language: al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Lebanon must be represented in terms of a menacing Iran-backed Hizbullah. Palestine’s Hamas must be forever shown as a militant group sworn to the destruction of the Jewish state. Any attempt at offering an alternative reading is tantamount to sympathizing with terrorists and justifying violence.

The deliberate conflation and misuse of terminology has made it almost impossible to understand, and thus to actually resolve bloody conflicts.

Even those who purport to sympathize with resisting nations often contribute to the confusion. Activists from Western countries tend to follow an academic comprehension of what is happening in Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon, and Afghanistan. Thus certain ideas are perpetuated: suicide bombings bad, non-violent resistance good; Hamas rockets bad, slingshots good; armed resistance bad, vigils in front of Red Cross offices good. Many activists will quote Martin Luther King Jr., but not Malcolm X. They will infuse a selective understanding of Gandhi, but never of Guevara. This supposedly ‘strategic’ discourse has robbed many of what could be a precious understanding of resistance – as both concept and culture.

Between the reductionst mainstream understanding of resistance as violent and terrorist and the ‘alternative’ defacing of an inspiring and compelling cultural experience, resistance as a culture is lost. The two overriding definitions offer no more than narrow depictions. Both render those attempting to relay the viewpoint of the resisting culture as almost always on the defensive. Thus we repeatedly hear the same statements: no, we are not terrorists; no, we are not violent, we actually have a rich culture of non-violent resistance; no, Hamas is not affiliated with al-Qaeda; no, Hizbullah is not an Iranian agent. Ironically, Israeli writers, intellectuals and academicians own up to much less than their Palestinian counterparts, although the former tend to defend aggression and the latter defend, or at least try to explain their resistance to aggression. Also ironic is the fact that instead of seeking to understand why people resist, many wish to debate about how to suppress their resistance.

By resistance as a culture, I am referencing Edward Said’s elucidation of “culture (as) a way of fighting against extinction and obliteration.” When cultures resist, they don’t scheme and play politics. Nor do they sadistically brutalize. Their decisions as to whether to engage in armed struggle or to employ non-violent methods, whether to target civilians or not, whether to conspire with foreign elements or not are all purely strategic. They are hardly of direct relevance to the concept or resistance itself. Mixing between the two suggests is manipulative or plain ignorant.

If resistance is “the action of opposing something that you disapprove or disagree with”, then a culture of resistance is what occurs when an entire culture reaches this collective decision to oppose that disagreeable element – often a foreign occupation. The decision is not a calculated one. It is engendered through a long process in which self-awareness, self-assertion, tradition, collective experiences, symbols and many more factors interact in specific ways. This might be new to the wealth of that culture’s past experiences, but it is very much an internal process.

It’s almost like a chemical reaction, but even more complex since it isn’t always easy to separate its elements. Thus it is also not easy to fully comprehend, and, in the case of an invading army, it is not easily suppressed. This is how I tried to explain the first Palestinian uprising of 1987, which I lived in its entirely in Gaza:

“It’s not easy to isolate specific dates and events that spark popular revolutions. Genuine collective rebellion cannot be rationalized though a coherent line of logic that elapses time and space; its rather a culmination of experiences that unite the individual to the collective, their conscious and subconscious, their relationships with their immediate surroundings and with that which is not so immediate, all colliding and exploding into a fury that cannot be suppressed.” (My Father Was A Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story)

Foreign occupiers tend to fight popular resistance through several means. One includes a varied amount of violence aiming to disorient, destroy and rebuild a nation to any desired image (read Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine). Another strategy is to weaken the very components that give a culture its unique identity and inner strengths – and thus defuse the culture’s ability to resist. The former requires firepower, while the latter can be achieved through soft means of control. Many ‘third world’ nations that boast of their sovereignty and independence might in fact be very much occupied, but due to their fragmented and overpowered cultures – through globalization, for example – they are unable to comprehend the extent of their tragedy and dependency. Others, who might effectively be occupied, often possess a culture of resistance that makes it impossible for their occupiers to achieve any of their desired objectives.

In Gaza, Palestine, while the media speaks endlessly of rockets and Israeli security, and debates who is really responsible for holding Palestinians in the strip hostage, no heed is paid to the little children living in tents by the ruins of homes they lost in the latest Israeli onslaught. These kids participate in the same culture of resistance that Gaza has witnessed over the course of six decades. In their notebooks they draw fighters with guns, kids with slingshots, women with flags, as well as menacing Israeli tanks and warplanes, graves dotted with the word ‘martyr’, and destroyed homes. Throughout, the word ‘victory’ is persistently used.

When I was in Iraq, I witnessed a local version of these kids’ drawings. And while I have yet to see Afghani children’s scrapbooks, I can easily imagine their content too.

Ramzy Baroud is editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers and journals worldwide. His latest book is The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle (Pluto Press, London). His newbook is, “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London).

Guerilla

Lucinda Andersson March 1st, 2010

Guerilla is a Spanish word, meaning small war, which has its origin in the Spanish resistance to the French occupation during the Napoleonic wars, guerrilla warfare, as a method should be considered as old as other methods of warfare. Guerrilla warfare is a resistance tactic where small armed groups attacks a militarily, and in numbers of combatants, superior enemy. Since the guerrillas are inferior the element of surprise becomes crucial. One avoids direct confrontation with the main forces, instead one use the tactic of attacking the enemy at the place and time when it is at its weakest. The guerrillas have often their bases in rural areas where it can rely on the local peoples support and the hard terrain to remain protected from attacks. To cause further confusion and complication to the enemy the guerillas usually remain in small scattered groups, until they become sufficiently numerous and militarily strong enough to win a complete war against the enemy by regular warfare.

Guerrilla warfare is used by resistance movements against their own government, or against an occupying power. There are also historical examples where the tactics of guerilla warfare has been used in war between states, where its function is to fight the enemy behind their own lines by creating chaos and confusion.

In modern times, guerrilla warfare has gained a central role in the revolutionary theory. The guerilla warfare as an ideology was developed by Mao Zedong, Ernesto “Che” Guevara, and Vo Nguyen Giap among others, who all believed that guerrilla warfare was by far the most effective strategy for bringing about a revolution. China, Cuba, Nicaragua, Algeria and Vietnam are examples of countries where guerrilla warfare have been proved successful.

The guerrilla’s biggest problem occurs when the revolution is completed and the guerrilla leaders are finally the ones who own the power. History has shown how many liberation movements have gone from being the liberators of the people to being the oppressors of the people. As an example, one might use the Maoist Liberation Movement in China, which later came to power as China’s Communist Party and that of many would be described as one of the most oppressive regimes in modern times.

In Mexico, a post-modern guerilla is emerging; the Zapatistas. Their tactics differ extensively from the ones of previous guerillas by their different view on violence. They have chosen not to use offensive tactics, but to only use their weapons in self-defense, if they would be attacked. Is it possible to call the Zapatistas a guerrilla movement? If the answer is yes, it will open up for an update of the guerrilla concept, wich will bring the guerrillas into a new era.

References

Lyth, Einar (2010-02-24), Gerillakrigföring, http://www.ne.se/school/lang/gerillakrigf% C3% B6ring, National Encyclopedia online edition (Swedish)

Peralta, Amanda (2009), Våldsamt Motstånd i Latin America, 1950-2000, chap. 4, Lily and Vinthagen (eds.), Liber AB

Why do certain attempts of “people power” revolutions fail?

Stellan Vinthagen December 19th, 2009

We have seen many political revolutions the last decades. According to many researchers there are some 30-40 succesful revolutions the last 30 years. For example the overthrough of Milosovic in Serbia, the breakdown of apartheid in South Africa after a massive international and domestic anti-apartheid movement did make the country impossible to govern, and we have seen several cases in the former Eastern Europe in 1989-1990, e.g. Poland and East Germany. And the last couple of years we have seen several similar cases as in Georgia and Ukraine.

But we have also seen a number of serious attempts of similar strategies: popular demonstrations, general strikes, boycott and massive civil disobedience – but with a failure to produce a revolutionary change. E.g. in Burma 1988 and 2007; in Palestine during the late 1980s in the “first intifada”; in China at the Tianamen Square 1989; in Iran this summer and in Belarus during the last election. What do these cases have in common that makes them fail? Or are they all unique cases with special reasons for the failure (so far) in creating a strong enough “people power” that forces the regime to change?

Since this is something we are looking at in our Nordic Nonviolence Study Group, we would be happy if there are any suggestions of literature, factors, processes, or other helpful ideas of how to understand these cases.

Resistance at the Climate Summit in Copenhagen Dec 2010

Stellan Vinthagen December 11th, 2009

During the coming days, from Saturday until the end of next week, there will be several demonstrations, civil disobedience actions and other forms of resistance in Copenhagen at the COP-15 Climate Summit. Major demonstrations are expected, a blockade of the harbor of Copenhagen is happening on Sunday and is organized by Climate Justice Action. On Wednesday next week there will be thousands who will do civil disobedience and try to break into the summit of the politicians and create a “Peoples’ Summit”. And, like other such summit protests against G8 or WTO there will for sure be riots.

On Sunday there will also be a uniqe “Academic Conference Blockade”. An academic conference in which researchers, lectureres and other academics will present research papers on climate issues while simultanously doing civil disobedience and blockade in the harbor, stoping climate destructive activity and thus, taking their responsibility for their academic analysises of the need to act and stop climate change. It is theory and practice combined, a form of “engaged academia”. At this conference blockade I will present a paper with the title: “A Proposal of a ‘Panel on Climate Justice’: 7 theses and the ‘Pope Model’”

The police are mobilized from all over Denmark and new legal measures are used creating virtually a state of emergency in Copenhagen, as well as special jails for protesters in what is called a “Climate Guantanamo”.

Reports will be given here on the blog as soon as we have interesting materials to reveal about the ongoing mobilization of a new global movement: the Climate Justice Movement.

Palestinian resistance to the separation wall, and the repression

Stellan Vinthagen December 6th, 2009

A report with over 100 pages has been released, documenting the development of Palestinian (mainly nonviolent) resistance to the (illegal, according to the International Court of Justice) separation wall. The report document the resistance being done mainly by a number of Palestinian border villages (e.g. Nilin and Bilin) and the repression against the resistance.

The report was published in July 2009 and is now online on the website of the Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign, with a summary and in full, possible to download.

Clashes as Israel shuts off al-Aqsa

jj October 4th, 2009

Al Jazeera reports that the tension in Jerusalem is growing.

IOF against a sit-in

Israeli security forces have closed off the al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jersualem as more than 200 Palestinians stage a sit-in at the site.

Sporadic clashes broke out on Sunday as military and police checkpoints were set up around the site, known as the Haram al-Sharif to Muslims and the Temple Mount to Jews.

At least seven people were wounded and seven arrested as clashes broke out at the Lion’s Gate entrance to the Old City of Jerusalem.

Al Jazeera’s Sherine Tadros, reporting from Jerusalem, said that the mosque was being protected by worshippers who wanted to stop Jewish hardliners from entering the compound.
“They are very keen that what happened in Hebron, where hardliners did in fact storm and take over a mosque there, doesn’t happen here in this very holy site,” she said.

She said that there was a lot of tension in the city because of the standoff.

“It could, of course, boil over if we hear of clashes between the police and those at the sit-in at the al-Aqsa compound,” she said.

Palestinian officials told Al Jazeera that Muslim worshippers entered the mosque late on Saturday to prevent a repeat of last Sunday’s clashes in the area.

In that incident, at least 13 Palestinians were injured and seven detained when fighting broke when Israeli Jews apparently attempted to enter the mosque.

Police fired tear gas and stun grenades at hundreds of Palestinians, while stones, chairs and other objects were reportedly thrown.

Israeli version

Describing the latest clashes, Shmuel Ben-Ruby, the Israeli police spokesman for Jerusalem, said that about 150 demonstrators were dispersed from one area near the al-Aqsa compound on Sunday, but unrest was continuing in nearby East Jerusalem.

He said some had thrown bottles and rocks.

Micky Rosenfeld, another Israeli police spokesman, confirmed that the compound had been “shut to visitors” this week.

He said that Israeli authorities had also detained Khatem Abdel Khader, an adviser to the Palestinian prime minister on Jerusalem affairs, on suspicion he was trying to incite protests at the site.

Israeli security forces have said that the restrictions will stay in place until the Palestinian protesters turn themselves to authorities.

Israel captured and annexed the Old City with its holy sites, along with the rest of Arab East Jerusalem and the West Bank, in the war of 1967.

The Resistance of the Monks in Burma

jj September 28th, 2009

After the Burmese military government’s brutal crackdown on Buddhist monks and other peaceful protestors in September 2007, the constant refrain was, “What happened to the monks?” The report “The Resistance of the Monks” attempts to answer that question within the context of the long history of political activism of the Sangha, the Buddhist monkhood, in Burma. It tells the story of many monks who were arrested, threatened, beaten, and imprisoned. It is a sad and disturbing story, but one that exemplifies the harsh rule of Burma’s military government as it clings to power through violence, fear, and repression.

The report provides an overview of the history of Buddhist activism in Burma since colonial times, the role of monks in the 1962 and 1974 anti-government demonstrations and the 1988 nationwide uprising. It looks at the key role monks played in the 2007 demonstrations, and in coordinating relief services in Burma following Cyclone Nargis in 2008.

Utilizing dozens of interviews with Buddhist monks inside Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka and in exile in the West, The Resistance of the Monks tells the story of the pivotal role played by monks as social mediators, as an important social safety net for Burmese people as poverty has grown under military rule, and as a key barometer of basic freedoms in Burmese society ahead of scheduled elections in 2010. You can download the full report here.

Free Gaza Movement’s Ship Threatened by Israeli Navy

Stellan Vinthagen June 30th, 2009

The humanitarian Free Gaza ship “Spirit of Humanity” is trying to give aid to the people in Gaza. The passengers are internationals who are concerned about the politically created humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the continuing blockade by Israel which hinders aid to come through.The idea of Free Gaza is to (1) bring humanitarian aid by people-to-people assistance, (2) show international solidarity, and (3) make peaceful resistance to the illegal blockade.

This is the 8th ship to sail to Gaza. The last one in December was violently stopped by the Israeli Navy.

They are right now being threatened by violence from the Israeli Navy, despite being unarmed, sailing in international waters and being protected by international law. Show your concern and protest to Israel. Follow the drama almost in real time at http://www.freegaza.org/.

I think this type of resistance is also interesting in a theoretical sense. It combines humanitarian assistance with nonviolent resistance in a way that merit it to be called a form of “constructive resistance”.

Iran and the need for nuanced views

jj June 25th, 2009

Steve Weissman is one of a few that has written very good comments on the discussion on Iran, US governmental involvment, the effect of NV, hidden agendas, and the problem with simplified answers. Ackerman is one of those who for many years now have financed research, training and dissemination of NV means. In an article in IHT from January Ackerkman and Ahmadi presented their views and predictions. Weissman commenting on that one is helping us with a more nuanced view of these important but difficult questions.

Read and enjoy.

Iran: Non-Violence 101

by Steve Weissman,
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Peter Ackerman and Ramin Ahmadi called the revolution on January 4, 2006, in an article in the International Herald Tribune with the prophetic title “Iran’s Future? Watch the Streets.”

“Against all odds, nonviolent tactics such as protests and strikes have gradually become common in Iran’s domestic political scene,” they wrote. “Student activists have frequently resorted to, and the violent response of the regime and repeated attacks of the paramilitaries have not succeeded in silencing them.”

Iran’s medical professionals, teachers, workers, bus drivers and women were also using non-violent tactics such as protests, industrial action, and hunger strikes in their fight for equal rights and civil liberties, the authors reported.

These “uncoordinated actions” had created “a grass-roots movement … waiting to be roused,” urged Ackerman and Ahmadi. But, “its cadres so far lack a clear strategic vision and steady leadership.”

Where would the Iranians find this vision and leadership?

“Nongovernmental organizations around the world should expand their efforts to assist Iranian civil society, women’s groups, unions and journalists,” the authors wrote. But, they left out a salient fact. In a chilling mix of Mahatma Gandhi and James Bond, Ackerman and Ahmadi themselves were already working with the United States government to engineer regime change in Iran.

A Wall Street whiz kid who made his fortune in leveraged buy-outs, the billionaire Ackerman was – and is – chair of Freedom House, a hot-bed of neo-con support for American intervention just about everywhere. In this pursuit, he has promoted the use of non-violent civil disobedience in American-backed “color revolutions” from Serbia to the Ukraine, Georgia, and Venezuela, where it failed.

Ahmadi teaches medicine at Yale and co-founded the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, using initial grants of $1.6 million in 2004 from the US Department of State, according to The New York Times. Washington reportedly continued its open-handed support in succeeding years, allowing the center to publicize the abuses of the Ayatollahs in English and Farsi.

Ahmadi and the center also ran regular workshops for Iranians on non-violent civil disobedience. These were in Dubai, across the straits from Iran. Some of the sessions operated under the name Iranian Center for Applied Nonviolence and included a session on popular revolts around the world, especially the “color revolutions.”

According to The Times, at least two members of the Serbian youth movement Otpor participated, as did the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict, which Peter Ackerman founded and chaired. The sessions taught the Iranian participants how to use Hushmail, an encrypted e-mail account, and Martus software to upload information about human rights abuses without leaving any trace on the originating computer.

“We were certain that we would have trouble once we went back to Tehran,” said one of the Iranians. “This was like a James Bond camp for revolutionaries.”

No one should question the value of non-violent civil disobedience for those who would bring down an unpopular government. Nor does the American training deny the very real grievances felt by the millions of Iranians who have taken to the streets – or by the lesser numbers of middle-class women who banged pots and pans as part of earlier CIA destabilization programs in Brazil and Chile. Even more important, no one should doubt the courage and commitment of anyone who would stand up against the Ayatollahs and their repressive state power.

But the presence of American involvement adds several dynamics of its own, which Ackerman and Ahmadi failed to explain to their Iranian trainees.

First, the Americans decide where to put their efforts – and when to stop them. Washington does not fund or provide training and technology for non-violent revolutions against regimes it backs, as in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel or Colombia.

Second, the American meddling makes it easier for the Ayatollahs to build support within their own ranks and among a large majority of the population for whatever repressive measures they finally decide to take.

Third, the non-violent participants know nothing of other moves that the dark side of the American government might be making at the same time, whether staging acts of provocation, or supporting terrorist activities by breakaway groups such as the Baluchi Jundallah. Nor do the vast majority of participants know that American intelligence regularly uses training sessions of all kinds to recruit individual agents.

Fourth, the Iranian activists want to win. At least some in the America government might prefer to provoke a brutal defeat, a Tiananmen Square, to further isolate Iran and bring pressure within the Obama administration for a military response to the Iranian nuclear program.

Fifth, non-violent tactics and organizational discipline offer ways to win the support of soldiers and police officers, isolate would-be provocateurs, and avoid giving the government any easy excuse to bang heads and kill people. The same techniques also give the organizers ways to turn off the protest, as appears to have happened during the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.

One other dynamic has more lasting effects. During the Cold War, the CIA funded and manipulated a number of liberal and social democratic intellectuals, labor unions, civil society groups and publications. The CIA-run Congress for Cultural Freedom and its vast network were perhaps the best known. When journalists at Ramparts and elsewhere exposed the CIA’s hand, many of these individuals and groups became discredited for having allowed Cold Warriors and dirty tricksters to use them.

Washington’s promotion of non-violent resistance in other countries is already casting suspicion on a number of activists and thinkers who, wittingly or not, have allowed themselves to become pawns in open – and covert – programs to “promote democracy.” Non-violent activists everywhere need to draw a clear line against cooperating with governments of any stripe in this foreign meddling.

*************

A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France.

The Iranian Uprising is Home Grown, and Must Stay That Way

Stellan Vinthagen June 23rd, 2009

This article was Published on Friday, June 19, 2009 by CommonDreams.org and written by the California Professor and well-recognized Middle-East expert Stephen Zunes

It is a very interesting article and I have re-posted the beginning of the article below, but if you want to read the whole article you find it on CommonDreams: article link.

THE BEGINNING OF THE ARTICLE BY Prof. Zunes:

The growing nonviolent insurrection in Iran against the efforts by the ruling clerics to return the ultra-conservative and increasingly autocratic incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinjead to power is growing.  Whatever the outcome, it represents an exciting and massive outpouring of Iranian civil society for a more open and pluralistic society.

Ironically, defenders of Ahmadinejad’s repression are trying to blame everyone from the U.S. government to nonviolent theorist Gene Sharp to various small NGOs engaged in educational efforts on strategic nonviolent action as somehow being responsible for the popular uprising in Iran.  It appears to be based upon the rather bizarre assumption that millions of Iranians would somehow be willing to pour out onto the streets in the face of violent repression by state security forces only because they have been directed to do so by people from an imperialist power which overthrew their last democratic government and subsequently propped up the tyrannical regime they installed in its place for the next quarter century.

Even putting aside the bizarre spectacle of self-proclaimed “leftists” coming to the defense of a right-wing fundamentalist autocratic like Ahmadinejad, this claim ignores several key factors:

1) Neo-conservatives and other American hawks were hoping for a victory by the hard-line incumbent to justify their opposition to President Barack Obama’s tentative steps at rapprochement with the Islamic Republic.

2) Opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and the vast majority of his supporters are strongly nationalist, anti-American, anti-imperialist, and would neither desire nor accept U.S. support.

3) There has been a longstanding Iranian tradition of such largely nonviolent civil insurrections against imperialist powers and autocratic rulers and no outside power is needed to convince the Iranian people to rebel.

Madagascar: Radio station accused of “inciting civil disobedience and undermining public confidence in institutions.”

jj May 10th, 2009

Since the War Tribunal on Rwanda accused radio stations for war crimes the role of media in conflicts are discussed more than ever. States are using the opportunities to block oppositional voices all over the world. Here is a recent case from Madagascar:

Detained Radio Mada Reporter is Charged And Transferred to Prison

7 May 2009

press release from Reporters Without Borders:

Reporters Without Borders is alarmed by today’s decision to keep Radio Mada sports reporter Evariste Ramanantsoavina in detention and charge him with “inciting revolt against the republic’s institutions,” defamation and disseminating false information. He was arrested on 5 May and forced to reveal the location from which the radio was broadcasting in defiance of a closure order.

“Even if one could understand why the authorities wanted to prevent a radio station from continuing to broadcast clandestinely in violation of an official ban, the way they singled out one of its journalists and the manner of his arrest are shocking and incomprehensible,” Reporters Without Borders said, calling for Ramanantsoavina’s immediate release.

Ramanantsoavina was taken this evening to the prosecutor’s office in Antananarivo, where he was formally charged and an order was issued transferring him to prison. He will now have to spend the weekend in prison pending a trial hearing on 11 May.

He was arrested at his home at 5 a.m. on 5 May by masked soldiers as his daughters looked on, and was taken to the National Mixed Committee for Investigations (CNME), which is located in the suburb of Ambohibao, in premises that used to be the headquarters of the former domestic intelligence service, the DGID.

There he was made to reveal the secret location from which Radio Mada, which supports the exiled former president, Marc Ravalomanana, has been broadcasting since the change of government. Soldiers then went to the location, dismantled its transmitter and seized equipment under communication ministry closure order 01/096mcc of 27 April accusing the station of “inciting civil disobedience and undermining public confidence in institutions.”

The decision to bring charges against Ramanantsoavina contradicted an initial statement by communication ministry secretary-general Charles-Aimé Randriamorasata that the authorities had arrested him simply to find out where Radio Mada was broadcasting from.

His arrest just 48 hours after World Press Freedom Day stunned journalists in Madagascar and was immediately condemned by the Order of Madagascan Journalists, which called for his unconditional release.

Aware that Madagascar is currently in a difficult period that has given rise to cases of unprofessional behaviour by some news media, Reporters Without Borders reiterates its call to all the country’s journalists to provide responsible, objective news coverage and not take sides in the ongoing political power struggle.

Reporters Without Borders defends imprisoned journalists and press freedom throughout the world. It has nine national sections (Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland). It has representatives in Bangkok, London, New York, Tokyo and Washington. And it has more than 120 correspondents worldwide.

International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest, 1500 to the Present

jj December 9th, 2008

A new impressive Encyclopedia is soon out. In eight volumes the editor Immanuel Ness has collected articles on Revolutions and Protests the last 500 years. This work is a must for all institutions and researchers with focus on resistance, history, social movements, and/or democracy. The books will be presented and discussed at one of the Resistance Studies Seminars in 2009.

If you want to check it out take a look here: http://www.revolutionprotestencyclopedia.com/

Take Action! 83 Ways to Change the World!

Stellan Vinthagen January 31st, 2008

The Museum of World Culture in Gothenburg recently started an exhibition on activism, displaying various forms of activism which people around in the world use in order to change their worlds. 83 different action forms are shown: e.g. violent rebellion, civil disobedience, clown armies, guerilla-gardening, knitting, seed-banks, remaking of IKEA-furniture, etc.

Confrontations with power relations as well as creative re-making of established structures and systems for own purposes (DIY, i.e. do it yourself or direct action) are part of the approaches. And much more…

The exhibition is a result of collaboration between a number of researchers within a research project around “Underground”, funded by Museion, Gothenburg University and the Museum of World Culture. Major parts of the actions displayed are building on the work by Karl PalmÃ¥s & Otto von Busch (on Hacktivism) and Stellan Vinthagen (on Political Undergrounds).

The exhibition goes on for 1,5 years and integrates with community events by various activist groups and open lectures on the theme of resistance and activism. Go and see it! Tell others about it!

The Ungdomshuset movement: squatting in Denmark.

Tommy October 19th, 2007

The eviction of the Ungdomshuset, “house of the young”, on the first of March 2007 in Copenhagen was dramatic and was even aided by the military who flew the helicopter that deployed special police forces on the rooftop. The police breaks into the house and starts attacking the people inside and shoot teargas, the response by the around 30 people inside being to defend themselves and their.
In the same moment as the eviction starts, many hundreds or thousands of sms are sent to people in Denmark, but also people in Germany, Sweden and Norway and the game is on. The following three days see demonstrations with thousands of people in the streets, massive rioting to try to retake the house. After three days the house was destroyed and the rioting ceased.
Since March, there have been numerous occupations of houses but all of them have been evicted. The struggle has continued with different actions (during two months one every day), occasionally interrupted by eruptions of more intense fighting. Saturday the first of September marked six months since the eviction and Copenhagen saw once again widespread rioting and demonstrations with around 1000-2000 persons. Almost a year before the eviction there were protests as well as riots which started to build a tension, to make a ground for a massive and militant mobilisation.
So what was Ungdomshuset? It was a social center located centrally in the Danish capital Copenhagen, and it existed there for during 24 years. It is a kind of legal squat that was created in 1982 and that grew out of the radical squatters movement in Denmark, “the BZ”: It came into existence after several occupations in the city, after which this particular house could be kept. The house was self-organised by the squatters movement, and later on and in some cases even by the children of the original squatters.
The house used to be used by the workers movement since a long time back and it has been visited by both Lenin and Rosa Luxemburg. The international women’s day, the 8th of March, was created in the house in 1910 during the second international women’s congress, which the German socialist Clara Zetkin took part in. The date of 8th of March was the day that the worker women of Russia went on strike in 1917 for bread and freedom, and helped to displace the tsar. So it has a long and “grand” history even internationally.
The house was sold to a Christian sect, which decided to tear down the house.

What is it about, according to the movement?
The formal demand is for a new house (without paying for it, of course) that is equal to the old one both in location and in size, and for this, thousands of people are willing to fight. The cost caused by the struggle is calculated to be no less than 15 million Euros, that´s ten times the cost of giving a new house. More than half of the population of Copenhagen supported at one point a political solution: that a new house should be given by the city (the support from people in the city may be less today).
The conflict is portrayed by the movement as being between the multitude of people in the city, and their needs, against the power of the state, against the incapacity of this society to fulfil what is desired by them.
Who participates?
From what I saw from the demonstrations the age and background of people taking part is mixed, especially on the big and mainly peaceful ones. Of course you have the punk-a-chien/punk-with-dog who seems to be about as common in the movement in Denmark as they are in Germany. Young people, a part of them immigrants, participated in the rioting (hard to know what generation).
The union of the construction workers managed to delay the tearing down of the house by claiming that it was not safe. This turned out to be true in a specific way when some company that helped tear down the house got some of their cars burned later on. The firms that worked on the building site concealed the plates and names on their equipment and cars in a vain attempt to prevent this from happening, and the workers at the site wore black masks to conceal their identity…
The people from Christiania are also very much present with their own big, visible demonstrations, and quite a lot of people have been crossing the borders to join in rioting and protest.
To say something of the size of the movement: One month after the eviction, a demonstration with 10 000 participants was held, in support of Christiania and Ungdomshuset. During the first three days just after the eviction, somewhere between 2000 and 6000 were on the streets each day.

What is Christiania?
It was a squatted area in the early seventies located centrally in Copenhagen. The area was created by the “flower children” of the sixties. It has a history of militancy but has also been criticized for harbouring a lot of middle class people that just want to live in this “cosy” part of town. During riots after the eviction Christiania was barricaded and cars were burned in the area, and there have also been riots as well as peaceful protests against the tearing down of an old house in Christiania where homeless people live. It gives a taste of the militancy that existed recently in Copenhagen. The solidarity between the Ungdomshuset and Christiania goes a long way back. We might see struggle in Christiania in response to the governments efforts to “normalise” the area, a process which may take years. On the other hand, Christiania seems to be a lot more integrated in the state than Ungdomshuset: it is involved in a legal contract with the state and it does not seem to facilitate the same population… If a struggle is to erupt over Christiania is is certain that it will be supported by the same people that have been taking active part in the Ungdomshuset movement.

What about the politicians?
Support has been coming from socialist politicians, by means of using their position to speak in favour of the demand. At present, Copenhagen is run by a social democratic mayor who refuses, together with more right wing parties, to give a new house to the young.
In the course of the struggle criticism has been directed not only towards the Christian sect that bought and tore down the old house, but also and especially especially against the politicians. Parties to the left have given some support but they are not the movement in the streets: by judging of it´s actions, it seems to be controlled by a more radical and street smart crew.

What about repression?
The police started to use teargas even before the eviction and the normal is now to use it. During the first three days after the eviction 850 people were arrested and many are facing jail time. In connection to the non-violent action day for a new house the police used an offensive strategy, which included a lot of teargas and clubs against non-violent protestors, and arrested over 400 people, the greatest number persons arrested at one time in Danish history.
Very young people have been kept in jail for exceptionally long periods of time. The state have also used other tactics such as using the schools in Copenhagen as places where they spread propaganda and try to warn the young not to participate in demonstrations. On Norrebro, where Ungdomshuset once existed, the police are doing preventive searches on people, and all the fighting in the area have been enough reason for some people to call it a war zone. The Danish police use of force has in fact been criticized by the UN.
This development is accompanied by an escalation in the use of force against the police, and by an increased tendency towards attacking private property. Molotov cocktails have been used on several occasions, something which was practically non-existent in Denmark before this, and stores have been looted on occasion.

What are the limits of this particular movement, and what are its strengths?
One major problem has to do with the demands: The formal demand is for a new house, and this seems reasonable in itself, but not by itself; that this is the only demand. What happens if they will get a new house, will the movement stop?
The concrete demand, in this case for a new house is important for uniting different groups, and one can only hope that all these people can continue their activity in a different way when or if a house is won; that is something that depends on their ability to overcome this very modest demand. How exactly this could materialise is hard for me to say though…
A great number of experienced activists from the Danish squatters’ movement has certainly helped the movement, and so have the activity of all kinds of people who participate in their own ways: There have been numerous groups of feminists, parents, punks, the people living in Christiania, who contribute to the struggle. The ones who cannot go out in the streets can, for example, fight repression.
The struggle seems to be, all in all, not relying on the support of politicians; the strength of the movement is sustained through autonomous activity. Of course there are the demand sent to the politicians to give away a house, but the movement is not afraid of simply trying to take what they want, something that is shown, for example, by the many (failed) squats made in the previous six months.
The fact that Ungdomshuset existed for so long in the middle of the city has rooted it in the minds of many people: it has been a real meeting place for many young who went there for concerts and other activities, and it has been a place where political activity has been planned.
On the other hand, some of the people taking part the fight seem not to have any real connection to the house. Ties can hopefully be made between groups of people that usually do not meet so frequently.
Internationally, this fight has received a lot of attention in the media and has also received a lot of support from other countries, especially Germany and the Nordic countries. All over Europe squatting is a phenomenon that is under threat and the squatters scene does not look the same as it used to: many houses have been evicted over the years.
A movement against the squatters have been coming to life in the area of Norrebro during the summer. They had months to organise, and they seem to protest against the violence and disturbances in the area caused by the protestors.
The bigger picture is that the Danish economy is experiencing a boom. There have been a number of successful strikes about wages and struggles against worsened conditions in the childcare system. In this context, it may seem strange that the city of Copenhagen could not give even an empty house to the young. The eviction issue has been very present in the media and in the minds of many Danes. It has become highly symbolic. It is not only a struggle over a house more or less, this struggle determines the perceived possibility of other struggles: It is certainly of importance for the people in power to not give in to the demands, because this could open the eyes of many others.

What now?
The negotiations between the movement and the local politicians seem to have started taking more serious and concrete form, after a day of mass non-violent action 6th of October where a thousand or two thousands of people tried to take a new house (inspired tactically by the recent G8-actions in Germany). It may be that the local politicians feel that they could get into negotiations with their pride intact (they do not negotiate with “violent troublemakers”).

To see videos of the struggle, go to youtube.com and search for Ungdomshuset. For English updates directly from the movement, see: www.ungdomshuset.dk

Exploring “Low level terrorism”

Stellan Vinthagen July 5th, 2007

I am writing on a paper that explores current state security tendency to label ordinary protests and opposition as “low level terrorism” or social movements as “terrorist environments” and the political and democratic consequences of such politics of fear. The judicial and political lack of clearness of what exactly constitutes “terrorism” enables e.g. FBI to redefine a wide spectra of activities, earlier understood as conventional or criminal and violent opposition, as e.g. those of Animal Rights or autonomous/Black Bloc groups, as terrorism, or linked to (low level) terrorism.

This paper tries to answer some of the most pressing questions connected to this new phenomenon: What are the criteria and logic for such labeling and what groups are targeted, and, most importantly, what political and democratic consequences does it have, and lastly, what can movements do to defend public space?

Through an international survey of security agencies and states and their policies towards oppositional politics ,this paper claims that in fact a decisive change occurred in the aftermath of Sept 11 2001. Increasingly semi-terrorist labels become a serious problem for various nonviolent radical activists. This is argued to be a serious democratic problem, limiting the public space of critical deliberation. Yet, this is a problem which social movements tries to deal with in different creative ways, ways which this article towards the end highlights and presents as a main defense of open democratic space.

So, in order to do this research I need your input. Any ideas/comments? Thanks!

Oaxaca: “mega-march” commemorates start of uprising

jj June 19th, 2007

The large scale protests in Oaxaca the last year is still going on.

In a “mega-march” extending more than 10 kilometres, thousands of teachers from the Section 22 union and their supporters in the Popular People’s Assembly of Oaxaca (APPO) marched through southern Mexico’s Oaxaca City June 14 to mark the first anniversary of the clash between police and striking teachers that sparked months of political unrest.

The marchers chanted “June 14-not forgotten, not forgiven!” and carried posters with the faces of imprisoned APPO leaders Flavio Sosa y César Mateos, two of the nine Oaxaca activists who remain behind bars. The march finally assembled in the city’s central square, where the initial clash took place one year ago, and which subsequently became the nerve centre of their movement. There a public meeting was held, presided over by Section 22 leader Ezequiel Rosales Carreño.

Smaller groups of protesters blockaded streets with rubble and commandeered buses-a tactic used during the 2006 protest, in which the plaza was seized and held for months. Most of the barricades erected at Thursday’s commemoration protest were removed after a few hours, however.

The protesters continued to demand the ouster of Oaxaca’s Gov. Ulises Ruiz, which became the central demand of the movement following the June 2006 violence.

More news and documentation: here in English and Spanish

Ethical problems in resisting the “human” robots

jj May 13th, 2007

Ethical problems in resisting the “human” robots

This text is relayed from my friend Tormod (tormod . otter (at) tidskriftenordobild . se

In danger of falling into the deep pit of awe in front of new technology I will try to say something about an important new factor in the high tech wars of the USA. The Washington Post tells a well written story about the soldiers best friends, the war bots of the Iraq war. The article begins with the touching story of a happy and excited engineer that sees his multilegged robot fight on against the mines, slowly losing one leg after another. When the robot crawls on to the last mine, with only one leg left, the engineer is more excited than ever. But the colonel overseeing the exercise has the exact opposite emotional reaction. He stops the test, calling it “inhumane”. He couldn’t stand watching the machine moving forward, busy getting crippled by mines.

The tales about squads in the American troops getting so attached to their robot servants that they name them, award them promotions and military degrees are growing by the day. The industry of creating robots not mainly for home purposes but increasingly for so called “government use” have golden days.

My questions are not mostly concerned with the threat of failing robots, going rogue or the interesting philosophical questions concerning who “really kills someone” when an autonomous robot kills people in Iraq. I am more concerned with the old, disturbing fact that the decision of what is humane or not, who is a human or not a human, a mere enemy and subhuman, always are twisted out of recognition in wars, whatever time or place. The even more disturbing fact here is that a dead thing, animated by simple algorithms, gets more concern than a human would have received in the same situation. What resistance is necessary to make a soldier understand the difference between a bot and a human? The easiest ideas might be the most difficult to practically comprehend.

Tormod

Next »