Join CODEPINK in sending letters to the ICC urging prosecutor Karim Khan to investigate Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.
Since October 7, Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have made multiple statements inciting genocide in Palestine. Since the start of its attack on Gaza, Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, giving the International Criminal Court (ICC) jurisdiction over this case. The people of Gaza cannot bring this issue to the ICC themselves since Israel has repeatedly cut off electricity and telecommunications.
Support and sign the petition here: https://www.codepink.org/iccgaza1
From its introduction in 1991, alternative service in Ukraine by design was hardly accessible and limited to marginal number of religious objectors. National security and defense establishment, entrenched and intended to dominate in economy, education, politics and media, put enormous efforts into shaming people for draft evasion, making it costly informal corruption practice available only for the rich and privileged people, limiting and preventing introduction of any legal exemptions from military service, especially insisting on denial of any notion of human right to conscientious objection to military service. Absence of clear legal guarantees of the right to conscientious objection in time of national emergency, when this right is especially precious and must be strongly protected, become one of results of this uncompromising pressure for totality of military duty.
After beginning of Russian aggression against Ukraine in 2014 and subsequent partial mobilization some conscientious objectors were prosecuted for insisting on access to alternative service. Cases of acquittal by courts in that time are known. Furthermore, Ukrainian diplomats in 2018 submitted to OHCHR a promise of changes in legislation2, based on a draft law which was never supported by the government, never included into parliamentary agenda, and in 2019 was automatically withdrawn.
Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and strong unconditional Western support of Ukrainian defensive war effort, on the one hand, and lack of all sorts of resources, especially human resources, for achieving ambitious goal to defeat Russia, as well as growing draft evasion, on another hand, make the military desperate and ready to coerce people for military service by any means, including radical limitation or denial of human rights. Military recruiters actively initiate criminal prosecution of those few who resist to all sorts of pressure, from sophisticated psychological and procedural to brutal physical, who insist on unwilling to serve despite all promises, threats and appeals to patriotism. It resulted in trending penalization of conscientious objection: the army insists on opening criminal investigations and subsequent convictions of conscientious objectors, and officers in charge of legal affairs testify in courts that conscription in time of mobilization could not be replaced with alternative service, which expectantly lead to guilty sentences considering almost universal trust in army (setting aside doubts in reliability of public opinion polls) and recognition of its leading role in country under martial law.
The International Peace Bureau (IPB) and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) are thrilled to announce their collaboration on a special 15-minute video for the 2023 Geneva Peace Week (GPW), unfolding this week. This video, themed “Common Security: Bridging Divides and Restoring Trust,” aspires to unite civil society, institutional members, government officials, MPs, and all peace advocates. The focus is on the applicability of the Common Security approach in decision-making for fostering peaceful societies.
About the Video Offering a thorough exploration of the Common Security concept, the video delves into its historical, philosophical, and political underpinnings, spotlighting its practical applications. Interviews with experts, parliamentarians, and seasoned peace practitioners clarify how Common Security principles tackle today’s global challenges, particularly in regions marred by conflict or tension.
The video is structured into two segments: “What Makes it Successful” and “Potential Stumbling Blocks.” The first section accentuates the positive aspects and success factors of Common Security in rebuilding trust. Conversely, the second section presents a balanced perspective by recognizing potential obstacles in peace processes rooted in Common Security, underscoring the need for humility, compromise, and checks and balances.
Case studies showcasing successful Common Security applications further illustrate its capacity to foster trust among nations and build lasting peace agreements. The video ultimately seeks to encourage an informed dialogue among policymakers, scholars, and the public, emphasizing citizen outreach as key to the approach’s sustainability.
Featured Speakers:
Mr. Martin Chungong, Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union;
H.E. Dr. Ali Rashid Al Nuaimi, Member of the Federal National Council of the UAE, President of the IPU Task Force for the peaceful resolution of the war in Ukraine;
Mr. Daniel Carden, MP of the United Kingdom, President of the IPU’s Forum of Young Parliamentarians;
Ms. Dr. Anuradha Chenoy, Adjunct Professor at Jindal Global University, Member of the IPB Common Security working group;
Mr. Reiner Braun, historian and peace activist, former Executive Director of IPB;
Ms. Anna Sundström, Secretary General of the Olof Palme International Center;
Ms. A-Young Moon, Founder of PEACEMOMO, Council Member of IPB.
We extend our deepest gratitude to our incredible speakers and our esteemed colleagues from the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). We invite you to watch, reflect, and engage with the ideas presented in the video. Good vision!
The world has lost a major pillar of peace education, a great teacher and a feminist anti-war scholar and activist. We, who had the huge privilege of being her long-term friend, have lost a loving and caring friend, an inspirational and knowledgeable discussion partner and a wonderful person for joyful interaction. Betty Reardon was an exceptionally inspiring person, through her writing and teaching, as well as through her personality. She was courageous and consistent and had a huge capacity for friendship and care. She managed to bridge the personal and the political, the analytical and the practical.
When in deep sadness over the loss, it is not easy to find the right words. My first encounter with Betty was in 1984/85. I was participating on behalf of the Norwegian National Commission for UNESCO in a meeting in Oslo of an American – Russian – Norwegian education project. I felt very fortunate to meet these courageous and progressive Russian, American and Norwegian teachers, Valentina Mitina, Betty Reardon and Eva Nordland, cooperating intensely over several years in the middle of the Cold War. They impressed me profoundly. How we need such a bridge-building and cancel-culture-free project today!
My professional cooperation with Betty was primarily through UNESCO and the International Peace Bureau/IPB. In UNESCO the cooperation was centred on the major UNESCO program Towards a Culture of Peace, which, under the guidance of the inspiring Director General, Federico Mayor, became the top priority of the Organization. Betty was member of the Director General’s Advisory Group for the Women and the Culture of Peace program, that I was fortunate to chair, together with two outstanding members of the Executive Board of UNESCO, Ingrid Eide from Norway and Lourdes Quisumbing from the Philippines. Betty authored the UNESCO publication Education for a Culture of Peace in a Gender Perspective (Reardon, 2001) and edited the 1999 publication Towards a Women’s Agenda for a Culture of Peace with Dorota Gierycz from the UN Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW) and myself (Breines, Gierycz & Reardon).
Betty was not only party to the reflections in UNESCO on the culture of peace, but she was able to help translate the vision into practical educational tools, for different levels of the schools system and teacher training, as well as for adult education and study groups. And Betty had already in 1980 prepared the main working document for the important UNESCO World Congress on Disarmament Education. She was member of the Jury of the UNESCO Prize for Peace Education and in 2001 she got honourable mention of the UNESCO Peace Education prize. She authored the 3-volume UNESCO publication: Tolerance: The Threshold of Peace (1998), so needed to-day.
In May 2000 Betty lectured in Norway at the UNESCO conference at the University of Tromsø on Higher Education for Peace,Transforming a culture of war to a culture of peace.
The aim of the conference was to discuss conditions for peace and the role of institutions of higher education in promoting peace. The conference served as an opportunity to exchange research results and educational strategies that promote creative thinking about peace studies in higher education. I still remember vividly how proud I was of Betty speaking truth to male militaristic power in a big, packed auditorium. It was also interesting to observe how some people not knowing Betty, at the outset got somewhat confused, as they probably had expected a less radical and direct way of speaking from this beautiful lady, elegantly dressed with a silk scarf and none of the external progressive attributes. When I was in Pakistan as the UNESCO representative, Betty came to give a workshop on education for a culture of peace. It was so needed, and she was so well received. It gave echoes in the complex context of a post 11. September 2001 situation in Pakistan.
Many people, so also Betty, gave a lot of their time and energy in the planning of the 4th World Conference on Women in Beijing, September 1995. The overall theme was: Equality Development and Peace, in line with the three preceding UN conferences on women. We were happy from a peace activist point of view when the Beijing Declaration came to include the following: “The full participation of women in decision-making, conflict prevention and resolution and any other peace initiative are essential to the realization of lasting peace”.
UNESCO presented a Statement on Women’s Contribution to a Culture of Peace to the Beijing conference that got signed by women heads of states and governments and other leaders and peace activists. The statement was based on the report from an expert group meeting in Manila where Betty was the rapporteur. We felt gratified when the term culture of peace was used at the Beijing conference for the first time at the UN outside UNESCO. Strategic objective E.4.of the Beijing Platform for Action reads: “Promote women’s contribution to fostering a culture of peace”.
Betty had prominent roles in relation to several peace organizations, not least the International Peace Research Association (IPRA), the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) and the International Peace Bureau (IPB). I have been fortunate to share many civil society activities and events with Betty. IPB was actively involved in the Global Campaign for Peace Education from the beginning, not least through the IPB President Cora Weiss and the Secretary General Colin Archer. In 2009 Betty received IPB’s Sean MacBride Peace Prize for her work, her teaching, her writing, her engagement and for establishing and running the International Institute for Peace Education. In 2016 Betty accepted an important role in IPB’s disarmament congress in Berlin: Disarm! For a Climate of Peace. Creating an Action Agenda. Betty undertook the difficult task of transforming ideas and suggestions presented to the congress into an operative peace methodology. See e.g. the publication based on the Berlin congress: Disarmament, Peace and Development. Vol. 27, Emerald Publishing, 2018. In addition, she organized with Tony Jenkins, Janet Gerson and Dale Snauwaert from the International Institute for Peace Education, a very well attended and appreciated workshop on peace education (Gerson, et. al., 2016). In 2013 Betty was nominated for the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize by the International Peace Bureau.
An archive of Betty’s published and unpublished works, the Betty A. Reardon Collection, has been established at the Center for Special Collections at The University of Toledo. It opened in 2009 and facilitates the access to her work.
Betty will continue to be with the global peace family in so many ways. May her thinking reach an ever broader audience! Thank you Betty!
Through this Declaration, the International Peace Bureau (IPB), an international Non-Governmental Organization,
MANIFESTS its firm support for the creation and maintenance of Ministries of Peace and Peace Infrastructures that are organized and developed in the Latin American region and internationally with the objective of generating a peaceful, supportive and harmonious culture incorporated in sustainable and lasting way to the lives of people.
More specifically, convinced of the relevance and urgency of said government structure in the current Colombian reality and taking into account its long history of violence and armed conflict that has bled the country for more than 50 years, we adhere to the project to create the Ministry of Peace in Colombia, which will be presented by representatives of the Global Alliance for Ministries & Infrastructures for Peace -GAMIP -in Bogotá, on November 9, 2023 in the format of a Public Hearing at the Congress of the Republic.
The planification of a Ministry of Peace and the development of Peace Infrastructures in Colombia, in all the countries of the Latin American continent and the world, means an unprecedented political and strategic challenge, enabling two simultaneous processes of extraordinary importance and impact on the future of the history of the region.
NATO’s goal of 2% spending of GDP on the military will accelerate climate breakdown by diverting millions of dollars from climate finance and increasing greenhouse gas emissions, concludes a new report that urgently calls for a ‘climate dividend’ similar to the ‘peace dividend’ that was won with the end of the Cold War.
The report, Climate Crossfire, produced by the international research organization, Transnational Institute, together with Stop Wapenhandel (Netherlands) and Tipping Point North South (UK) estimates the likely financial implications as well as increased greenhouse gas emissions that would result if all NATO members meet their commitment to increase military spending to a minimum of 2% of GDP.
The report finds that:
NATO’s military spending this year – $1.26 trillion- would pay for 12 years of promised climate finance of $100 billion a year.
If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, it would divert an estimated additional US$2.57 trillion by 2028 away from climate spending, enough to pay for climate adaptation costs for all low- and middle-income countries for seven years.
NATO’s estimated military carbon footprint this year – 205 million tCO2e – is comparable to the total annual greenhouse gas emissions of many countries. If NATO’s militaries were a country, it would rank 40th in the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, this would lead to an estimated additional 467 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
NATO members export arms to 39 of the 40 most climate-vulnerable countries, fuelling conflict and repression at a dangerous moment of climate breakdown.
NATO’s spending goals have undoubtedly gained momentum as a result of Russia’s full-scale illegal invasion of Ukraine, however even before achieving the 2% target, in 2021 NATO overall spent more than 16 times as much as Russia and its allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO, which includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan). Russia has increased its military expenditure to a projected $102 billion in 2023, but this would still be less than a twelfth of NATO’s collective expenditure of $1.26 trillion.
The biggest danger of NATO’s 2% military spending goals is that it is encouraging a worldwide arms race. Global military spending in 2022 reached record highs of $2.24 trillion. Our report last year, Climate Collateral, revealed that the richest nations (known as ‘Annex 2’ countries in UN climate negotiations) are spending 30 times as much on military as on climate finance.
Nnimmo Bassey, former president of Friends of the Earth International and director of the Health of Mother Earth Foundation, Nigeria says in a foreword to the report:
‘Wars kill people, extinguish biodiversity, and destroy the infrastructure that could otherwise provide safeguards in the face of extreme weather events. Warfare is an act of climate denial.’
Co-author of the report, Nick Buxton of Transnational Institute says:
‘This report shows that the climate has tragically become the latest victim in the crossfire of war. We have a closing window of time to address the climate crisis, but the world’s political leaders are more focused on arming themselves to the teeth than prioritising climate action. NATO’s 2% minimum spending goals are adding fuel to the climate fire, diverting much needed resources and increasing greenhouse emissions. We urgently need to de-escalate tensions and find peaceful solutions to conflicts if we are to defend our planet. There is no secure nation on an unsafe planet.’
Co-authors of the report, Dr Ho-Chih Lin and Deborah Burton of Tipping Point North South say:
‘The military like to portray themselves today as positive climate actors, but they have been the biggest institutional user of fossil fuels. Oil-free fighter jets or electric tanks do not exist and there is nothing realistic on the horizon that will make a meaningful dent in military carbon footprint. Not in our lifetime and certainly not by 2050. The stark reality facing politicians is that to green the military, we need to reduce military spending significantly and this will require a new approach to security, one invested in building diplomacy, peace and climate resilience rather than war.’
Contact: Deborah Burton | +44 7779 203455/ UK | deborah@tippingpointnorthsouth.org
Wendela de Vries, a researcher at StopWapenhandel, Dutch Campaign Against the Arms Trade says: ‘High military budgets lead to more emissions, which is not making the world safer. The big winner is the arms industry whose profits are skyrocketing. As the planet reaches a climate tipping point, it is insane that we are investing in making arms dealers even richer, rather than protecting those whose lives are being devastated by climate breakdown
The winners of the 2023 Seán MacBride Peace Prize are champions of the right to conscientious objection, represented by a joint prize for three remarkable movements, and an individual peace advocate. At the heart of this esteemed award are three remarkable movements that have not only made significant strides in advocating for the right to conscientious objection but have also symbolized the enduring spirit of peace in the face of adversity. These awardees include “Our House” from Belarus, the “Movement of Conscientious Objectors”from Russia, the “Ukrainian Pacifist Movement” from Ukraine, and Tore Nærland, a passionate advocate for peace through his initiative, “Bike for Peace.”
Ukraine and Russia have been entangled in a complex and protracted conflict that has left scars on the hearts and souls of countless individuals and communities. This conflict, marked by territorial disputes, political turmoil, and humanitarian crises, has exacted a heavy toll, with civilians often caught in the crossfire and subjected to unimaginable suffering. It is in this context that the 2023 Seán MacBride Peace Prize recognizes the exceptional efforts of those who have chosen the path of peace and conscientious objection.
The first award is a shared prize for Our House, the Movement of Conscientious Objectors in Russia, and the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement.
Our House (https://news.house/), a Belarusian civil society organization registered in Vilnius since 2014, is dedicated to defending human rights, particularly focusing on vulnerable groups, such as women and children. They also support Belarusian and Ukrainian refugees in Lithuania and other EU countries. Founded two decades ago as a small initiative, Our House is now active in 15 Lithuanian cities. Their current campaigns, “NO means NO” and “Non-Children Play,” aim to help Belarusian conscientious objectors, prevent children from being taken from their families for economic and political reasons, and respond to Belarusian army service issues.
In Russia, Movement of Conscientious Objectors (MCO) or Движение Сознательных Отказчиков, Russia (https://stoparmy.org/), a non-profit organization established in 2014, aids young individuals in legally avoiding conscription into the military. MCO offers guidance, resources, and collects conscription-related information. The right to conscientious objection to military service is a fundamental component of the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, as enshrined in Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This right remains inviolable even during public emergencies, as stipulated in Article 4(2) of the ICCPR. Conscientious objection actively contributes to peace, making the protection and promotion of this human right more vital during wartime.
Despite being labeled as Foreign Agents and facing increased threats, the Russian Movement of Conscientious Objectors unwaveringly supports those opposing war and military mobilization, especially individuals subjected to persecution, torture, and imprisonment. Their commitment extends to all cases of forced and even violent recruitment into participating armies, as well as the persecution of conscientious objectors, deserters, and non-violent anti-war protesters.
The “Ukrainian Pacifist Movement” (http://pacifism.org.ua/) from Ukraine established in 2019 by activists involved in peaceful protests against conscription in Kyiv, is a non-governmental, non-profit, and nonpartisan organization. Its mission revolves around promoting the right to peace, disarmament, conscription abolition, nonviolent conflict resolution, and civilian oversight of military affairs. The organization primarily focuses on advocating for the legal right to conscientious objection in accordance with international human rights standards, supporting the right to refuse participation in war, ending the conflict in Ukraine, and striving for global peace. The Ukrainian Pacifist Movement is an active participant in various international networks, including the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection, World BEYOND War, War Resisters’ International, International Peace Bureau, and the Eastern European Network for Citizenship Education.
The second award is for Tore Nærland, an individual advocate for peace through his initiative “Bike for Peace,” embodies the transformative power of personal dedication to peace. Through his tireless efforts and determination, he has inspired countless individuals to embrace the idea that peace can be pursued actively, one pedal stroke at a time. His commitment to spreading a message of peace and understanding transcends national boundaries and resonates with people from all walks of life.
In honoring these remarkable recipients, the 2023 Seán MacBride Peace Prize acknowledges the enduring importance of the right to conscientious objection and individual efforts to promote peace in the times that peace is being challenged. Their collective work reminds us that peace is not merely the absence of war, but a deliberate and courageous choice that can shape a better future for us all.
The International Peace Bureau (IPB), Middle East Treaty Organization (METO), and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) are deeply concerned over the unprecedented Israeli-Palestinian violent escalation launched in the morning of Saturday, 7th October, which has already resulted in the loss of hundreds of lives. The resulting fear, panic, and uncertainty that the Israeli and Palestinian people feel in these moments demand our compassion and understanding, even as the extent to which the conflict will escalate remains unclear.
The death toll cannot continue to rise. The signatories to this statement therefore call for immediate global attention to deescalate the conflict and provide on-the-ground humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, we call on the international community to support the immediate cessation of attacks and abductions of civilians and attacks on non-military infrastructure. The UNSC must live up to its charter-mandated responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It should urgently demand all parties to stop violence and respect and protect lives of civilians, especially children.
There is no military solution to the multifaceted and complex crisis between Israel and Palestine; we acknowledge the deep suffering of Palestinians and Israelis even under the status quo, including settler violence, terrorist attacks, economic violence, and a constant environment of fear under violation of international law. The root causes of the conflict are deep and can only be addressed when immediate and direct violence is not present.
Therefore, together we call for:
An immediate cessation of violence–in particular the targeting of civilian infrastructure;
The immediate exchange of hostages and prisoners under humanitarian concerns;
The establishment of a humanitarian corridor for safe passage of emergency services and aid;
The international community, in particular the League of Arab States, to engage in negotiations based on the Arab Peace Initiative (API), the only comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict in the Middle East.
October, 2023| Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs (Gensuikyo)
Tokyo, Japan – Following the opening of the 78th Session of the UN General Assembly, the commemoration of the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on September 26 and the start of the First Committee deliberations in the first week of October, discussion on disarmament and security has started.
The world is now facing a grave crisis, such as the continuing war, killing and destruction as seen in the war in Ukraine, the danger of threat or use of nuclear weapons, intensifying confrontation and tension between nuclear powers, the expansion of military alliances and blocs, buildup of nuclear arsenals in the name of “modernization,” huge military expenditures totaling $2.24 trillion and massive arms buildup, etc. All of them run counter to the principles of the UN Charter and the desire for peace of the peoples of the world.
At the same time, the world is witnessing an overwhelming majority of public opinion to call for peaceful resolution of international conflicts, the prohibition of threat or use of force and a total ban and the elimination of nuclear weapons in defiance of retrogression of history. In addition, backed by this public opinion, the overwhelming majority of countries are continuing their efforts to achieve a “world without nuclear weapons”, based on the agreements made at the UN General Assembly and the NPT review conferences.
Nuclear-weapon-free zones were already established on five continents of the world and persistent efforts are continuing to achieve denuclearization of conflict-ridden regions such as the Middle East. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) that was adopted in the UN, entered into force in January 2021, and with 92 signatories and 68 ratifiers, it has already begun to function as a substantive international law. The Second Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW is scheduled to open at UN Headquarters in New York on November 27.
The deliberations of the 78th UN General Assembly must be an opportunity to overcome the crisis facing humanity, restore peace and security, achieve a total ban and the elimination of nuclear weapons and drastic disarmament. These resources must be used for the well-being of humanity and to resolve the global issues we face, including those of environment, food, inequality and energy. To this end, the responsibility of the five nuclear weapon states is particularly grave, as they occupy permanent seats on the UN Security Council and are obligated under the NPT to conclude negotiations to cease the nuclear arms race and achieve nuclear disarmament.
While opposing the development, acquisition and possession of nuclear weapons by other countries, the nuclear weapon states claim that their nuclear weapons “guarantee security,” “deter aggression,” and “prevent war.” However, nuclear weapons not only fail to “deter” aggression and war, but on the contrary, escalate the danger, and if used, could even lead to the annihilation of the human race. The current situation itself clearly demonstrates this danger.
The war that led to the tragedies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was caused by Japan’s aggression, but most of the 210,000 people killed by the two atomic bombs and many more who survived and became the Hibakusha, were civilians. Such sacrifices must never be repeated in any country. To this end, we request your governments to do the following:
To abide by the UN Charter, which stipulates the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means, to immediately end war, and to never threaten or use force, especially nuclear weapons.
To reaffirm and implement the first resolution of the UN General Assembly pledging the elimination of atomic weapons from national arsenals, the unequivocal undertaking to “accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals” agreed to at the NPT Review Conference in May 2000, and the agreement reached in 2010 to make special efforts to achieve “the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons” and to create a “framework” to achieve this goal; To immediately commence negotiations on NPT Article VI, “Effective measures relating to nuclear disarmament” and to “bring them to a conclusion” in accordance with the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice.
To recognize the TPNW as a “framework” for realizing a world without nuclear weapons, and to initiate procedures to support, sign and ratify the Treaty; To end reliance on the “nuclear deterrence” and “extended nuclear deterrence” policies that are actually aimed at threat or use of nuclear weapons.
To participate as observers in the Second Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW and cooperate in its success.
Japan Council against A and H Bombs (Gensuikyo): Tel: +81-3-5842-6034 Fax: +81-3-5842-6033 Email: antiatom@topaz.plala.or.jp
Location: Heiwa-to-Rodo-Center 6F, 2-4-4, Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8464 JAPAN
Meet Sean Conner, the executive director of the International Peace Bureau, one of the most vocal and oldest grass-root peace organisations in the world. For over 130 years the IPB has been lobbying governments and organisations for peaceful means to resolve conflicts. Even now they are one of the few organisations that stand for a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine and have not been corrupted or coerced into submission by the pro-war narrative of the collective west.
By loading the video, you agree to YouTube’s privacy policy. Learn more
