National Priorities Project (NPP) at the Institute for Policy Studies seeks to prioritize peace, shared prosperity, and economic security for all in our nation's decision making. We are the people's guide to the federal budget. In 2014, NPP was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of our pioneering work to track federal spending on the military and promote a U.S. federal budget that represents Americans' priorities, including funding for people's issues such as inequality, unemployment, education, health and the need to build a green economy. In 2017, we joined the non-profit Institute for Policy Studies as an independent project.
December 3 webinar hosted together with the Asia-Europe People's Forum a webinar on Military Spending & Global
(In)Security to discuss how current levels of military spending condition
our global emergencies. Speakers include: Michael T. Klare, Binalakshmi
Nepram, Tarja Cronberg and Walden Bello, and moderators will be Jordi Calvo
and Corazon Valdez Fabros.
The webinar coincides with the presentation of the book edited by GCOMS
coordinator Jordi Calvo "Military Spending and Global Security.
Humanitarian and Environmental Perspectives", published on
November 26 by Routledge. The book gives context to the discussion at
hand, reflecting on why people are not well served by nation-states when
they continuously seek to out-compete one another in the size and
destructive powers of their militaries. The webinar deals with the
scope of military spending around the world, while explaining how militarism
is linked with conflict and security threats, and how military spending
further prevent us from adequately dealing with global problems such as
climate change or the covid-19 pandemic.
This report focuses specifically on the military-oil industry relationship to reveal its role in climate breakdown. It argues that we must start to quantify, expose and act upon the climate burden put upon people and planet by the world’s big military spenders.
The Independent Experts’ Assessment on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Women and Women’s Role in Peace-Building (Progress of the World’s Women 2002, Vol. 1) (Assessment, 2002) - Resources - UNIFEM. Elisabeth Rehn, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Austria on Tuesday called for banning nuclear weapons because of their catastrophic humanitarian effects, an initiative it said now has the backing of 159 countries.
Aseistakieltäytyjäliitto julkaisee venäläisen aseistakieltäytyjäaktivistin kirjoituksen, jossa kerrotaan asevelvollisten käyttämisestä maan sotatoimissa Ukrainassa. Kirjoittaja esiintyy nimettömänä, sillä Venäjän käymän hyökkäyssodan vastustamisesta tai siitä objektiivisesti kertomisesta voi saada useiden vuosien mittaisen vankeusrangaistuksen.
The signatories of this Appeal demand that the governments of the world seriously address this neglected issue, and agree on a global plan for disarmament at the Rio Summit in June 2012.
Pacifists ought to enter more deeply into the aesthetical and ethical point of view of their opponents. Do that first in any controversy, says J. J. Chapman, then move the point, and your opponent will follow. So long as antimilitarists propose no substit
In 2014 the world's governments spent over USD 1700 billion on the military sector. This is money that could instead be spent on creating jobs for young people, feeding the hungry, protecting us all from the effects of climate change...
Useat suomalaisjärjestöt – Aseistakieltäytyjäliitto, Rauhanpuolustajat, Rauhanliitto, Sadankomitea, Tekniikka elämää palvelemaan, Kristillinen rauhanliike, Naiset rauhan puolesta, WILPF:n Suomen-osasto ja ajatuspaja Creatura – ovat allekirjoittajina mukana CEOBS:n (Conflict and Environment Observatory) Glasgow’n ilmastokokoukselle osoittamassa vetoomuksessa, joka vaatii sotilaspäästöjen vähentämistä. Vetoomuksen on allekirjoittanut 27.10. mennessä 188 järjestöä. Alla vetoomus suomennettuna.
Victoria Nuland played a significant role in the U.S. foreign policy, particularly concerning Russia, Ukraine, and the countries of the former Soviet Union. Nuland participated in negotiations between Russia and NATO in the '90s, as well as in talks between Russia and Ukraine in 2016 and 2022. She recently left the State Department, so now she can share a lot of new insights.
By Peter Andreas On June 12, 2012
Introduction[i]
The illicit business side of armed conflict can involve clandestine exports to fund combatants, reselling looted goods on the black market, smuggling weapons and other supplies, sanctions evasion and embargo busting, theft and diversion of humanitarian aid, and covert “trading with the enemy.” How does such illicit business affect peace operations in conflict zones, and how do such peace operations, in turn, affect illicit business? I provide a preliminary answer in the case of the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia (one of the most brutal wars of the post-Cold War era and the site of one of the most ambitious and challenging peace operations ever attempted).[ii] Instead of reinforcing the common tendency simply to ignore or condemn the illicit business side of conflict and its relationship with peace operations, I stress the more ambiguous and double-edged nature of the issue.
From World Beyond War. Thanks to: Mayors for Peace, the Institute for Policy Studies, and the New Priorities Network. "The Office of Economic Adjustment in the Pentagon (oea.gov) has one mission: to help communities affected by military downsizings, either from base closings or military industry contract losses, with transition planning grants and technical assistance (see program guidelines at 1 and 2 and below). The Obama administration is ramping up and fast tracking this assistance. Who is eligible? Military-dependent communities, regions and states. Dependency has a low threshold—only about 2-3% of a community’s workforce need be employed in the military industry to qualify."
2011: 1,7 trillion usd Figures from the 2011 Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) annual report show that the world’s governments are spending more than ever on the military: $1,738 billion per year. If spent differently, this money would go a long way to resolving the real and immediate challenges facing our planet.