Just a quick note about the Nobel Peace Prize. Today they announced that the winner for the 2009 prize will be Barack Obama a president of the USA who has been in post for less than a year and was only in office for two months before he was nominated.

This is an interesting choice for the Nobel Committee, not mostly because he is so unproven. The committee has a history of awarding prizes soon after the event and has been criticized for acting too quickly and partisan.

I think that the comments in the Guardian today sum up some of the sentiment:

Michael Cox, a North America expert at the Chatham House thinktank, said: "It is difficult to see why it would be awarded to him at this stage in his presidency. There are problems in the Middle East and an ongoing war in Afghanistan. You could say it is a little bit premature. It is certainly a very interesting choice.

Time have even suggested that winning the prize may heart Obama burdening him in the years to come with an expectation that he can not, [or does not want to] achieve.

Looking forward to Obama in the next year has the committee spoken too soon. We are already starting to see how the US and other western states is using its power to manipulate the Climate Change Negotiations. John Vidal describes how these countries are ""fundamentally sabotage" the Kyoto protocol" in a statement from China and the G77 in Bangkok.

This is potentially very damaging, not only are we looking at the US taking the west off to separate negations which it can manipulate. The Obama administration is causing a schism between the West, led by the USA and the Global South led by China. This will do anything but increase world security.

But lets look at a more local level, because health care, social security in the USA is, in my view, just as important in creating culture of peace than a global politician gallivanting around the world espousing the virtues of the UN whilst sending his cronies to scupper international negotiations in Bangkok.

Here Obama seems to be trying to make headway, but the package which is slowly being riped to shreds the plans started out as less ambitions as Hillary Clinton's plans in the 90s when her husband was in power.

Now for all this, Obama has in the past done some inspirations things. In Chicago, his work on the ground (as we learnt in CR last week level 3 work) has made some real changes to communities and the lives of young and old people alike. This is the problem, the Nobel committee dont mention any of that work in thir citation but the international globe trotting.

The say that Obama is worthy for his commitment to the UN, for his passion to get people around the table and talk, effectively for being an effective statesman. So he manages to negation on level 1 well, not fantastically but well. Iran is still producing more nuclear fuel and potentially weapons, Israel and Palestine has moved forward but there is little sign of peace right now and as i said before China is still spitting feathers at the USA.

So all in all a strange and maybe regrettable choice - maybe lets hope I am wrong!

Labels: china, climate change, International Politics, Israel, Palestine, Peace Studies

On Monday 9th March about 40 Students gathered to hear Tamar Katz talk about her experiences being jailed for refusing to fight in the Israeli army. Tamar, a high school student, was drafted in to the army but told her story about how a group of school students and her joined a small but growing movement of conscientious objector in Israel.

Following massive demonstrations and a wave of student occupations against Israel’s war in Gaza, the University of Bradford Union, supported by Education not for Sale (a student anti-capitalist lobby group) joint up with other Unions and also Alliance of Workers liberty to host part of the national tour with Tamar, one of the Shministim, Israeli high school students jailed for refusing to fight in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Tamar said “I was 16 when the second war in Lebanon began and this made me re-consider the prospect of fighting in the IDF after I graduated from school. My family were “ordinary” — not political, and we did not talk about these things at home. I wanted to find out more about the political situation and to think through my ideas. I began to work for an organisation which ran educational initiatives in working-class neighbourhoods. This was my first time in a politicised environment. Through it I met many left wing people. I moved into a collective house and began to get involved with a group called New Profile (an anti-militaristic feminist organisation).

She spoke about her experience in jail, how her family reacted and the pace of change in Israeli. There was much debate about boycotts and their effectiveness and most people reported a successful event. Tamar talked about their work with other organisations such as Combatants for Peace

The Union, with the Peace Studies department is working to bring Bassam Aramin, Co-Founder of a joint Israeli-Palestinian organization, Combatants for Peace to Bradford in the next academic year. He has been accepted at the University to study a masters but needs the fund to come to the University. We will keep you updated with information and whether the University agrees to a fee waiver for Bassam.

Labels: Education Not for Sale, International Politics, Israel, Palestine, Peace Studies, UBU, Universy of Bradford, Universy of Bradford Union

Over the last few weeks, and going in to months now occupations about Gaza have been happening up and down the country. This amazing act of solidarity has seen almost 20 Universities occupied from Scotland to Brighton even spreading to New York.

The movement needed to come together - share ideas, and exchange views. That was what I thought Stop the War Coalition was hosting at their student meeting. Unfortunately that's not what some of the StWC comrades thought - to them it had been billed as an event to build StW groups on campus on the back of occupations.

At some points of the meeting this confusion was used to hijack all occupations to create a national StW committee. Whether this confusion was deliberately instigated or was just due to the mix of people at the meeting I will (for the sake of argument) take the latter.

Due to a reluctance of some occupations to join this committee and a number of people calling for a further discussion of how we build from the occupations, Sussex comrades lead the call for a further meeting. This was to discuss further building of the occupations network (in a loose way) and to this end I agree so with other ENS comrades backed the calls and helped instage a discussion at the end of the Conference only for it to be later hijacked by Revo and other factions.

We meet at ULU (the University of London Union) to further discuss what to do next. However the issues got inflated and confusion entailed.

I realise that the StW needed to consolidate its own networks and if only this had became clear at the conference then maybe we would not have needed this further discussion. I fully support that every campus should have an active Stop the War Group, and in the understanding agree that they need a national body/ committee elected by branches - this however had not been clear.

By the end of the side meting at ULU, I don't know if people were clearer or more confused by what had happened. Frustration as always at these meetings had grown and people wanted to
leave.

I have a lot of respect for comrades from all the divide. For example Rob Owen, although lambasted, often puts in valuable inputs, and although I disagree I think that without the factions in some sense we would be weaker.

With heat rising I don't think that other appreciated these "inputs"and a few started walking out - factions trying to get their own way, the meeting ended with a understanding that some organising needs to come out of the occupations (the same situation that we were in at the start !)

If the meeting will motivate people to go back and mobilise, if the meeting means that people communicate on the email list and we get moment for a national day of action on Palestine then it would al be worth it - if not it was just another factional bitching session.

Labels: education, Education Not for Sale, International Politics, National Union of Students, Palestine

Last night I want to the Topic Folk Club, the oldest surviving folk club in the world. It was a great night, as always, and enjoyable. I would recommend that anyone around on a Thursday head off to the IDL - Bradford Irish Club and enjoy the night.

At the night, John Waller sang a song in the intermission about Palestine, having lived in Lebanon only a few miles from a refuges camp in 1969, John had written the song then about how he saw the issue, and although trying to look at both sides, it was clear to him that there was a political perspective that had to be taken.

40 years on, and now 60 years since the start of the occupation, John sang that same song again, nothing had to be changed. The attacks, the deaths, the injustice - still rife.

Many people can see that what has been happening over the last 60 years isn't right and that it must end.

One state, two state or what ever is the academic question, what I clear to many, an especially to those who took part in the student occupation on Tuesday and Wednesday is that the killing must stop and we must show solidarity to those who are suffering, quite clearly the Palestinians.

Those who inflate the whole debate in to a Jew, Muslim, Christian conflict, are not only trying to use religion, race and racism to win the argument, they are mistake. This is not an issue of your background, but one of an occupier, an imperial force (IDF) and justice and peace.

Labels: International Politics, Palestine, Peace Studies, UBU, Universy of Bradford, Universy of Bradford Union

Yesterday after a peaceful demonstration outside the library and a walk to the Vice Chancellors office just under 100 students (see in the photo on the right) decided to occupy the University Boardroom.

This action was taken by the students after they felt that the University had not fulfilled the demands laid out both by the Union (UBU) and the same group the night before.

The demands (which can be seen on the bolg of the occupation) were given to the VC the day before.

During the day the University of Bradford Union officers supported the protesters but where unable/unwilling to lead any part of the demonstration. As an officer I felt that it was important that students themselves spoke with the VC and the University management.

I have always felt that my relationship with the VC and other managers is very good, and the stronger message of students speaking out against something came from them, and from their hearts.

The VC wasn't in at first, and the group spoke first with the Deputy VC and then later with the VC and Chair of the University Council together. The students where very acutely aware of the problems that where facing them in Gaza on the day that Israel had conducted further air strikes against Gaza.

I am very proud of students who take part in direct actions and feel that it is partly my duty to help and assist with this, however, where to the actions stop and the negations start.

The day went with meetings about the demands, refining them and making them better for the University. I was in and out talking to both "sides", and also keeping an eye on the open space.

After a few false starts the university management came to the table with what I would describe as a very good offer. I laid out to students what I thought about it - "if you care about Gaza, if you want to achieve change and keep a positive dialogue with he VC then this offer is good, my brain said accept it. If however, your purpose is different, is to show how long you can last, turn this space in to something different then then would be exciting and my heart says don't accept. If however you go with my heart, I think that we will be letting a great opportunity pass by to work positively with the VC"

The meeting voted by a majority vote to stay - ironically, many of the people that voted to stay then left and the others (bound by the later decision), who had now nothing on the tabled where forced to stay though the night so that they were able to start it all over again.

Bradford students are doing the right thing, but when does an occupation stop, when do we say ok, that's enough go home? I think that we are nearly there. Over the night a number of people worked on a new statement, trying to get some agreement and move closer to something that University could agree on. Lets hope that it all works out.

Labels: education, Palestine, Peace Studies, Universy of Bradford, Universy of Bradford Union