Wage Peace - Disrupt War

Strategic, bold, direct and discursive action to disrupt militarism in Australia and our region.

Margie Pestorius

USyd Tied to Arms Industry

The Chancellor is the chairwoman of weapons company Thales…

by Lara Sonnenschein

FORWARD BY MARGARET PESTORIUS

This piece of writing by Lara Sonnenschein is a wonderful example of research which might guide and inspire a movement. Using key nonviolence theory she provides information that might allow for identification of a set of winnable campaigns.  In his articles on developing a nonviolence based strategy to prevent war, Robert J. Burrowes suggests that dozens of ‘campaigns’, each with attainable specific and local objectives must be set up with their own escalating sets of creative tactics aimed to shift power and inspire involvement.  If only all journalists were strategy focused – rather than all analysis. WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS!!! #disarmunis Let’s learn strategy and do fun stuff.

In this piece, Lara Sonnenschein sets the scene with a three part analysis: it’s ‘partnerships’ involving investors, sponsors and board members. Any of these might provide focus for creative tactics – we start and we wiggle and see where the wiggle room is [that’s technical nonviolence language]. USyd. folks started with this lovely tactic here by students supporting Jodie Pall to give a short, disruptive, off-the-formal-programme, prepared speech at her graduation – a speech with banner-drop and cheers.  

Cheers,

Margaret Pestorius

 

Our Federal government is engaging in the biggest defence build-up since the Second World War. In the 2016 Defence White Paper, the Australian government outlined an 81 per cent increase in the defence budget over the next decade, translating to an additional $29.9 billion and the hiring of 4400 new Australian Defence Force employees. Recently, Prime Minister Turnbull announced his government will invest $3.8 billion into the arms manufacturing industry, in the hopes that Australia will break into the top ten weapons exporters worldwide. At the same time, Turnbull is slashing $2.2 billion from higher education.

Research Partnerships

Amid cuts to higher education and broader corporatisation, universities have turned to research partnerships to make up  the revenue lost from  public funding. And with Australia’s newfound embracing of the arms industry, weapons companies are proving attractive bedfellows.

For example, Lockheed Martin (the largest arms manufacturer worldwide) established its first Centre for Research outside the US at the University of Melbourne. UK arms manufacturer BAE Systems is set to follow in Lockheed’s footsteps after signing a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with UniMelb in February this year for the construction of a technology hub at Fishermans Bend, Victoria.

Similarly, Adelaide University, Flinders University and the University of South Australia form part of the Joint Open Innovation Network (JOIN), funded by BAE Systems, which aims to offer  new engineering scholarships, internships, and industry placements for undergraduate students. This $10 million initiative will also see the introduction of defence-focused courses, research and development.

University of Sydney Vice-Chancellor and Principal Dr Michael Spence and Thales Australia Country Director and CEO Chris Jenkins sign a 2017 MOU agreement.
University of Sydney Vice-Chancellor and Principal Dr Michael Spence and Thales Australia Country Director and CEO Chris Jenkins sign a 2017 MOU agreement.

Closer to home, in late 2017 USyd along with six other New South Wales universities founded a defence research network. With $1.25 million in State government funding, the network aims to increase collaboration across universities and bolster connections between government, industry and academia in the defence sector. As part of the scheme, the seven founding universities will each provide two PhD scholarships for defence-related research projects.

The University of Sydney also has links with weapon manufacturers in its own right. Our chancellor, Belinda Hutchinson, is the chairwoman of weapons company Thales Australia. Last year, USyd signed an MOU with Thales so the two can collaborate more closely over the next five years.

When I questioned the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) Duncan Ivision about this, he assured me that all conflicts of interest had been resolved. He downplayed the MOU by emphasising that communication lines between the University and the company were simply “open”, whilst refusing to reveal any ongoing projects with Thales.

The head of the School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering, Stefan Williams, however, revealed that the School has entered into ongoing programmes with Thales, but that they are “confidential”.

The School hosts the Sydney Industry Placement Scholarship (SIPS) as an optional part of their honours programme which effectively doubles  as an internship, with $18,000 paid to selected students who then spend six months working for various aerospace, mechanical and mechatronics companies. The School is also in talks with large weapons companies including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Honeywell who seek to expand the SIPS programme for fourth year engineering students.

Investments

Aside from research partnerships, the University also has investments in several arms manufacturing companies. Documents obtained under freedom of information laws show that USyd holds short term investment positions in several arms manufacturers worldwide. A number of these are ASX top 100 companies, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, General Electric, Rockwell Collins, Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company.

At the end of 2017, the total amount invested was $15,173.20. More sinister is the list of the university’s long term investment positions when cross referenced with the top 100 arms manufacturers worldwide. Companies included are CSRA, DynCorp International, Fluor Corp, Engility, Rolls-Royce, ThyssenKrupp, United Technologies Corp and Honeywell International amounting to a total of $4,035,416.72 as at the end of 2017.

Of that figure, $3,353,084.84 was invested in Honeywell. Interestingly, Honeywell has repeatedly surfaced in  the  the USyd Engineering Faculty’s promotional material. USyd also sponsors a Honeywell summer school programme for senior high school students. This programme is an opportunity for students to learn the fundamentals of engineering and includes site visits and talks from private corporations.

Honeywell is the company that developed cluster bombs during the Vietnam War which have killed over 20,000 people since. They are also part of the consortium that operates the Pantex plant, where all the United States’ nuclear bombs are assembled. Honeywell provides the engine for the MQ-9 drone, the world’s deadliest UAV, which is responsible for civilian deaths in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia. New Zealand Super Fund recently divested from Honeywell, citing ethical concerns.

A group of high school students attend a Honeywell Summer School camp in 2014
A group of high school students attend a Honeywell Summer School camp in 2014, supported by the University of NSW; University of Technology, Sydney; University of Sydney; University of Western Sydney; Macquarie University; and the University of Wollongong.

The University also opts into Vanguard’s International Shares Select Exclusions Index Fund, which holds investments in over 1500 different companies. While promoting itself as an ‘ethical’ fund, it maintains significant investments in Raytheon ($452,535.49), Rolls Royce ($133,333.90), ThyssenKrupp ($102,069.92) and Thales ($100,896.14), as at the 18th of March this year.

Universities as anti-war institutions

It is unsurprising that universities are strengthening their links with arms companies: our Chancellor sits on the board of a weapons manufacturer and our Vice-Chancellor’s salary is $1.44 million. Universities are operating under a neoliberal framework which ultimately comes from the highest echelons of government. With the Turnbull government motivated by this agenda, and the Labor party offering ineffective  opposition, this is unlikely to change in the near term.

There is also disturbing bipartisan support for Australia’s ‘defence’ and ‘security’, whether through maintaining the US-Australia alliance or our torturous refugee policy that sees innocent people languishing in offshore island gulags in the name of border security.

Students, the most important stakeholder in the education debate, should demand that they be anti-war institutions. In fact, as universities are increasingly active in broader society than they have ever been, we need to demand that USyd not fund death and destruction via research and investments.

It’s time to revive the anti-war sentiment of the 60s on our campuses. The University must divest from corporations like Honeywell, and instead fund research which improves lives, rather than destroys them. So while universities might be strengthening their ties, it is we students who hold the collective power to sever them and disarm USyd.

First published in Honi Soit March 28, 2018

US troops are now in Darwin. But questions remain as to why.

The presence of US marines on Australian soil is a radical departure from normal practice that has never been fully explained

Nick Deane

The 2018 contingent of more than 1,500 US marines began arriving in Darwin two weeks ago. Every year since 2012 marines have been routinely stationed here, and, under the terms of the force posture agreement between the USA and Australia, they will be here every year until 2040.

This is an extraordinary arrangement, which has come under little public scrutiny. The strategic significance of having the forces of a foreign nation stationed on domestic territory has largely escaped attention. Why this highly unusual deployment has become necessary in peace time has never been properly explained.

Having foreign troops on home territory creates a potential breach in any sovereign nation’s defence. The first criterion of independence has to be the nation’s capacity to look after itself by conducting its own defence. Under normal circumstances no independent nation entertains the forces of another nation in anything other than the most extreme of situations, such as being under immediate threat from some third party.

In the case of Australia, no such threat exists. The 2016 defence white paper states that there is no more than a remote possibility of a military attack by another country on Australian territory in the foreseeable future. This being the case, there should be some other explanation for such an unusual development. However, successive Australian governments have offered only flimsy reasons.

From the very start, the move lacked transparency. Despite its significance, the decision involved no parliamentary debate and little public discussion. It was simply announced (jointly, by President Obama and then prime minister Julia Gillard) in the Australian parliament in November 2011, as part of the USA’s “pivot to the Asia/Pacific”. It was fait accompli. Whether the idea for the deployment originated in Australia or the USA has never been made clear. The amount that Australia must contribute to the cost of the marines’ presence is secret. The true nature of their mission remains hidden.

IPAN are conducting activities which draw attention to the effect of US Troops in Darwin.

Before he died, former prime minister Malcolm Fraser became an outspoken critic of the development. He pointed out that the marines could be used in some offensive operation on orders from Washington – and that Australians would only learn about it after the event. The Australian government has provided no assurance that such an eventuality could not occur.

Several reasons for the deployment have been given in correspondence between peace activists and a succession of defence ministers. It is argued that the marines’ presence will maintain stability in the region – stability underwritten by the USA for the past seven decades. The deployment’s detractors say it is an aggressive and expansionist move, will increase regional tensions, is designed to contain China and will provoke any nation not already aligned with the US.

The government insists that the move is nothing more than an extension of existing arrangements, under Australia’s alliance with the US. It is actually a radical departure from normal practice. In the eyes of some activists, it could ultimately prove to be a step too far, taking Australia to a situation where military commitment to the US becomes detrimental to the national interest.

The government says that the deployment provides greater opportunities for ADF and US forces to train together, and this is true. “Interoperability” has been a key concept in successive defence white papers. However, are interoperability and gaining better training sufficient reasons for hosting foreign forces on a semi-permanent basis?

It is not clear whether the marines are here for Australia’s defence. However, there is a perception, popular among those who recall the second world war, that Australia is always vulnerable to attack, and would have been overrun by Japan were it not for the American armed forces. By implication, this view suggests that Australia is incapable of managing its own defence. This is repudiated by defence expert, Dr Mike Gilligan, who argues that Australia already has adequate capacity to defend itself – giving grounds for ADF personnel to feel offended by the suggestion that Australia cannot manage without the help of the US.

Many questions remain. Which country benefits most from the deployment – Australia from better training and possibly more regional stability, or the US from having another forward position in the region? How are our regional neighbours impacted and how do they view the matter? Above all, what strategic wisdom informed the decision in the first place?

  • Nick Deane is a member of the national committee of the Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN)

First published in the Guardian Opinion here

 

Bombing in Syria must be condemned

IPAN Media Release – 14 April 2018

ANU lecturer Dr. Alison Broinowski says: bombing in Syria must be condemned

Defence Minister Payne and Prime Minister Turnbull’s obsequious support for the bombing attack on Damascus by the US, UK and France demonstrates their hypocrisy when calling for a rules-based order.

The missiles fired on Damascus have broken international law, since Syria did not threaten the US, UK or France, said ANU Visiting Fellow Dr Alison Broinowski. ‘There was no UN resolution to approve this military act against a sovereign state, just as there was none when Iraq was attacked 15 years ago.”

“The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons had accepted an invitation from the Syrian government to inspect the region where an alleged chemical weapon attack occurred, demonstrating a willingness to support its claim they had not conducted such an attack. What will now become of the OPCW verification?”

“Australia was a founding member of the United Nations,” said Dr Broinowski, “and now it disrespects the central role of the UN to prevent wars and ensure there is never again another world war.”

“Prime Minister Turnbull can be a responsible voice at this crucial time and say no to further bombing and call for an emergency meeting of the Security Council to prevent any further escalation. If Australia supports an international rules-based order, it has to apply those rules to itself and its allies.”

—–ENDS—–

CONTACT: Dr Broinowski 0422 608 580

Further information: Annette Brownlie (Chair of IPAN) 0431597256

IPAN Media Liaison: Kathryn Kelly, contact 0417 269 984

TAKE ACTION: #DONTBOMBSYRIA

Take Action

Call Defence Minister Marise Payne’s office (02) 6277 7800 and say NO to war in Syria. #dontbombSyria

“Clearly reject the proposed missile attack and instead be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.”

Tweet @MarisePayne #dontbombsyria : “reject the proposed missile attack and be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.”

Facebook: share the graphic: the media release and action

Call on the Labor party to act responsibly @RichardMarlesMP [Twitter] is the Shadow Defence Minister.

 

 

Media Release – Independent and Peaceful Australia Network

Bombing in Syria not the way to peace in Syria – 12 April 2018

Bombing not the answer for peace in Syria, rather a dangerous mistake

Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s reckless support for a military strike by the US in Syria demonstrates Australia’s lack of independence in its foreign policy.

IPAN spokesperson Mr Stephen Darley said, “Surely it is clear that any military exchange between Russian and US forces threatens a dangerous widening of the conflict and the lives of millions.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has accepted an invitation from the Syrian government to inspect the region where an alleged chemical weapon attack occurred demonstrating a willingness to support its claim they had not conducted such an attack.

The video showing children being hosed down allegedly from a chemical weapons attack needs to be investigated.  Any chemical attack is an inhumane and illegal act, requiring the strongest condemnation.

If there is proof that chemical weapons have been used in Syria, regardless of who was behind it, then there needs to be serious consequences in the international court of justice where crimes against humanity are legitimately dealt with.

What is clear is that a bombing assault on sites in Syria is neither legal, effective or acceptable. The risks of even more innocent people suffering death, injury and destruction of homes and the risk that a major powers war could ensue is being recognised internationally.

Mr Darley is calling on the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister to clearly reject the proposed missile attack and instead be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.

—–ENDS—–

CONTACT: Stephen Darley  08 7329-8542 

Further information: Annette Brownlie (Chair of IPAN) 0431597256

IPAN Media Liaison:  Kathryn Kelly, contact 0417 269 984  

www.ipan.org.au

 

IPAN: Bombing is not the way to peace in Syria – 12 April 2018

Media Release – Independent and Peaceful Australia Network

Bombing is not the way to peace in Syria – 12 April 2018

Bombing not the answer for peace in Syria, rather a dangerous mistake

Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s reckless support for a military strike by the US in Syria demonstrates Australia’s lack of independence in its foreign policy.

IPAN spokesperson Mr Stephen Darley said, “Surely it is clear that any military exchange between Russian and US forces threatens a dangerous widening of the conflict and the lives of millions.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has accepted an invitation from the Syrian government to inspect the region where an alleged chemical weapon attack occurred demonstrating a willingness to support its claim they had not conducted such an attack.

The video showing children being hosed down allegedly from a chemical weapons attack needs to be investigated.  Any chemical attack is an inhumane and illegal act, requiring the strongest condemnation.

If there is proof that chemical weapons have been used in Syria, regardless of who was behind it, then there needs to be serious consequences in the international court of justice where crimes against humanity are legitimately dealt with.

What is clear is that a bombing assault on sites in Syria is neither legal, effective or acceptable. The risks of even more innocent people suffering death, injury and destruction of homes and the risk that a major powers war could ensue is being recognised internationally.

Mr Darley is calling on the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister to clearly reject the proposed missile attack and instead be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.

—–ENDS—–

CONTACT: Stephen Darley  08 7329-8542 

Further information: Annette Brownlie (Chair of IPAN) 0431597256

IPAN Media Liaison:  Kathryn Kelly, contact 0417 269 984  

www.ipan.org.au

____________________________________

Take Action

Wage Peace suggests

Call Defence Minister Marise Payne’s office (02) 6277 7800 and say NO to war in Syria. #don’tbombSyria

“Clearly reject the proposed missile attack and instead be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.”

OR tweet @MarisePayne #dontbombsyria : “reject the proposed missile attack and be a voice of reason in calling for all non-military means possible to be adopted to resolve the conflict.”

OR on Facebook: share the graphic: the media release and action