twitter facebook donate

News Release Archive | nato | Accuracy.Org

Is NATO Ending the Afghan War?

May 22, 2012


REBECCA GRIFFIN, rgriffin at peaceactionwest.org
Griffin is the political director of Peace Action West. She said today: “President Obama clearly feels the pressure to end the war. However, the plan endorsed at this week’s NATO summit leaves the door open to a substantial U.S military presence as far out as 2024. This is clearly out of step with the vast majority of Americans who want our troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. Despite the administration’s efforts to sell this plan as an end to the war, we’re still talking about thousands of soldiers and billions of dollars for another twelve years.

Opposition to this war is not going away. Last week, House Republicans tried to beat back the inevitable tide by blocking a vote on an amendment supporting withdrawal that many believe would have passed. But the writing is on the wall and the American people will continue to speak up until our government brings us a clear plan to end this war.”

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) on Monday released the following statement as world leaders met in Chicago for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit: “The [NATO] talks are being billed as discussions of plans to end the war. The war in Afghanistan is not ending. These talks are simply about financing the next phase of the war.”

“The Strategic Partnership Agreement between the U.S. and Afghanistan commits us to the country for at least another decade, despite public support for the war being at an all time low. The United States will pay for half of the estimated $4.1 billion per year cost of supporting 352,000 Afghan army and police officers. Afghanistan’s contribution will be $500,000. The rest will be financed by our ‘NATO partners.’ It is not surprising that support for the war among NATO members is waning, with France threatening to pull out its troops by the end of this year.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Afghanistan, Dennis Kucinich, Middle East, military, nato, Peace Action West, Rebecca Griffin, war,

Veterans Return Medals to NATO

May 21, 2012


The following veterans returned their medals yesterday during a protest outside the NATO meeting in Chicago as thousands protested. See footage here.

JACOB GEORGE, jacobdavidgeorge at gmail.com, http://www.operationawareness.org
Geroge, who is from Arkansas, recently visited Afghanistan where he was deployed several times. He said Sunday at the NATO protest in Chicago: “Today I made history with my brothers and sisters in the military. We returned our medals and rejected the mistakes we have made and the lies we have been taught. We showed that solidarity and justice can prevail over endless war.”

MAGGIE MARTIN, maggiemartin at ivaw.org, http://ivaw.org
Martin is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War. She said yesterday as she returned her medals: “No amount of medals, ribbons, or flags can cover the amount of human suffering caused by these wars. We don’t want this garbage, we want our human rights, we want our right to heal.”

SCOTT KIMBALL, scttkmbll at gmail.com
Kimball is also a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and said Sunday outside the NATO meeting: “I am turning in these medals today for the people of Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and all victims of occupation across the world. And also, for all the service members and veterans who are against these wars: you’re not alone.”

AARON HUGHES, aarhughes at ivaw.org
Hughes is a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and he threw three medals in sequence on Sunday: “This medal here is for Anthony Wagner, he died last year. This medal right here is for one-third of the women who are sexually assaulted by their peers. We talk about standing up for our sisters in Afghanistan, but we can’t take care of our sisters here. And this medal right here, is because I’m sorry. I’m sorry to you all.”

SARAH LAZARE, Sarah.Lazare at gmail.com
Lazare has been working with veterans and military families for several years. She recently wrote the piece “Mobilizing Military Moms Against NATO.”

She can speak to the issues involved and connect media to veterans and military families.

Filed Under: Tagged With: Aaron Hughes, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Jacob George, Maggie Martin, nato, Sarah Lazare, Scott Kimball, war,

NATO and ICC: Power and Accountability

May 18, 2012

AARON HUGHES, aarhughes at ivaw.org; SCOTT KIMBALL, scttkmbll at gmail.com
Hughes and Kimball are veterans and members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. They will be leading a rally and march on Sunday to the NATO meeting “security perimeter.” Kimball said today: “We plan on returning our medals to the leaders of NATO — it’s been destabilizing, not stabilizing, Afghanistan. We are against this militarism.”

Hughes explained his returning of medals: “Because every day in this country, 18 veterans are committing suicide. Seventeen percent of the individuals that are in combat in Afghanistan, my brothers and sisters, are on psychotropic medication. Twenty to 50 percent of the individuals getting deployed to Afghanistan are already diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, military sexual trauma or a traumatic brain injury. Currently one-third of the women in the military are sexually assaulted.”

DAVID N. GIBBS, dgibbs at arizona.edu
Author of First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia, Gibbs is a professor of history and government at the University of Arizona who has written extensively on NATO. He said today: “NATO is an organization that lost its relevance with the Cold War. It was originally created to protect Europe against a military invasion by the Soviet Union. By any reasonable standard, it should simply have ceased to exist with the end of the Cold War in 1989. Today, it is largely an example of bureaucratic self-preservation, as well as a drain on the economy.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at law.uiuc.edu
Boyle is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of Tackling America’s Toughest Questions. Yesterday, AllAfrica.com reported that Charles Taylor — in his first statements after being convicted by the UN Special Court on Sierra Leone: “President George W. Bush not too long ago ordered torture and admitted to doing so. Torture is a crime against humanity. The United States has refused to prosecute him. Is he above the law? Where is the fairness?” The report noted that “In January of 2010, one Professor Francis A. Boyle of the College of Law at the University of Illinois filed a Complaint with the International Criminal Court against President Bush and at least five of his senior officials for allegedly committing international crimes.”

Just this week, Boyle returned to the U.S. from Malaysia and the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, which convicted Bush in absentia. He said today: “The International Criminal Court has become a joke and a fraud. I supported it originally. But no more. It has no credibility whatsoever. It just goes after tin-pot dictators in Africa while the real war criminals such as Bush, Blair and Netanyahu get off scot-free. Hence I went out to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal to convict Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their consigliore lawyers.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Aaron Hughes, David N. Gibbs, Francis Boyle, ICC, military, nato, Scott Kimball, war,

NATO Above the Law?

May 14, 2012

Human Rights Watch today released a report “Unacknowledged Deaths: Civilian Casualties in NATO’s Air Campaign in Libya”. NATO will be holding its summit in Chicago beginning May 20.

VIJAY PRASHAD, vijay.prashad at trincoll.edu
Author of Arab Spring, Libyan Winter and The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World, Prashad is chair of South Asian history and director of international studies at Trinity College, in Hartford, Connecticut.

He said today: “A United Nations report released in early March 2012 asked for an investigation of NATO’s potential war crimes, but was snubbed by the military alliance, whose lawyer, Peter Olsen, wrote in February of this year to the UN Commission that, ‘in the event the Commission elects to include a discussion of NATO actions in Libya, its report clearly states that NATO did not deliberately target civilians and did not commit war crimes in Libya.’ In other words, it is impossible for NATO to commit war crimes. NATO, unlike the Libyans, is too civilized to be guilty of any such violations. It is, therefore, above investigation. The scandal here is that NATO, a military alliance, refuses any civilian oversight of its actions. It operated under a UN mandate (Security Council Resolution 1973) and yet refuses to allow a UN evaluation of its actions. NATO, in other words, operates as a rogue military entity, outside the bounds of the prejudices of democratic society. It is precisely because NATO refuses an evaluation that the UN Security Council will not allow another NATO-like military intervention. The new HRW report reinforces what was raised in the UN report from March. It simply underlines the necessity of a formal and independent evaluation of NATO’s actions in Libya.”

On May 18, Prashad will be speaking at the the NATO Counter-Summit

See Prashad’s pieces:

“NATO’S Craven Coverup of Its Libyan Bombing”

“Straining NATO on Short Syrian Leash”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Arab Spring, Human Rights Watch NATO Report, Middle East, military, nato, NATO Air Campaign in Libya, NATO Civilian Casualties, Vijay Prashad, war,

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Rebuffs U.S. State Department on Upcoming Summit

April 16, 2012

Mairead Maguire, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her work on Ireland and was scheduled to attend the Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates this month in Chicago, has canceled her appearance citing a statement by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the State Department is an “active partner” in the event. Maguire notified associates, including other Nobel Prize Laureates, of her decision in a letter the Institute for Public Accuracy has obtained and is below.

The Nobel Summit leads up to the NATO Summit in Chicago. A video of Clinton’s recent remarks is available here.

Critics of the State Department and NATO applauded Maguire’s decision:

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at law.uiuc.edu
Boyle is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of “Tackling America’s Toughest Questions.” He said today: “It is well known that the so-called Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by Norwegian politicians and that Norway is a member of NATO. In other words the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by NATO politicians in order to further their own political interests. And now we have the Nobel Prizers finally come out of the NATO closet.” Boyle derided the notion of the U.S. State Department using the Nobel Peace Prize at the upcoming “NATO WARFEST in Chicago. But of course the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Henry Kissinger. Nobel ‘Peace Prize’? Tell that to millions in war after war — Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now threatening Syria and Iran.”

Boyle — who was a leading lawyer defending protesters during the fight against apartheid South Africa — noted that a video has also been released of former apartheid South African President Willem de Klerk touting his scheduled participation and interaction with Chicago students in conjunction with the upcoming events. Boyle noted that de Klerk “avoided testifying before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission — so from him there was no truth, no accountability, no prosecution.”

FREDRIK HEFFERMEHL, fredpax at online.no
 Author of “The Nobel Peace Prize: What Nobel Really Wanted,” Heffermehl said today: “I take the Mairead Maguire boycott of the Chicago event as a rising awareness of how far the Peace Prize has wandered from the original peace vision of Alfred Nobel, a world peace order based on global law and disarmament. Nobel wished to help a development in the direct opposite direction of what the U.S. and NATO are pursuing and it is particularly pertinent to abstain from participation in a Nobel event hosted by the U.S. State Department.”

“The Norwegian parliamentarians entrusted with the award have transformed it to suit their own political ideas and led Swedish authorities to initiate an investigation of the peace prize awards. The probe ended last month with an order to the Nobel Foundations to do a major overhaul, checking the purpose Nobel had in mind and giving clear instructions to ensure that all awards comply with the purpose.”

Mairead Maguire sent this letter out to fellow Nobel Peace Laureates and other associates on Friday:

Dear Friends,

I write to let you know that I have decided not to attend the 12th World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates on 23rd-25th April, 2012, in Chicago, USA.

On 10th April, Sec. of State H. Clinton appeared on video [on the U.S. State Department website] announcing plans for the forthcoming Nobel Peace Laureates Summit and said ‘The U.S. Department of State is proud to be an active partner in this event’. Sec. Clinton gave details of how the U.S. State Dept. is working with U.S. embassies around the world, to bring 20 students and four teachers from four countries to Chicago and explained that video conferences and portals for live streaming of events, will be managed by U.S. State Department.

I have now decided, with some sadness, not to be associated in this Partnership as I do not agree with many of the policies of the U.S. State Department. Indeed I have, as a Nobel Peace Laureate, (and in the spirit of Alfred Nobel) often called for disbandment of NATO, end of militarism and war, and for disarmament and demilitarization. I cannot therefore, in good conscience, be part of a Partnership with the U.S. State Government (NATO). I also believe that my participation in such a partnership would compromise my position and put in jeopardy my work in the Middle East and other countries.

I am very disappointed that what is a great opportunity for young people, the Nobel Laureates and organizations to listen, learn, and exchange friendships and experiences, has been, I believe, seriously compromised in such a Partnership.

However, I hope it will be an enjoyable and educational summit particularly for all the young people, and I am deeply saddened not to be with you all.

Peace,
Mairead Maguire
Peace People, Northern Ireland

Video of Willem de Klerk

Filed Under: Tagged With: Mairead Maguire, militarism, nato,

Obama Says G-8 Moving for “Intimacy” — Not Protests

March 6, 2012

When questioned at his first news conference of the year this afternoon about the upcoming G-8 meeting being moved from Chicago to Camp David, President Obama stated that G-8 leaders wanted to meet in an “intimate” and “casual” setting and “the weather should be good.” He made no direct reference to planned protests, but did say “I always have confidence in Chicago being able to handle security issues. Whether it’s Taste of Chicago or Lollapalooza or Bulls championships. We know how to deal with the crowd.” Question starts at 37:15.

“SUGAR” RUSSELL, press at OccupyChi.org
Russell, an activist with Occupy Chicago, said today: “If they wanted to have a more ‘intimate’ setting for the G-8, they would have arranged for that from the start. Instead, they have split the venues for the G-8 and NATO meetings. They fear protests, scrutiny and voices of people representing themselves. They are moving the G-8 meeting because they don’t want negative media, but we will continue the protests — and we’ll be so loud that they will hear us all the way in Camp David.

“The G-8 and NATO work hand in hand for the elites, for cutbacks in social services, militarization of schools and environmental damage that results in increasing inequality, poverty, racism, sexism, loss of youth to war, and destruction of civil rights and democratic systems of governance.”

See: “Obama Moves G-8 Summit from Chicago to Secluded Camp David.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: "Sugar" Russell, G8, nato,