Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Many to Many
March 2004

Issue 87




I. EDITORIAL – Ownership

II. FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT IN A CHANGING WORLD

III. TOKYO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT

IV. PREPARING FOR THE JUNE 2004 GLOBAL COMPACT SUMMIT

V. THE INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION - A Voice for the People at the UN?

VI. ‘PEACE IT TOGETHER’ – A Youth Culture of Peace Initiative

VII. ‘MISSILES OF EMPIRE: America’s 21st Century Global Legions’

VIII. LET NOT OUR DEATH HAVE BEEN IN VAIN

IX. NUCLEAR WEAPONS AWARENESS PROGRAMME

X. STRATEGIES FOR US NATIONAL SECURITY: Winning the Peace in the 21st Century

XI. GO TO THE PEOPLE – Travel with Awareness

XII. HUMAN GENETIC ALERT

XIII. CULTURE OF PEACE

XIV. GREAT INVOCATION








I. Ownership

Since time immemorial the concept of ownership seems to have formed part of our human make-up. A sense of ownership is important to our feeling of self-worth and  being secure. A ruler, landowner or head of family used to see people as their property, to do with as they liked. New land discovered would be claimed by the finder; wealth and power more or less synonymous terms.

But times changed. We became more enlightened. Slavery is by and large eliminated.
However, the whole issue of ownership, of sovereignty, and of the rights and responsibilities connected with these, are perhaps more urgent and pressing and at the same time more nebulous and complex than ever before.

The old habitual ways of transferring individual decision making to a centre of corporate power and control are being replaced with new and more subtle means of conveyance. Today, a person can have shares in companies controlled by other companies to which is given the power to make decisions on behalf of all the shareholders. The transparency of their annual reports goes opaque by the use of words unfamiliar to most of us, a reasonable return on investments tending to put to rest any un-ease.

Today’s explorers are mostly the scientists, whose travels are taking them – and us all - to both outer and inner space, in search of new territories to map, name and include as "property". But the discovery of these new territories challenges us to re-visit and re-consider previously held notions of ownership and entitlements. The whole concept of what can be named as mine or not-mine is becoming increasingly obscure.

When, for instance, the scientists have not only identified the very formula of a living organism but are also experimenting on how to manipulate this genetic material for future purposes, then we must ask: who are entitled to claim ownership of this formula for life we have in common or give authorization for any experimentation to take place?

Traditionally, those who made the decision to initiate and finance an excursion into the unknown were also the ones who would "own" whatever was found. Common practice would be – and still is – to cover all past expenditures with gains made, and any excess profits to be invested in further explorations. Through this natural sequence of events we have progressed and continued to add further territories and spaces to our domain.

But the drive to conquer, to achieve and to control, has itself been difficult for us to master. Sometimes it is this instinctive, compulsive force, not common sense or conscience, that governs our exploits.

Before we set foot on neighbouring stars or enter the sanctuary of the life-forming formula, should we not see to it that we are indeed in control of ourselves; that we understand what we are doing and approach these new commons with foresight, sensitivity and right intent?

Is it not the responsibility of all shareholders to invest wisely in our common future?
 


II. Financing for Development (FFD) in a changing world


The International Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey (March 2002), resulting in the so-called Monterrey Consensus, was – in spite of being met with considerable cynicism and disappointment – aiming to provide a base for establishing an era of new partnerships "with shared responsibilities and mutual accountability". This new partnership, according to James Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank, "is an understanding that leaders of the developing and developed world are united by a global responsibility based on ethics, experience and self interest."  

Although the non-governmental organizations who attended the Conference disssociated themselves form the Consensus (calling it "Nonsensus") they nevertheless decided to continue their participation in Financing for Development follow-up meetings and confirmed their commitment to press for the implementation of internationally agreed development goals.

Throughout the Monterrey Conference discussions the delegates had been emphasizing the importance of "establishing strong follow-up mechanisms to keep implementation of FFD and the achievement of the Millennium Goals on track". As part of this follow-up process the first High-Level Dialogue since the Monterrey Conference took place at the United Nations headquarters, October 2003, as a 3-day discussion within the UN General Assembly.

It was with a real sense of urgency that the meeting sought to reinvigorate the spirit of partnership which had characterised the Monterrey Conference and assess what progress had been made since then with regard to the promises made in the Monterrey Consensus.
The UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan reviewed the international community’s performance as "mixed". While the 2002 official development assistance (ODA) had made a modest gain (to about US$57 billion), these gains had been more than offset by the largest-ever net resource transfer from the developing to developed world over the same year by US$200 billion. "If what we say about financing for development is not to ring hollow, if financing for development means anything, we must reverse the negative balance sheet and fix the system so that all countries, and all people, especially the poorest, can benefit", commented Kofi Annan.



Throughout the three days this High-Level Dialogue differed from previous meetings by including not only a half-day informal civil society hearing before the General Assembly delegates, but also the systematic incorporation of civil society representatives in all of the Dialogue’s official gatherings, including the Ministerial Roundtable Sessions and the High-Level Interactive Dialogue.

As a common thread through all these meetings ran the shared concern for how to generate sufficient political will so that a new vision of economic development could be realised.  Much of the debate centered around the issues of how developing countries could create an "enabling" environment which would result in private sector investment and domestic economic growth. But many saw this as part of the larger vision of global partnership, which included reform of global governance in order to provide developing countries with greater voice in international economic policy making. It was thought that greater efforts were needed to develop policies more consistent with the dual goals of promoting domestic growth and global economic stability. The international community should help Highly Indebted Poor Countries to achieve a sustainable debt situation.

The important role that the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) could play in the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus was discussed at great length. While ECOSOC had proven successful, convening a "multi-stakeholder, cross-institutional dialogue", many thought there was a need to greatly enhance its institutional capacity for reviewing and monitoring Monterrey commitments. Only then could it hope to fulfil its role of improving global economic governance, as well as coherence and consistency among economic, financial, trade, social and environmental policy making. While ECOSOC was generally seen as the most natural body within the UN System for spearheading the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus in the short-term, a number of scholars, activists and government delegates felt that a longer-term solution would be the creation of an Economic and Social Security Council, comprised of a regionally balanced and representative set of countries, that could eventually become a forum for undertaking the coordination of the macro-level economic policy making.

The overall themes of the Monterrey Consensus were identified by such words as coherence, coordination, cooperation, and commitment. The meaning of these Cs became a topic for discussion, and a number of prominent academic, civil society and intergovernmental representatives felt that today’s economic globalisation was actually characterized by "a significant amount of ideological coherence" that privileged "global" over "local, and financial capital over people and the real economy. A board member of Women’s Environment and Development Organisation  (WEDO) added her voice to the debate by exclaiming "We need a ship of our own in this sea of Cs"! When women called for coherence, she said, we meant that the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation should toe the line of the United Nations and not the other way around. "We want people-centred-women-sensitive development".

The Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Mr. Ricupero acknowledged the frustration felt by some delegates with regard to the speed of the implementation of the Monterrey commitments, but drew the attention to another more subtle yet highly significant achievement of the FFD process. Mr Ricupero, together with a number of other Dialogue participants, argued that the whole process leading up to and following the Monterrey Conference could more appropriately be seen as a "collective learning process among all stakeholders", suggesting that, viewed in this light, "the long-term viability of the UN’s engagement in global economic policy making can not be measured simply by the implementation of the Consensus as it exists, but also by its ability to dynamically identify areas in the Consensus that need to be amplified or transformed to attain the type of policy coherence favourable to developing countries in the context of a rapidly changing world."

Source: United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service (NGLS) newsletter Roundup 107
e-mail platz@un.org , website: www.un.org/esa/ffd
_______________




III. Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD)

Since its first conference in 1993 TICAD has functioned as a continuing process of support for Africa and has become a major focus for collaboration between Asia and Africa to help ensure development in Africa.

TICAD as well as the UN Development Programme (UNDP) have supported a research into the creation of a new strain of rice, which would grow faster and provide bigger yields as well as higher earnings for the farmers. After only a few years of experimentation by the West African Rice Development a new strain of rice was developed, which embodied the best qualities of Asian and African strains and suited the African climate and soil conditions.

This New Rice for Africa – known as Nerica – has become particularly popular among farmers in Guinea who find that its yield is much higher than that of their local rice varieties. The Nerica harvest also tends to fall between those of their other local strains, which ensures that rice is available to feed the farmers and their families throughout the year.

In 2003 TCAD celebrated its 10th anniversary. At this conference commitments were made to help fulfil the UN Millennium Development Goals through intensifying the Africa-Asian cooperation, consolidating peace and good governance in Africa and continuing to reinforce the roles of the private sector and civil society for the future of Africa.

2004 – The International Year of Rice

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has declared 2004 the International Year of Rice. The proposal came from 44 UN Member States who felt that this might highlight the fact that more than half of the 840 million people suffering from chronic hunger live in areas depending on rice. Rice provides 20 percent of the world’s dietary supply; wheat 19 per cent and Maize 5 per cent.

FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf points out that within Asia, Africa and the Americas almost a billion households depend on rice and rice production for their livelihood and that about four-fifth of the world’s rice is produced by small-scale farmers.

The UN Millennium Development Goals

All United Nations Member States have pledged, by 2015 to:

Source: UN Development Programme (UNDP)’s newsletter CHOICES, September 2003. UNDP, One United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017, USA. (choices@undp.org).
 
"UNDP is the UN’s global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life."


IV. Preparing for the June 2004 Global Compact Summit

Five years ago (July 1999) the United Nations together with world business leaders formulated an agreement, the so-called Global Compact,  in which a commitment was made to uphold a set of values reflecting good human rights, labour and environmental standards.

At the 2004 annual Global Economic Forum in Davos (Switzerland) the UN Secretary-General reminded the meeting of this agreement, saying that the Compact’s mission, i.e. making openness work by underpinning economic imperatives with social and environmental priorities, is as relevant today as it was five years ago. Global Compact, he said, had brought companies together with UN agencies, labour and civil society in a common concern to uphold shared values and responsible practices so as to protect the global economy from the negative effects of the post-cold-war "isms", such as protectionism, populism, nationalism, ethnic chauvinism, fanaticism and terrorism.

Today more than 1,200 companies from over 70 countries (including India, Brazil, China, Egypt and South Africa) are participating in Global Compact as well as many global labour and civil society organizations.

But in spite of good progress more needs to be done. Mr. Annan hoped that large companies, who had tended to be bystanders, would join the initiative. He wished to allay any fears of  ‘small print’ in the Compact agreement; it was simply  about getting the job done through dialogue, learning and projects. Mr. Annan  pointed out that this exclusive focus on the practical side was not always understood by those whose profession it is to interpret the nuances of words, but "I know business leaders understand the importance of action".

Mr. Annan saw the policy dialogue on transparency and anti-corruption which had been taking place at this Global Economic Forum as one of the most exciting projects, telling the meeting that this subject is very central to the United Nations and the Compact "as transparency and the fight against corruption are essential to tackling the root causes of many challenges."

At the forthcoming summit meeting on the Compact, planned to take place on 24th June this year, Mr. Annan hoped that the business world would share their experiences on what works and what doesn’t work, and why; what are the new challenges on the horizon; and how can the Global Compact become more effective in fulfilling its mission?

Source: www.un.org
-


V. The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) – a voice for the people at the UN?

The Inter-Parliamentary Union held its annual UN hearing at the United Nations headquarters in October last year. It was attended by more than 120 legislators from 42 national parliaments.

Together with the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the General Assembly President Julian Robert Hunte, the IPU President, Senator Sergio Paez opened the meeting and outlined the programme, which focused on the issue of reform of the United Nations system as a precondition for greater world security, together with other topics relating to security and peace.

Mr. Kofi Annan expressed his delight with the UN General Assembly’s decision (in 2002) to grant the IPU observer status, stressing that the intergovernmental structure of the UN was reflecting "an earlier age" and needed to be reformed: "The voice of the people must be heard at the United Nations. And few render that voice more authentically than elected parliamentarians". Mr. Annan hoped that parliamentarians would seek to build political momentum at home and encourage their governments to prioritize the reform issue.

Concurring with the UN Secretary-General, Mr. Hunte said that a pre-requisite for the UN to be able to carry out its responsibilities was "a significant attitudinal adjustment on the part of the UN Member States". Therefore he welcomed the deepening relationship between parliamentarians and the UN, hoping also that the General Assembly’s reform efforts might foster the building of a global parliament "more efficient in its decision-making process and more capable of taking effective decisions.

The IPU President highlighted the commitment of the Inter-Parliamentary Union to give its solidarity and political support to the United Nations for the fostering of peace and understanding in the world.

Contact: Inter-Parliamentary Union, 5 chemin du Pommier, Case postale 330, CH-1218 Grand Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland. E-mail postbox@mail.ipu/org Website www.ipu.org
_________________________




VI. "PEACE IT TOGETHER" – a Youth Culture of Peace Initiative


The United Network of Youth, UNOY, formerly known as the United Nations of Youth, based in the Netherlands, has launched a campaign promoting the building of a culture of peace. UNOY firmly believes that a Culture of Peace and Non-violence not only can but also will become a reality if we work for it together.

The change of name to the United Network of Youth was aimed at reflecting more clearly the core activities of the organization. Under the motto "Peace It Together"
The UNOY Peace-builders Campaign for a Culture of Peace invites "enthusiastic youth organizations" everywhere to help create a network of young people who will cooperate towards this end. Youth, says the Campaign, "are stakeholders in the processes of social transformation and key actors in building peace and providing alternatives to violence."

UNOY hopes that youth will work with other community members; with their family, peers, organizations, churches, local as well as national governments, media etc, and offers various suggestions as to how to go about initiating such cooperation.

In a "Peace K-it Together" UNOY gives some general ideas and useful tips on how for instance to: spread information; set up workshops; plan a press conference, or how to write a newsletter.

For more information contact:
UNOY Peacebuilders, Venedien 25, 1441 AK Purmerend, The Netherlands
e-mail unoy@unoy.org   website: www.unoy.org
_________________


VII. "MISSILES OF EMPIRE: America’s 21st Century Global Legions"

OPTU recently received a copy of the Western States Legal Foundation’s Information Bulletin of October 2003, headed "Missiles of Empire: America’s 21st Century Global Legions". This paper, written by Andrew M. Lichterman, is seeking to transfer to the general public, in the plainest possible wording, a wealth of information on the progress and the thinking of politicians and people within the military-industrial complex on national war and defense capacity.

Reading this chilling material and - hovering over it for the better part of a day – I realized that I was teetering on the borderline of those whom its content was likely to reach. Maybe if one’s daily job was earning a living within this field, and breathing in each day the constant aspiration of finding and maintaining ever more sophisticated ways of destruction, and the capability to win a war, should it occur,  - then perhaps it would be easier to understand the raison d’etre of  this ‘empire of missiles’. Habit and repetition both have their own effect on the human mind.

However it appears that while a public debate is taking place on upgrades of certain parts of the nuclear arsenal and based on whatever amount of information has been made available, the work continues. The Pentagon and its contractors, we are told, are poised to begin the development of a whole new generation of long range delivery systems. Missile technology research and development, although slowing after the Cold War, began accelerating again in the late 90’  "as the contractor and service constituencies of the strategic nuclear forces, the weapons laboratories and their representatives in Congress worked to repackage much of the high-tech Cold War military, including nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, for a new ‘counterproliferation’ mission". After September 11 almost all constraints on military budgets were lifted and increased funding for these efforts as well as for new ideas and initiatives became readily available, unobstructed by any coherent or consistent opposition from the public arena.

Much thinking is being devoted to be able to reach, strike and demolish anything anywhere, from the sea, the air, the ground – or even space – with ever greater precision and efficiency.  

Forming part of the vision set forth in the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) is what the military labels a "prompt global strike". This is apparently a "viable prompt global strike capability, whether nuclear or non-nuclear" that will allow the US to quickly strike "high-payoff, difficult-to-defeat targets from stand-off ranges" and assure that the desired effect is produced. Such a capability will provide "war-fighting commanders with the ability to rapidly deny, delay, deceive, disrupt, destroy, exploit and neutralize targets in hours/minutes rather than weeks/days even when US and allied forces have a limited forward presence".

Among the most publicly known proposals, which would enable such prompt global strikes, would be the research into producing reusable military "space planes".
NASA’s ongoing ‘civilian’ space program is seeking ways of replacing the aging Space Shuttle, which would continue to allow human access to space and the manning and servicing of the International Space Station. In early 2002 NASA together with the Air Force conducted a study, exploring the possibilities for common technology development for both military and NASA re-usable launch vehicle programs. The Space Plane, according to materials prepared by NASA for industry briefings, would conduct "offensive and defensive counter-space operations"; it would be employing radio frequency, microwave and jamming systems, deploy a variety of systems surveillance, communications, and reconnaissance, and would also provide "Decisive Precision Firepower". Combat operations "may include preemptive strikes" against hard and deeply buried targets.

This plane in space - the space surrounding our planet - could carry a number of so-called Common Aero Vehicles (CAVs), which would, the Military Space Plane (MSP) advocates tell us, enable "interchangeable use of virtually the entire arsenal of next generation air munitions currently in development at the Air Force’s Air Armaments Center".

While a military space plane or a hypersonic vehicle (HCV) is likely to take ten or twenty years to develop, the military is hopeful that their less ambitious efforts, such as the CAV, will be available at an earlier date.

This is only a peep into the Global Strike wish list. There is more, much more. And while the public debate goes on, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons and delivery systems have routinely been rolling out of factories. Meanwhile the George W. Bush administration has been eliminating prior requirements for verified destruction of strategic nuclear missiles in the 2002 US-Russian Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty; withdrawn from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty; rejected the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty and refused to apply the model developed by his father for the verified elimination of chemical weapons. The current Administration’s 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States pronounces a policy of preventive war with the right to attack any country the USA unilaterally determines to be a threat.

The briefing tells you that the US military-industrial complex is today so immense as to defy comprehension – "even those paying attention tend to focus on one small piece at a time". The occasional headline or "newsbyte" will attract some attention to a particular accident or incident, "criticizing the hubcaps while the juggernaut rolls on".  The briefing contends that while a few congress people will challenge one or another particularly extreme new weapon, the question is seldom "why", but rather "how much".

The Western States Legal Foundation, based in California, believes that the path ahead can still be changed, "but we must begin with an understanding of where we are, and how we got here".  It suggests that the only solution, which will increase the security of ordinary people everywhere, is "for all of us, in our respective societies, to do everything we can to get the most violent elements in our cultures – whether in or out of uniform – under control".

In conclusion, the briefing states that this will require far more than changing a few faces in Washington: "We will need a genuine peace movement, ready to make connections to movements for ecological balance, and for social and economic justice, and by doing so to address the causes of war. Before we can expect others to join us, it must be clear that we are leaving the path of violence".

Contact: Western States Legal Foundation, 1504 Franklin St. Suite 202, Oakland, California 94612 USA
Fax (510)839-5397 Website www.wslfweb.org


 
VIII. Let not our death have been in vain

"The rule of power is darkness. The rule of law is light.
In the darkness of retaliation, the proper path for human civilization is illumined by
the spirit of illumination that ‘no one else should ever suffer as we did’.
Lifting up that light, the aging Hibakusha are calling for
US President George Bush to visit Hiroshima.
We all support that call and hereby demand that President Bush, Chairman Kim Jong Il of North Korea, and the leaders of all nuclear-weapon states come to Hiroshima and confront the reality of nuclear war.
We must somehow convey to them that nuclear weapons are utterly evil, inhumane and illegal under international law."

Statement by Tadatochi Akiba, Mayor of Hiroshima




IX. NUCLEAR WEAPONS AWARENESS  PROGRAMME

The Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) is among many other UK based groups, such as Abolition 2000, British Pugwash Group, MEDACT, Oxford Research Group, Quaker Peace Social Witness UK, and World Court Project, who have decided to work together to develop an extensive public awareness programme on nuclear weapons issues.

The idea of creating such an awareness programme is based on a suggestion made by Nobel Peace Laureate Professor Sir Joseph Rotblat. The collaborating organizations will each contribute their own expertise in a combined effort to prepare the public awareness programme, founded on a solidly based research.

It will be made available through various means, such as proactive electronic resources, communications with parliamentarians, curriculum development and youth education, and large-scale VIP events that will bring together internationally recognized scientists and celebrities/media personalities to highlight the urgency of the issue.

Through all these types of initiatives the collaboration intends to help make people more aware of the grave dangers of present nuclear weapons policies. While the work of the Nuclear Weapons Awareness Programme will be concentrating on reaching the UK public, it is hoped that similar groups and organizations in the EU, US and elsewhere might, if this programme proves effective, be able to build on this approach.

For more information, contact SGR, PO Box 473, Folkestone, Kent, CT20 1GS, UK
E-mail: info@sgr.org.uk


    

X. Strategies for US National Security: Winning the Peace in the 21st Century"


The highly reputable, nonpartisan and private operating Stanley Foundation undertakes a variety of educational initiatives and focused discussions that bring together policy professionals, diplomats and other experts. Among its recent publications (October 2003) is a Task Force Report on Strategies for the US Security Program.

The task force took as its starting point that, resulting from the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, the need of the United States was, with the support of the American people and its allies, to develop a new grand national security strategy (NSS) in order to be able to prosecute the war on terrorism efficiently and effectively.

Some analysts as well as several members of the task force argued that the resulting "Bush Doctrine" represented the most profound shift in US grand strategy in the past 50 years and construed this doctrine of preventive war to mean that the United States will not hesitate to take anticipatory or preventive action to defend itself, whenever it decides it must. The war against the regime of Saddam Hussein is viewed as the first manifestation of this new policy.

Few members of the task force disagreed with the goals and strategic principles outlined in the strategy, though differences arose as to how the USA should go about using its power in a way that does not create further instability and future catastrophic attacks on US territory.

The above background to the new NSS doctrine raised the following questionable points for members of the task force:


Several members of the task force strongly disputed these assumptions.

A study of this comprehensive Task Force Report will be found especially helpful to those who seek clarification and understanding of how the United States sees itself and the role it wishes to play in today’s world.

The document concludes with the comment that while the new National Security Strategy has much to commend it, it also embodies "a dangerous degree of hubris". It ends citing the following words of the 20th century historian Arnold Toynbee:

"Great empires do not die of murder, but suicide. And the moment of greatest danger is their moment of greatest strength, for it is then that complacency and hubris infect the body politic, squander its strength, and mock its virtues."

A copy of the NSS can be found at the US State Department website: http/www/state.gov/r/pa/ei/wh/c7889/htm This NSS was the first public release of a strategy document in nearly 3 years and its importance was magnified by the fact that it was the Bush administration’s first official strategic policy announcement in the aftermath of 9/11. The key concepts of NSS were articulated in the State of the Union "axis of evil" speech in January 2000 and in presidential speeches at West Point and Fort Drum in June 2002.

Copies of the Task Force Report are obtainable from The Stanley Foundation, 209 Iowa Avenue, Muscatine, IA 52761, USA (e-mail: info@stanleyfoundation.org)
____________

"Defeating al-Qaida would not end the problem of proliferation,
because al-Qaida is deadly even without nuclear, chemical, and biological arms.
But, meanwhile, the nuclear programs of North Korea and Iran are driven by nationalism, not terrorism, and must be dealt with primarily on that basis.
September 11, the administration's "eureka" moment, caused it to lump together terrorists and rogue regimes and to come up with a prescription for fighting them - namely pre-emption that frightens and divides the world at precisely the moment US security depends on bringing people together".

(Madeleine Albright in the September/October 2003 issue of Foreign Affairs)



 XI.  GO TO THE PEOPLE -  Travel with Awareness

This exceptionally helpful guidebook, published by Christians Aware, aims to provide a service for a growing number of thoughtful travelers who have become dissatisfied with the level and quality of experience offered by the mass tourism industry.

As is emphasized in the preface, the book is written "for every person who plans to travel and for many who have an interest in traveling primarily to meet people, show interest in their lives and to share their concerns." Fortunately, in our crisis-ridden world, this accounts for a growing number of us who have come to realize that by traveling with the conscious aim of developing multi-cultural and inter-faith understanding and friendship we are making no small contribution to bringing about a better and more peaceful world.

By being open to visiting and seeing places in this spirit and as our hosts experience them rather than with our own pre-conceived expectations, pleasurable surprises can await us.

There is, for example, the story of a Kenyan leader unexpectedly switching plans made by a British travel group hoping to see a beautiful hippo pool at the end of a long journey, to an invitation to visit instead his grandmother’s farm. Disappointment was quickly replaced on arrival by the unforgettable experience of being welcomed to a family and community that had been there for hundreds of years.

An interesting example of and explanation for motivation is given by one person who undertook a pilgrimage to Ladakh in the Himalayas:

"I chose to go to Ladakh alone. Travelling with a harmonious companion is both pleasant and helpful in times of perplexity, but it can also shield one from personal new experiences.

Travelling alone can be exciting, challenging, liberating – giving the imagination free rein so that all that is offered within a new experience can be savoured consciously, with an openness of heart and mind".

Arriving in New Delhi this traveler was met by the only Indian there of her acquaintance, ushered through a barrage of taxi drivers and put on a flight to Leh, Ladakh’s capital. There she was met and hosted by the father of her Indian friend, experiencing a number of exhilarating yet somewhat frightening car journeys that can only be imagined by those who have not been exposed to car travel on Indian roads, showing how, being in a totally unaccustomed environment, "initial alarm can turn into acceptance of a new situation."

In addition to its "Ten Commandments for Travellers", this book contains a mine of practical information and advice, including a list of suggestions as to what to take and what not to take and hints on planning and preparing for the travel. It is tastefully illustrated with a number of beautiful coloured photographs.

From beginning to end this book reflects the meticulous care, consideration and, let us add, compassion with which it has been written and put together by its editors, Barbara Butler and Ailsa Moore. * It cannot be recommended too highly.

*Ailsa Moore is a trained biologist and teacher who more recently has spent time traveling to a number of areas of conflict where her charity has been working on development and income generating programmes.

Barbara Butler is the Executive Secretary of Christians Aware. She writes and teaches, organizes, conferences and courses on mission and development issues and travels, mainly to the developing world.

For information as to availability and price of this book contact: Christians Aware, 2 Saxby Street, Leicester LE2 OND, U.K.
________________________________




XII. Human Genetic Alert

Human Genetic Alert (HGA), based in London and described as an independent public interest watchdog, is committed to providing information on a regular basis to people who are concerned about genetic issues, and to formulating clear and concise policies which aim to serve the interest of the general public.

In a recent 12-page briefing the possible dangers and benefits of human genetic research are being discussed and considered, highlighting the pro-et-con of some crucial points, such as: the ethics of medical genetic testing; the cloning and stem cell research; the gene therapy and human genetic engineering; and commerce, research and patents.

The HGA group has adopted five main principles:

This briefing and other material are available on the Human Genetic Alert website: http://www.hgalert.org/briefings/briefing1.pdf  Source: Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) newsletter, November 2003, address: PO Box 473, Folkestone, Kent CT20 1GS, UK. E-mail newsletter@sgr.org.uk Website: http://www/sgr.org uk/
__________

XIII.

Our last Many to Many mailing included a pamphlet, which highlighted a culture of peace initiative, aiming to contribute to the worldwide efforts to bring into being a culture anchored in Heart.

This initiative is based on the vision and work of Nicholas Roerich and the pledge Manifesto 2000, which gives a set of common values that can guide and unite us in the work ahead.

In combining the ancient symbol of trinity, used by Nicholas Roerich for the banner of peace, with the clear and simple guidelines given us by the Nobel Peace Laureates in the Manifesto 2000, we can continue the work and gain strength and inspiration from them – and from each other.

A banner is now available which carries and shares this energy to which we can contribute, each in our own way.


XIV. The Great Invocation

TE INOINGA NUI
Na te maramatanga kei te
Ngakau o Te Atua
Kia koha te maramatanga ki te
Ngakau o te tangata
Kia koha te maramatanga ki te ao

Na te aroha kei te ngakau
O Te Atua
Ki horapa te aroha ki te
Ngakau o te tangata
Kia hoki mai ano te Karaiti
Ki te ao

Na te mauri o Te Atua
Kia marama te haere a te tangata
I te huarahi o Te Atua

Na roto mai I te Tangata
Ma te maramatanga me te aroha
Tatau e arahi
A ma tenei e pa kuaha ki te Kino

Ma te Maramatanga,
Ma te Aroha,
Ma te Kaha e whakau
Te whakaaro nui te ao




THE GREAT INVOCATION

From the point of Light within the Mind of God
Let light stream forth into the minds of men.
Let Light descend on Earth.

From the point of Love within the Heart of God
Let love stream forth into the hearts of men
May Christ return to Earth.

From the centre where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide the little wills of men –
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.

From the centre which we call the race of men
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.

Let Light and Love and Power restore the plan on Earth.