Peace Education – Page 4 – IPB – International Peace Bureau

Tectonic Geopolitical Changes: Which Way to Peace and A Nuclear Weapon-Free World

On the Eve of the NPT Review Conference International Civil Society Demands an End to Wars & a Nuclear Weapons-Free World

At a time when the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock had been set to 85 seconds to midnight—the closest ever to global catastrophe—and when the viability of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was under increasing strain, an international coalition of nuclear disarmament and peace organizations gathered on the eve of the 11th NPT Review Conference. The moment reflected what Antonio Gramsci described as a “time of monsters,” in which the old world is dying and the new struggles to be born.

Message by UN ODA High Representative Izumi Nakamitsu On the Global Days of Action on Military Spending

Each year, the Global Days of Action on Military Spending challenge us to pause
and reflect on the choices we are making, and the world those choices are shaping.

We are living through a period marked by geopolitical tensions, deepening
mistrust, and accelerating crises that affect every region of the world. Conflicts
continue to devastate communities. Inequality is widening. Climate change is
intensifying displacement and instability, and humanitarian needs consistently
outpace our collective response. Amid these challenges, global military spending continues to rise.

This troubling trajectory is clearly reflected in the figures released today by the
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which show that world military expenditure reached $2887 billion in 2025, an increase of 2.9% in real terms from 2024, and the eleventh year of consecutive growth.

In 2025, official development assistance (ODA) totaled $174.3 billion,
representing a 23.1% decrease from 2024. Global military spending was more
than 16 times higher than total ODA. By comparison, the United Nations regular
budget for 2025 was $3.72 billion, while global military spending exceeded that
amount by 776 times.

These trends should give us pause and prompt serious reflection.

We are just four years away from the 2030 deadline for the Sustainable
Development Goals. Yet only one in five SDG targets is currently on track, while
the annual global financing gap for sustainable development has reached four
trillion dollars.

This is not simply a resource gap. It is a priority gap.

As the Secretary-General made clear in his report “The Security We Need:
Rebalancing Military Spending for a Sustainable and Peaceful Future”, rising
military expenditures are not delivering greater peace or stability. Instead, they
risk undermining the very foundations of long-term security and sustainable
development.

History has shown us, time and again, that arms races do not lead to peace. They fuel escalation, deepen distrust, and increase the risk of miscalculation. A cycle emerges in which insecurity justifies militarization, and militarization, in turn, breeds further insecurity. Meanwhile, the most pressing threats to humanity such as climate change, inequality, and food insecurity, remain chronically underfunded.

The opportunity costs are stark.

Every dollar diverted to militarization is a dollar not spent on preventing famine, building schools or strengthening climate resilience. It is a dollar that could be spent on diplomacy, conflict prevention, and advancing human security. The cost of inaction is not abstract. It is measured in lives lost, futures foregone, and trust eroded.

The question before us is not whether States have the right to invest in their
militaries to increase their security. They do. Nor is it whether real security threats exist. They certainly do. The question is: what kind of security are we building and at what cost?

True security cannot be measured solely by the size of our arsenals, but by the
well-being of our people and the health of our planet. A militarized approach
alone cannot address the root causes of conflict, instability, and violence.
The path forward is clear. We must reimagine what security means in the 21st
century—and we have the tools to do so. The Secretary-General’s report outlines practical steps: placing diplomacy first, strengthening confidence-building measures, ensuring transparency in defence budgets, and redirecting even a fraction of military spending toward sustainable development.

On these Global Days of Action on Military Spending, I urge all of us –
governments, civil society, and global citizens – to heed these warnings.

We must champion a human-centered approach to security, rooted in prevention, good governance and aligned with the principles of the UN Charter.

Let us make this moment a turning point. A moment when we choose diplomacy over escalation. Human security over excessive militarization and long-term peace over short-term calculations.

The world does not need more weapons. It needs more trust. It needs more
cooperation and more solidarity.

And above all, it needs more peace.

4.27 HR Statement (GDAMS)Download

The world spent $2.88 trillion in the military in 2025. Take a stand with us today and protest this nonsense!

Today (Monday 27) might be the most important day of this year’s Global Days of Action on Military Spending (GDAMS), with several events taking place all across the world.

SIPRI has just published new data on military spending for the year 2025, and the figures show a new growth in military spending, reaching $2.88 trillion, an increase of 2.9% compared to last year, marking he 11th consecutive year of growth and the highest spending level ever recorded by SIPRI.Global military expenditure rose in 2025 despite a drop in spending by the United States, the world’s biggest spender. A sharp increase in European spending and continued growth in Asia and Oceania were more than enough to offset the decrease in US spending during the year. World military expenditure excluding the USA grew by 9.2 per cent in 2025. The five biggest spenders in 2025 were the United States, China, Russia, Germany and India, which together accounted for 58% of world military spending. The USA’s military spending fell by 7.5 per cent to $954 billion in 2025, while China’s spending rose by 7.4 per cent to an estimated $336 billion.

Trillions for War, Nothing for the People: Resist Militarization, Defend Sovereignty

Press Release by Stop the War Coalition Philippines on the Global Days of Action Against Military Spending (GDAMS)

Global military expenditure soared to an unprecedented $2.887 trillion in 2025, according to today’s Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Global Military Spending Report 2025. This staggering sum is funneled into weapons and warfare while the world grapples with pervasive hunger, escalating climate crises, and deepening inequality. The United States alone contributed a colossal $954 billion, accounting for a third of this global outlay. Concurrently, nations such as China, Germany, Ukraine, and Spain significantly augmented their defense budgets, fueling an alarming arms race across both Asia and Europe.

This war economy is not a distant concept; its impact resonates profoundly at home. In the Philippines, diesel prices remain stubbornly high at ₱98–₱112 per liter, rice hovers at ₱60–₱70 per kilo, and inflation registered 4.1% in March 2026. Yet, instead of substantive relief beyond temporary “ayuda” or one-time aid, the Philippine government maintains a “business-as-usual” approach, hosting Balikatan 2026—the largest war games in our history. Furthermore, the Marcos Jr. government actively facilitates U.S. military projects, including an ammunition hub in Subic (Zambales), a fuel depot in Mindanao, and the controversial Pax Silica enclave in Tarlac.

Korean A-bomb victims head to UN to tell their stories and seek accountability

Source: Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea (SPARK)

【Below are the Korean, Japanese, and Chinese versions】

A delegation of victims and advocates will head to the US next week to alert the international community about the toll that America’s atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on Koreans who were forced there during Japanese rule

Han Jeong-soon, the president of the Korean Society for the Second Generation Patients Atomic Bombs, pays her respects at a memorial space featuring plaques with the names of Koreans who died while suffering the aftereffects of the US atomic bombings of Japan, located at a welfare center for Korean A-bomb victims in Hapcheon, South Gyeongsang Province. (Choi Sang-won/Hankyoreh)

Why it’s important to talk about military spending on Earth Day

By: Francesco Vignarca, Rete Italiana Pace e Disarmo, English and Italian

Militarism is deeply connected to the climate crisis. By prioritizing the domination and extraction of fossil fuels, it fuels conflict and causes environmental damage. Military operations require enormous amounts of energy, and armed forces are among the largest institutional consumers of fossil fuels and leading emitters of greenhouse gases worldwide.

As military spending continues to rise, it not only fuels wars and increases emissions but also diverts vital resources away from urgently needed climate solutions.

This Earth Day, it is important to highlight these issues within the framework of the Global Days of Action on Military Spending to demand concrete and urgent change from governments. This initiative, coordinated by the Working Group on Arms, Militarism and Climate Justice, reflects a growing awareness that peace and climate justice are closely interconnected.

Let’s fight for reduced military spending and to redirect resources towards climate action , care, and a just transition.

Join us on Earth Day 2026 in support of the Global Campaign Against Military Spending and its international GDAMS days: Demilitarize for Climate Justice!

Militarism and the Climate Crisis: Key Points

Militarism and the climate crisis are deeply intertwined, yet this connection often remains invisible in public debate. The military is among the world’s largest institutional consumers of fossil fuels, powering jets, warships, military bases, and vast global supply chains that generate enormous—yet largely unreported—greenhouse gas emissions. Globally, militaries are estimated to be responsible for approximately 5.5% of annual emissions; if they were a country, they would rank as the fourth-largest emitter, after China, the United States, and India. The U.S. military alone is the largest institutional emitter of greenhouse gases in the world.

The scale of the problem is staggering. Every additional $100 billion in military spending generates approximately 32 million tons of CO₂ equivalent—roughly the annual emissions of 23 million cars. Global military spending reached at least $2.7 trillion in 2024 and continues to rise, with projections suggesting it could reach $6.6 trillion by 2035. The top twenty military spenders have generated at least 10 billion tons of CO₂ equivalent in military-related emissions in the first quarter of the 21st century, while collectively spending around $40 trillion on their arsenals since 2001.

The relationship between militarism and fossil fuels extends beyond direct emissions. Control over oil and gas reserves has long fueled geopolitical conflict: between 25% and 50% of interstate conflicts since 1973 have been linked to oil. Fossil fuel extraction is frequently militarized, with armed forces and private contractors deployed to protect infrastructure and suppress local resistance. Between 2012 and 2023, more than 1,900 environmental and land defenders were killed worldwide, with Indigenous peoples and women disproportionately affected.

Armed conflict further accelerates environmental destruction. Israel’s war in Gaza generated an estimated 33.2 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in its first 15 months—comparable to Jordan’s annual emissions. Russia’s war in Ukraine has caused climate damage estimated at 311 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. Between 1950 and 2000, nine out of ten armed conflicts occurred in biodiversity-rich areas, leading to deforestation and long-term ecological damage that persists long after fighting ends.

Proposals to “green” the military offer a false solution. There is little evidence that armed forces can decarbonize at the scale or speed required. Weapons systems being deployed today—such as F-35 fighter jets, expected to remain in service well beyond 2050—lock in fossil fuel dependence for decades. Military emissions are typically excluded from national climate targets, and existing commitments remain vague and insufficient.

At the same time, the world’s wealthiest countries spend thirty times more on their militaries than they allocate to climate finance for vulnerable nations. Yet reallocating just 15% of global military spending in 2024—approximately $387 billion—would be enough to cover the annual costs of climate adaptation in developing countries.

Reducing military spending and redirecting resources toward ecological transition is not only possible—it is one of the most powerful tools available to address the climate crisis while building a more just and peaceful world.

This version is an English translation. Please see the Italian version of the original article.

Italian Version

No war without the US Air Base Ramstein

01.04.26 – Reiner Braun, Berlin – International Peace Bureau – English and German

Military strike against Iran: Without this U.S. air base in Germany, the attack would not have been possible.

An incomplete compilation by Reiner Braun (IPB)

Weeks before the illegal war of aggression by the USA and Israel against Iran on 28 February 2026, there were numerous indications of its preparation. There was intense activity at Ramstein Air Base. Transport aircraft of the types Boeing C-17 Globemaster III and Lockheed C-130 Hercules were landing and taking off “every minute”, according to the portal austrianwings.info; in between, civilian Boeing 747 freighters of Atlas Air on behalf of the US military.

This was the logistical choreography of a war being fought thousands of kilometres away – but hardly conceivable in this form without the Palatinate hub.

Urgent Call for Support: The Marianas in Crisis After Super Typhoon Sinlaku

A Region in Crisis

The Mariana Islands are facing a severe humanitarian emergency following the impact of Super Typhoon Sinlaku, a Category 4 storm that struck the region last April 14. As communities begin the long and difficult recovery process, the full extent of the devastation is becoming clear.

The storm swept across the entire archipelago, with Saipan and Tinian experiencing the strongest impact, facing winds of up to 170 mph. Rota and Guam were also significantly affected, with winds reaching up to 80 mph. Moving slowly, the typhoon lingered for over 50 hours, bringing record rainfall and widespread flooding.

Impact on Communities

Homes destroyed and infrastructure severely damaged
Power lines down; thousands without electricity and running water
Over 800 people in emergency shelters in Guam
More than 500 displaced in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)
Injuries reported, with some residents still trapped

This is a moment of deep loss and uncertainty for communities across the islands.

Support Community-Led Response

Local organizations, including Common Wealth 670 in Saipan and Prutehi Guåhan, have mobilized quickly to support affected families. They have created a directory for direct aid, allowing supporters to contribute directly to those impacted.

Give direct support to families here

Direct mutual aid is critical at this time to ensure resources reach communities quickly and equitably.

Why Your Support Matters

In the aftermath of disasters, recovery efforts can become centralized or controlled in ways that may not fully meet community needs. Supporting grassroots initiatives helps strengthen local resilience and ensures aid reaches those who need it most.

Additional Ways to Help

Call for Resources

If you are aware of funding opportunities, partnerships, or rapid response resources that could support local organizations, please get in touch.

Stand in Solidarity

With limited internet and cell service, communication remains challenging. While efforts are underway to deliver essential supplies, direct financial support remains one of the most effective ways to help.

Now more than ever, solidarity and mutual aid are essential—not only for recovery, but for building long-term resilience.

Yuhi Shimada – Council Member

Yuhi Shimada was elected as an IPB Council member in October 2025.

Yuhi Shimada is based in Japan. He is the National Executive Board Member of Gensuikyo (Japan Council against A & H Bombs).

Terry Rockefeller – Council Member

Terry Rockefeller was elected as an IPB Council member in October 2025.

Terry Rockefeller is based in the USA and is the Co-chair of the Rule of Law Committee of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. The committee’s focus is on closing the detention facilities on the Guantanamo Naval Base and ending the extrajudicial military commissions that have failed to deliver justice and accountability for the crimes of 9/11. Peaceful Tomorrows is part of a coalition of organizations that advocate for human rights and security with the U.S. government and through UN structures.

She is on the Board of Directors of the Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security. SHe is the National Co-convenor of United for Peace and Justice, a network of national and local, peace, disarmament, social and economic justice organizations in the U.S. She is a 40+ year member of Amnesty International—USA, where she focuses on the work of the Security with Human Rights Co-group. (She served on the Board of Directors from 2013-19.

She is an award-winning documentary film producer. She had the honor of working on Eyes on the Prize, a history of the civil rights and black power movements, and the NOVA science series, among other productions for public television.