Why you should respect and support ARC

Preamble
Introduction
Why should you support this campaign?
The present cycle must be broken
The UN Needs your Help
The Proposal
The UN Security Council Veto 5
Africa - 4 million dead in the last 4 years
Jobs
What is The Rationale behind ARC
A Nightmare Scenario
Divert military expenditures / Resources
Likely Opposition
Gun Crimes
Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE
Summary

Preamble

Kindred Spirits,

In considering this proposal, please be mindful of the fact that human beings are organisms and that most micro-organisms / bacteria die from the toxic effects of their waste products, before their food runs out.

Introduction

In the June 2001 edition of Nonviolent Action Dwight D Eisenhower, General Commander Allied Forces, World War 2 and US President 1952-1960 is quoted as saying:

"Every gun, every warship, every tank and every military aircraft built is, in the final analysis, a theft from those who are hungry and are not fed, from those who are naked and are not clothed."

This expresses part of the essence of ARC's (Arms Reduction Coalition) campaign.

The Arms Reduction Coalition (ARC) is campaigning for the states of the United Nations (UN) to agree and implement a legally binding instrument, to reduce the amount of resources spent on arms by between 1 and 5 percent for a period of between 10 and 25 years, and to spend the resources saved on programmes that benefit humanity and the earth. This reasonable proposal is based on Implementing Article 26 of the UN Charter, which the states of the UN have committed "to promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the worlds human and economic resources".

The value of the world's arms trade is currently over $800 bn (Billion Dollars) per year (The latest figures for 2001 is about $840bn).. A one percent year on year reduction on the previous year’s expenditure would make $8bn available in the first year.

ARC is about resources. Reducing the amount of resources being spent by the states of the UN on things to kill people, and diverting those resources to positive (UN based) humanitarian and Earthism programmes such as poverty reduction, sustainable development, protecting the vulnerable, peaceful resolution of conflict systems, maintaining the environment.

My talk’s purpose is to suggest some reasons why you should respect and support this ARC. I will talk about the ARC and gun crimes. Please forgive my style (I am not very adept at public speaking). Consider substance over from.

Why should you support this campaign?

For several reasons:
To quote Ex-Swedish Premier Olaf Palme;

"It is very unlikely that disarmament will ever take place if it must wait for the initiatives of governments and experts. It will only come about as the expression of the political will of people in many parts of the world."

1. Just imagine how great it will be if we succeed. For the poor people, for all peoples, and indeed life on earth. Its worth a try! Ten years ago we did not have mobile phones, yet in some countries there are now more mobile phones than people. Fifty years ago, few women could vote, yet now most have the vote. The change to a culture of peace is possible.

2. For it to succeed we require a broad based campaign, with demonstrated support from a large cross section of the population. We need You. Only then will the States of the UN consider it seriously, and perhaps, hopefully make a legally binding commitment required.

3. Without peace most Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) cannot achieve their aims. Without a reduction in weapons peace will be very difficult to achieve. Most people (leaders included) agreed on the need for peace before poverty can be effectively tackled. At a positive meeting on Africa's NEPAD development plan last year ;I said to Claire Short that I did not ask a question because I did not want to put a damp squib on the good work been done on development by pointing out that all that good work is often destroyed by war. By the way Claire Short did support the need for Arms reduction.

4. Implementing ARC requires continuous random inspections and regular reporting. If we had that we would not have had the Iraq war or the threats of war with North Korea or Iran.

5 To the public; the proposal is about reducing the resources spent on things to kill people, possibly themselves or their relatives especially as in Kofi Annan’s Millenniums report "We the peoples the Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century.." report we read that most wars are within states and most people killed or injured are civilians. 90% of all war casualties are civilians. Some weapons sold to Nigeria found their way to the IRA to be used against the British people.

6 If you think there are too many arms, more than is needed to ensure our security; Join ARC. Or, If you think too many resources are being spent on weapons; Join ARC. Or, If you want more resources to be spent on the environment, or tackling diseases, or helping the poor, or on development, or on conflict prevention; Join ARC. Or if you think that the arms trade or making things to kill people is abhorrent; Join ARC. Or, if you want the possibility of paying less tax. Join the Arms Reduction Campaign.

7 The request is about using those resources to improve the quality of life of all the Earth’s peoples. The coalition calls for some of the savings to be spent on programmes on own state’s programmes; which conceivably could include tax reductions.

The present cycle must be broken

Countries spent US$840 billion (an estimated 2.6% of world Gross Domestic Product) on weapons and other military expenditure in 2001, an average of US$137 for every person in the world. Yet 2 Billion of the world people live on less than US$2 per day.

"Without peace NGOs and the UN cannot achieve their aims. Without a reduction in weapons peace will be very difficult to achieve. The present cycle that must be broken is:

A) Large amounts of resources are used to make weapons.

B) The weapons are used to maim and kill people and to destroy their homes, their infrastructure and the environment.

C) The UN, NGOs and people who care are left to pick up the pieces and try to alleviate the resulting poverty and suffering and rebuilding their environments.

D) The world turns. Humanity advances. The weapons are replenished by more advanced and destructive ones and the cycle starts again."

The UN needs your Help

I note from the UN web site that periodically the UN tries to implement article 26, but they usually fail to reduce the resources diverted to armaments or at best have limited success.

On 13 February 1947 the security council resolved "To work out the practical measures for giving effect to General Assembly resolutions 41 and 42 of 14 December 1946 concerning, on the one hand, the general regulation and reduction of armaments and armed forces and the establishment of international control to bring about the reduction of armaments and armed forces."

On 12 December 1980 The UN passed Resolution 35/142 B : "Reduction of Military Budgets". It states the UN is "Convinced that reductions of military expenditures could be carried out without affecting the military balance to the detriment of the national security of any country".

The UN has tried many times but has only had partial success in part due to the powerful International Military Industrial complex and Militarism philosophy. The UN needs your help. ARC are asking for your support. This could take the form of :

a) Just saying you support the proposal – joining the coalition as a member or just endorse the ARC resolution.

b) Offer of resources (human, financial, physical)

c) Getting academics, experts, policy makers or you to write papers (that we can publish) analysing the proposal.)

d) Writing letters to MPs, Media, phone the radio etc in support of the proposal.

e) Join some of the organizations that support Arc such as CND (Campaign for Nuclear disarmament) and WILPF (Women's International League for Peace and Freedom) and ACTUN (Action for UN Renewal), WDC (World Disarmament Campaign), and CAAT (Campaign Against the Arms Trade).

We will be pleased to come and speak about the proposal to your group (resources permitting) and shall be holding other meetings in future to which we will invite you if you so wish. Contact us via our web site at www.arcwebsite.org

The Proposal

Essentially the proposal is for all the Member States of the UN to make a legally binding commitment to reduce the amount of the world's human and economic resources diverted to armaments by a small (one to five) agreed percentage each year. The resources saved can be used for poverty reduction, sustainable development, peaceful resolution of conflict systems, maintaining the environment etc. A strong emphasis is placed on implementation; requiring Members to have systems in place so that their resource figures can be independently verified / audited each year. Members will be required to recommit every ten to twenty years, so that if the proposal does not work they can revert back to spending the world's precious resources making things to kill people.
In summary a 1% to 5% reduction over 10 to 20 years. I hope you agree that is reasonable.

The UN Security Council Veto 5

ARC is aimed at one the Security council’s primary responsibility the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources. I have been informed by a senior UNA member that the original intention of article 26 was that the permanent 5 members of the SC with the veto would own most weapons so that they could prevent wars with deadly weapons. Instead the veto 5 (US, China, France, Russia and the UK) have betrayed this responsibility. Instead of reducing weapons, they have used it as a means of making money, fueling and satisfying the desire for arms. They have made a killing. Does anyone here support the Drop the debt campaign? Much of the debt owed by developing countries was brought about through the purchase of arms. At a recent Jubilee 2000, Drop the debt meeting we were informed that Some 30% of the loans made to the highly indebted nations is spent on arms. In some parts of Africa armed gangs are wreaking havoc, terrorizing and robbing people, raping women and spreading HIV/Aids. In some parts of Africa it is cheaper to buy a gun than chicken. Yet Africa makes few arms. (The philosophy of some UN states is that everyone should have a gun, this philosophy is being globalized).

The supply of arms made by the veto 5 members of the UN Security Council (who make over 80% of the arms in the world) to areas of conflict or potential conflict. It was estimated that both sides in the Iran - Iraq war would have run out of arms within 6 months; instead with the readily available supply ensured that the war lasted 6 years. In many cases it does not even take a war to devastate a country; just a crate load of weapons.

The arms trade not only provides the veto 5 with economic wealth but also provides the finance to enable them to develop even more weapons. People in indebted countries will be paying interest and loans for many years to come, some of which will be used to develop more weapons. The result is that millions have been killed, wounded, maimed, suffered and impoverished. Some responsibility for the wrecking and termination of these lives must be born by the arms makers. They make some of their living from making and selling weapons to people to kill other people. They make some of their living from the suffering, blood and killing of people. Effectively, they are using their lives on earth to kill people. Well what is done is done. We can't put the clock back or take away the weapons or the knowledge. That arming everyone strategy / policy has achieved all it can and now has mostly negative effects. So let us reduce arms gradually. A new strategy / policy is now urgently needed. It will be difficult for the veto 5 as they will require a change of mindset.

Many times in the last 50 years members of the Veto 5 have supplied weapons to both sides in civil wars. The Security council’s Veto 5, entrusted with maintaining peace and security supplied weapons to both sides in civil wars

Africa - 4 million dead in the last 4 years

In the last 4 years over 4 million people have died due to the wars and arms in Africa. Over 3 million in the Democratic Republic of the Congo alone. 4 million dead in the last 4 years; That’s more people died per month than in the whole of the Iraq war. 4 million dead in the last 4 years; That’s more Africans dying than at the highest rate during slavery. 4 million dead in the last 4 years and yet Africa does not produce weapons. 4 million dead, yet incredibly, no one person has been prosecuted for supplying the weapons of their destruction and death of the 4 million in the last 4 years. It's like legalized aiding, abetting and facilitating mass slaughter.

In Prime minister’s Question time Wednesday 6 Feb 2002

Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan) asked: Is the Prime Minister aware that on the day of the Twin Towers disaster, there took place in this city an arms trade fair sponsored by the Ministry of Defence? Among the customers at that fair for state-of-the-art weaponry were both sides in the civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Would it not be a useful start to the Prime Minister's mission to Africa if he announced that henceforth this country will not sell arms to both sides in African civil wars?

Part of The Prime Minister (Tony Blair's) reply was: "Our arms sales to Africa run at about 1 per cent. of total arms sales, so it is important to put that in context. There are also, incidentally, jobs and industry in this country to consider. Of course it is important to take care who we sell arms to, and we do."

4 million dead in 4 years and weapons made by the Veto 5 are being supplied to both sides. It's like the police giving you and your family and friends guns whenever you have a conflict.

Jobs

Lest briefly look at the loss of jobs argument.

1. ARC is a Challenge: to Economists, Military, Business / investors as well as politicians. I have every confidence that they will be able to make life better of us all by effective planning and implementation of a small percentage year on year reduction in the resources spent on arms. A UN study by Nobel Prize winning economists concluded that diverting spending from arms to the supply side of the economy would increase employment four times (7 times for the consumption). Each arms trade job is subsidized by your taxes.

2. The buggy makers mentality. I recall a story related to me by a lecturer. During the late 1800’s one of the wealthiest men in the world died. He and his family had made enormous wealth from the horse and cart trade. In his will he stated that none of the family’s wealth should be invested in the (then new) motor car but remain invested in horse based modes of transport. It was beyond his comprehension that the car could overtake the horse based modes of transport. One aspect of the loss of jobs argument is that it is beyond the comprehension of some that the world could do without so many weapons. I hope many of those involved in the arms industry would choose to do something other make things to kill people given the chance. Another implication is that the only decent work the government can invest in is making and trading in weapons to kill people.

 What is The Rationale behind ARC?

1. Integrity - The states of the UN, in particular the SC committed to A26. They should honour that commitment.

2. Economic - A UN study by Nobel Prize winning economists concluded that diverting spending from arms to the supply side of the economy would increase employment four times (7 times for the consumption).

3. Human Security - Humans needs peace and security. Arms do not provide peace or security. Indeed countries no longer have to go to war to defeat another country, all they need to do is to ensure there is a large supply of arms available in the other country. Sir Richard Jolly (President of UNA) in his talk on Human security shows a graph which shows that after an initial increase security does not increase significantly with increased arms expenditure. He emphasized that the states of the UN are vastly overspending on military approached to security.

4. Moral - Making things to kill people and destroy life on earth is immoral. Humans have dominion over the earth and are now managing it. Where is the good in having weapons that can destroy the earth and all its peoples many times over? Mankind has all it takes to eliminate wars, poverty and underdevelopment permanently. But mankind also has all it takes to wipe human life off the face of the earth once and for all. During the cold war I read Isaiah 24 in my bible. It says the earth is going to be devastated and left desolate, lie shattered and ruined. I was aware of the CND movement. I became concerned about Nuclear weapons and the prevailing strategy of MAD; Mutually Assured Destruction. This meant that if USSR and the US started to fight they would destroy everyone. Every man, Every woman, Every child, Every animal, Every bird; Everything. From then until now I cannot think of a more evil thought. Yet it was the actually policy of those charged with defending us. "But I also made it clear to [Vladimir Putin] that it's important to think beyond the old days of when we had the concept that if we blew each other up, the world would be safe." George W. Bush, US President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, preaching on the US position on Health and safety (from CAAT news June-July 2000 / Issue 166 - www.caat.org.uk )

 5. Resources - The earth has limited resources, with the expected future demand (i.e. population 12bn), why waste precious resources on weapons?

6 Sustainable Development - The earth's resources are being depleted at a rapid rate. We need to develop sustainable technologies not the inherently destructive weapons technologies.

7 Human Development - Weapons are produced at the expense of the world’s peoples. Some 30% of the loans made to the highly indebted nations were spent on arms. That means that poor people have been and will continue while the debts remain to finance the production and development of arms in richer countries. The prime responsibility lies with the buyers and consumers of weapons. A major responsibility lies with arms makers and traders

A Nightmare Scenario

One Nightmare scenario that is becoming increasingly closer is that the whole world might become like Israel and Palestine; but with the United States (US) and it's allies against the rest. This scenario implies that the world faces a future in which the infrastructure, human environment and all cultural monuments of those countries that the US sees as enemies (some of whom may be friend now) are destroyed with many civilian casualties.

The continued and increased huge expenditure by the US on arms; over US$400 billion per year. This means the US will be driven to either seek ways to use these weapons; or sell them to the rest of the world - killing people to finance future arms development. The exporting of the American philosophy that everyone should have a gun to defend (???) themselves and light weapons to many impoverished countries can only make our bad situation worse. Guns kill people. During the 20th century guns in the US killed more Americans, than all American soldiers killed in all wars.

The propensity for the US to use force (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, and the 23 countries the US has bombed since world war 2) and not fully explore or invest in non-violent means of conflict resolution. If only 1% of the spending on the US military was diverted to finding non-violent means of conflict resolution we would have effective solutions. The genius and ability of the American people to solve complex problems is extraordinary. It a shame that many of their best minds are employed making things to kill people.

In this scenario the US may be seen as Darth Vader's master in Star Wars films; with their star wars system targeting earth; while the rest of the world hopes for a Luke Skywalker who can use the force of good to defeat the empire. I love the American people; I always seem to meet nice ones, but some of their government's policies sucks.

Divert military expenditures / Resources

The value of the world's arms trade is currently over $800 bn (Billion Dollars) per year. A one percent year on year reduction on the previous year’s expenditure would make $8bn available in the first year. Over ten years this would total $73 bn available for the improvement of humankind and preservation of our common home - Earth. During the same ten years $7,573 bn would still have been spent on things to kill people.

The value of UK’s arms trade is about 24 bn (Billion pounds) per year. Over ten years a 1% reduction would make 2.2bn be made available for the benefit of the people of the UK and the world. During the same ten years 227bn would still have been spent on instruments of death.

Note: The total net programmed budget of the UN for the two years 2002 and 2003 is (6, 082, 959, 000) 6bn US dollars

The world military sector is a vast repository of resources -- financial, physical, human and technological. If only a fraction of these resources could be diverted to meet the unmet socioeconomic needs of the developing world, then not only would human welfare be dramatically enhanced, but also many conflicts with their roots in economic deprivation would be averted." (. http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/ip/global/coat/24/international/intdevel.txt )

"In at least 84 countries, military expenditures exceed expenditures on health alone. In one out of three developing countries, military expenditures exceed half or more of all expenditures on health and education. In more than one out of six developing countries, military expenditure actually exceeds combined expenditure on all forms of health and education, in eight cases by two to four times. The countries spending the highest proportion of their resources on military uses are also those countries whose standing in human development lags most behind their standing in wealth and GNP. In contrast, countries with the lowest military expenditures generally rank considerably higher in human development than in GNP per capita." (http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/quotes.htm ). Yet an increasing amount of resources are still being wasted on arms; by both producers and consumers, instead of poverty reduction.

In Angola over 22% of its GDP was spent on the military during 2001.

Pray that your country does not discover resources such as oil and diamonds coveted by the veto 5. Because if they do your people will suffer, they will have little peace because outsiders will facilitate and orchestrate wars so they can get those resources for cheaply; in exchange for scrap metal and weapons of death and destruction of your people and country. For example Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Sudan, South America, Iraq to name a few.

Reductions and qualitative limitations of armaments are necessary for common security.

The benefits of reducing armaments in terms of alleviating the economic and social burdens of the arms race are obvious. Of even greater importance would be the creation of a political atmosphere in which peaceful relations among nations could flourish, and in which there would be a lesser risk of war.

The proposal should include the cumulative sum of all resources spent on all arms. From nuclear weapons to hand guns, from war ships to military air craft, from chemical weapons to biological weapons. As Dwight D Eisenhower puts it "Every gun, every warship, every tank and every military aircraft built". It includes research, development, production, marketing, support, maintenance; all resources (Human, Financial and physical).

It includes small arms.

As Kofi Annan puts it "We the Peoples"

238 "The death toll from small arms dwarfs that of all other weapons systems – and in recent years greatly exceeds the toll of the atomic bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In terms of the carnage they cause, small arms, indeed, could well be described as "weapons of mass Destruction". Yet there is still no global non-proliferation regime to limit their spread, as there is for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."

Likely Opposition

Major opposition will come from NON-Democratic states. Those that are not ruled with the consent of the people (or government of the people, by the people, for the people); but by groups with interests in (i.e. making money from) armaments.

The preamble of constitution of UNESCO, states

"That the great and terrible war which has now ended was a war made possible by the denial of the democratic principles of the dignity, equality and mutual respect of men, and by the propagation, in their place, through ignorance and prejudice, of the doctrine of the inequality of men and races;"

Opposition will come from some of the most powerful sections of society such as the military (less toys for the boys), the arms companies (less profits), Universities (less research); etc. To quote Richard Falk in Peace is Possible "Millions of people gain profits and fame by selling and using weaponry. Strong networks of such people use their money to influence political leaders, elections, and even TV and newspaper coverage"

To quote ACTUN’s Vice Chair VIJAY MEHTA "It is for profit, greed, world domination, and control of land space and other resources. It is about protecting interests and investments of the big corporations and powerful governments. It is about creating tensions, upsetting the balance of power among different countries."

Gun Crimes

I think you are all aware of the problem of gun crimes in London. At a meeting last year a Rasta man pointed out that in most countries where there has been a recent struggle for civil or political or economic rights; drugs and gun crimes now hold sway. In the cities of the USA, South Africa, Jamaica and the UK to name a few.

Last year I went back to Jamaica to bury a member of my family who was violently robbed and brutally murdered in cold blood.

I was sad to find the war zone state that the land of my birth seemed to be in; indeed before coming here I was somewhat afraid. Our beautiful Island paradise is in danger of becoming a wasteland like Afghanistan. The war is for the hearts and minds of men, and a mindset based upon greed and lack of respect for life of a small minority of the population, who do sometimes corrupt others.

Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE

After the funeral, I could not sleep for days; until I wrote up my thoughts in a letter and sent it to the Newspaper (who did not print it as usual).

It was entitled:

"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

Let me hear you say it:

"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

I asked everyone to try their best to agree, declare, implement, monitor and enforce a cease-fire for a whole next year. It will help to reduce the killings and play a major role in the decade of the culture of peace that we are now in. To end a war and gain peace somewhere along the line you must have a cease-fire.
"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

Let us say it together. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE". Its like some of you do not understand. We are saying; the shooting, the killing, the blood running we are tired of it, we don't want anymore of it, it is time for it to stop, finish, done. To get peace the first step is a cease-fire. So cease; the shooting, the killing, the blood running. What we want now and in future is peace. Let us say it together again. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

To the young people especially men who find guns attractive or are attracted to guns, Young man, Turn away, turn away from the path of destruction. Young man, Turn away, turn away from the guns of death. If on average people who study hard and learn dem book and get good qualification or go through the pains and toils of apprenticeship to learn a trade and become a craftsman, earns US$10,000 per year more than others, how much is that worth in total over your working life. Plus you have yu liberty, yu noh lock up a jail and yu get to live past 30 years old.

"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

To the Trigger Happy Ugly Thief Me Seh. Yu mumma never born yu Fe thief. Excuse me; if you don't understand the vernacular, let me translate.
Your mother did not bear you for nine months for you to bear guns.
Your mother did not give birth to you, for you to kill the children of other mothers.
Your mother did not nurse and nurture you for you to grow up to steal, rob, and murder. Yu mumma never born yu Fe be a murderer.

"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

To the dons and leaders of the gangs and posses. If your life here on earth is to have any meaning, then declare a cease-fire for the whole of next year. This means agreeing, declaring, implementing, monitoring and enforcing a cease-fire. No gun shooting for a whole year. Imagine how much benefit that would bring to the whole of society. To every one including the possies who's greatest problem is the gun. After a gun is fired you not only bring down your enemies upon you but also the security forces. I am sure you are not idiots; like the Mafia in America in the 1930's you know that doing what ever you do without gun shooting is better for you and everyone. The only disadvantage I can see to it is the validity you will get if you can deliver.

"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".


To dem people associated with Trigger Happy Ugly Thief, don't take any of their money. Because if you accept it you will be guilty of the crime of receiving / handling stolen goods. A blood money. In some case you will become the equivalent of those birds that feed on the flesh. If a Trigger Happy Ugly Thief is your friend, end that friendship now or be always prepared to die. Because the reason he is a Trigger Happy Ugly Thief is he is evil and covetousness and will sooner or later kill you for one reason or another. The poverty story only works up to a point. Over one billions of the worlds six billions people live in extreme poverty. A noh all a dem a tief and murderer. The vast vast majority struggle with life and bear their burdens like the rest of us.
"Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

It occurs to me this could apply internationally. Let me hear if you agree.
To all those who make and supply weapons …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To our UK government …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To the states of Europe …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To the biggest military power on earth the USA …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To those killing people in the Americas such as in Colombia …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To those places in conflict in Asia such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and Palestine…. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To the Trigger Happy Ugly Thief in Jamaica …. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".
To the facilitators and killers in Africa where over 4 million people have died in the last 4 years…. "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

Summary

I am embarrassed to say I am quite new to the peace movement. Many of you here today are much more knowledgeable than me in these matters and can put up a better case. There are many other points to be made from many peoples. Use this campaign to make them.

To quote The Dresden Appeal by Party of Democratic Socialism 7Th October 2001

" Heavily armed, the world will remain without peace. Disarmament gives peace a chance. One fifth of today's military spending would suffice to ensure everyone sustains a basic supply of food, drinking water, education and public health services."

Divert resources from arms to positive humanitarian and Earthism programmes such as poverty reduction, sustainable development, protecting the vulnerable, conflict prevention, peaceful resolution of conflict systems, maintaining the environment.

That is what the Charter of the United Nations calls for. Some 189 states have signed up to the charter. It is full time they live up to their commitments and responsibility to ensure the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources.

The request calls for a 1% to 5% reduction over 10 to 25 years of the resources being spent by the states of the UN on things to kill people. I hope you agree that is reasonable.

Read more on our web site at www.arcwebsite.org

Do you think there are too many arms?
Do you think too many resources are being spent on weapons?
Do you want more resources to be spent on the environment, or tackling diseases, or helping the poor, or on development, or on conflict prevention?
Do you think that the arms trade or making things to kill people is abhorrent?
Do you want the possibility of paying less tax.
If you said yes then Join the Arms Reduction Campaign.

Over 4 million dead in Africa in the last 4 years. Gun crimes on our streets.
To all the arms makers, suppliers, gun men and killers we say "Blood run done, CEASE, NOW PEACE".

Please support and take on this request , join ARC, and let we the peoples start upon a new direction of peace and better usage of our Earth’s extremely precious resources

Just Imagine ….

Karl Miller  Jul 03 Written for but not delivered to  the Respect Festival - Millennium Dome Greenwich 19 July 2003

See: ARC at the Respect Festival - Millennium Dome Greenwich 19 July 2003