This Saturday, April 5th, there will be a symposium on the Media's role in Historical Reconciliation at the Goeth Institute in Akasaka, Tokyo. The details on the Goeth Institute website is in German, but I was forwarded the email in English last week. Sorry for not posting earlier.
Particularly I am interested in the second panel discussion on whether journalists can be peacemakers? This is a question that came up during my peace journalism course at Transcend University. Also, Hans-Robert Eisenhauer, the producer of the documentary Why We Fight (2005) will be in attendance. I had the pleasure of attending a screening of this film in LA with the director Eugene Jarecki present. The film is about the US military-industrial-complex and it is on my must-see list.
Details:
Co-organized by: -- Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Tokyo Office (FES)
-- Goethe-Institut Japan in Tokyo
In recent months, the long shadow of World War II seems for a time to have lifted from the map of East Asia. New leaders in China, Korea and Japan are making efforts to put a difficult past behind them. But is this the beginning of a permanent reconciliation or just a lull in an ongoing war of words? This month, a dispute over contaminated dumplings imported from China unleashed a torrent of such unrelentingly critical coverage in the Japanese media that an official visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao had to be postponed. The US Marine Corps dictionary defines a powder monkey as one who carries explosives to gun crews on a battleship. Reporters everywhere have plied their trade by stoking the fires of nationalism. But is the media also not capable of promoting peace? Japanese, Chinese, and Korean reporters have been meeting for years in attempts to confront the past. In Europe, ARTE TV funded jointly by French and German tax-payers, beams programs on public affairs and the arts, simultaneously in two languages. Might a similar multi-lingual network be established in Asia one day? Or should we pin our hopes on the Internet to forge shared perceptions of past and future?
Admission is free but participants are kindly requested to register in advance using the reply form sent as separate attachment.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Tokyo: International Symposium on the Media's Role in Historical Reconciliation
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
Los Angeles: A Path for Peace
Much of my early peace activism began with working on the campaign to establish a cabinet level Department of Peace. Since 2003, the campaign has been pushing legislature through congress as well as building a culture of peace.
What is a culture of peace?
According to the UNESCO, a culture of peace is:
a set of values, attitudes, modes of behaviour and ways of life that reject violence and prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations.
To me, a culture of peace is also creating a sense of appreciation for peace, where people understand the value that peace has to offer and thus want to encourage its presence.
So if you live in LA, here's a way in which you can help build a culture of peace:
On April 18, 2008, the California chapter of the DOP campaign will be organizing "A Path for Peace. " They will be building a meditative labyrinth out of sand on Hermosa Beach Pier in which they will invite you contemplate peace as you walk.
To find out more about the event or if you are interested in volunteering, visit their website.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
1:00 pm
Welcome Ceremony
1:00 – 3:00 pm
Labyrinth Walk and Peace Celebration
Everyone is welcome!
3:15 pm
Children's Labyrinth Walk
*******************
On the beach –
Just north of the Hermosa Beach Pier
Friday, March 28, 2008
New York: Satyagraha Walk
So in attempt to be more active on my blog, I hope to be writing regularly on stories and events related peace, media, technology, human rights, Japan, New York and any where else in the world.
I came across this today through one of my email list serves and once again wished I was in New York to participate.
The Satya Graha Forum is organizing the Be the Change Walk which starts at four different points through out Manhattan and converges at Union Square, where unbeknownst to many stands a statue of Gandhi. This is the kick off event for Metropolitan Opera's presentation of Philip Glass's (composer) Satayagraha at Lincoln Center. Glass, journalist Gustav Neibuhr and Vishakha N. Desai will discuss Gandhi's legacy at an event on April 23rd.
To view the events line up for the month of April click here.
The walk starts at 1pm on April 6th from the following locations:
| NORTH: | New York Public Library 5th Avenue & 42nd St. |
| EAST: | Sara D. Roosevelt Park E. Houston St. & Chrystie St. |
| SOUTH: | City Hall Park (South end) Broadway & Park Row |
| WEST: | Chelsea Park 9th Ave. & 27th St. |
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Colloquia Series at Columbia University
My film March 22 was included in Deep Dish TV's compilation Shocking and Awful which was exhibited at the Whitney Museum as part of the 2006 Whitney Biannual.
Teachers College, Columbia University
Colloquia Series Spring 2008
21st Century Peace Education:
Discourses, Dilemmas, Practices
“Bullets into Blogs,
Swords into Power Points:
Old & New Media in the Quests for Peace”
Dr. Dee Dee Halleck
Co-Founder of Paper Tiger Television and the Deep Dish Satellite Network
Professor Emeritus, Department of Communication, University of San Diego
Thursday, March 27. 7-9pm Location: Room 363 GDH
(Teachers College, Columbia University – 525 West 120th Street)
* Free and Open to the Public *
DVD Showing: World Tribunal on Iraq
Upcoming 21st Century Peace Education events at www.tc.edu/PeaceEd
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Applying for grants and fellowships
Hello~! I am back in Tokyo and have been working diligently on my thesis. I feel very positive about the progress that I am making and believe that the less than two months I have left will prove to be a smooth experience. Otherwise, I am also in the process of applying for grants and fellowships.
It is my belief that there is an abundance of money in this world- money that people put aside to do good with- and money that is channeled through the form of grants and fellowships, and money that will support me in my endeavors to use the power of media for peace, human rights and development.
Here are some of the ones that I am looking at:
International Reporting Fellowship- Due April 1, 2008- "The International Reporting Project will offer up to four IRP Fellowships to U.S. journalists to carry out a project reporting from any country in the world outside of the United States. One of these Fellowships will be the “IRP/FRONTLINE World Fellowship” for video journalists, which will offer additional support through the PBS program FRONTLINE/World and a chance for the Fellow’s story to appear on that program’s web site and broadcast."
New Media Women Entrepreneurs- Due May 1, 2008- "NMWE is a unique initiative addressing opportunity and innovation, recruitment and retention for women in journalism by spotlighting their ingenuity and entrepreneurial abilities. Pilot projects will show what can be done. Research will tell us what more to do. And an awards program and summit will showcase women’s creative ideas. NMWE is supported by the McCormick Tribune Foundation."
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Media and Peace links
Have a great day,
Megumi
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
War Journalism vs. Peace Journalism
I completed my Transcend Peace University's online Peace Journalism course over a month ago (see previous blog here), but I wanted to share with you my final assignment in which we had to take a form of war journalism and convert it into peace journalism.
So this assignment was to re-write an existing piece of journalism (war journalism) and transform it into Peace Journalism. Honestly, it's not the type of article that I would ever want to write again- my interests in peace are on a more human to human level and not on the geo-political level but it alas it was the completing assignment for the course. I received good feedback, so I hope it's helpful in showing the difference between traditional journalism and peace journalism.
The original article:
THE Pentagon is spending billions of dollars on new forms of space warfare in order to counter the growing risk of missile attack from rogue states and the anti-satellite capabilities of China.
The US Congress has allocated funds to develop futuristic weapons and intelligence systems that operate beyond the Earth's atmosphere as America looks past Iraq and Afghanistan to the wars of the future.
The most ambitious project in a $US459 billion ($516 billion) defence spending bill is the Falcon, a reusable hypersonic vehicle that could fly at six times the speed of sound and deliver nearly 5500 kilograms of bombs anywhere in the world within minutes.
The bombs' destructive power would be multiplied by the Earth's gravitational pull as they travelled at up to 25 times the speed of sound towards their target.
The cost of the vehicle has not been revealed but a spokesman for the Pentagon's Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency said the first test flight was scheduled for next year.
Loren Thompson, a leading military analyst in Washington, said the focus of the project was attacking "time-sensitive targets" in states such as North Korea and Iran, which have either developed nuclear weapons without international approval or are suspected of doing so.
"If we received intelligence that a strike was about to happen on South Korea, or on Israel, we would want to destroy that within minutes, and not hours. But from most current US bases that is not feasible."
In a 621-page report on the Defence Appropriations Bill, congressmen from Republican and Democratic parties said: "Enhancing these capabilities is crucial, particularly following the Chinese anti-satellite weapons demonstration last January."
In China's first successful test of an anti-satellite system, a ground-based missile fired into space shattered a weather satellite in low Earth orbit.
Telegraph, London
Now, here's my Peace Journalism version of the article:
PJ Final exercise
Megumi Nishikura
Jan 18, 2007
The Pentagon continues to spend billions of dollars on building new forms of space weaponry as a precautionary response to potential threats from countries it deems as rogue.
They are particularly concerned with the new missile capabilities of China which in January of 2007 successfully tested a direct ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon.
Congress has now approved new funding to further develop intelligence systems and weapons capabilities to ensure its security and superpower status beyond the conflicts of Iraq and Afghanistan. As of now the defense budget stands at $US 459 billion, a 7-percent increase over 2006 and a 48-percent increase over 2001.
The Falcon, the Pentagon’s most ambitious project, is a reusable hypersonic vehicle capable of flying six times the speed of sound and delivering 5500 kg of explosives within minutes.
The cost of the Falcon project has not yet been announced but a spokesman from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency said the first test flight was scheduled for next year.
However, one expert said the Pentagon’s continuing arms build-up could be explained in light of a fifteen-year-old strategy document, Defense Planning Guidance, drawn up by three officials who later went on to become leading lights in the so-called Project for a New American Century.
Associate Professor Jake Lynch, Director of the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney, said the note had proved highly influential in setting strategic military and foreign policies under the administration of George W Bush, with its three authors, Lewis Libby, Zalmay Khalilzad and Paul Wolfowitz, appointed to senior posts.
“Defense Planning Guidance sets America the task of preventing the emergence of a strategic rival in three key areas of the globe – Europe, the Middle East and East Asia”, Prof Lynch said. “For China to acquire the capability of weaponising space would be seen, under this doctrine, as a potential threat to US full spectrum dominance – and would demand a pre-emptive response”.
Tensions over the weaponization of space have existed between China and the US for over a decade. Tensions were particularly heightened when the US and Japan began developing a missile defense system which China views as threatening its national interests, especially over the military conflict in Taiwan.
While China has called for controls on space weaponization for some time, the US has done little in response. Now, some international analysts say that China's ASAT test is a direct challenge to the US, even though Chinese officials have assured the international community that their ASAT test was not “aimed” at anyone
Both Republican and Democratic congressmen approved the new funding as a reaction to China's ASAT tests. The 621-page Defense Appropriations Bill report states: “Enhancing these capabilities is crucial, particularly following the Chinese anti-satellite weapons demonstration last January.”
If both countries continue to increase their space weapon stockpiles, relations between may echo the Cold War strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction that existed between the US and Soviet Union .
The Center for Nuclear proliferation Studies (CNS) and other academics asses that there are many economic and technical limitations to China's program and that at this stage their ASAT tests cannot be taken seriously. They suggest that the major powers in space—the US, Russia and the EU—can take the "initiative and push for a moratorium on the development and testing of anti-satellite weaponry."
Joan Johnson-Freese, the Department Chair of National Security Studies, suggests that a renewed approach to strategic communication is necessary to enhance mutual understanding and address the issues that exists between the two nations.
Communication strategies between the US and China should be “ aimed to understand global attitudes and cultures, engage in a dialogue of ideas between people and institutions, advise policymakers, diplomats, and military leaders on the public opinion implications of policy choices, and influence attitudes and behavior through communications strategies,” as stated by the 2004 report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communications.
It is very likely that the US cannot sustain its sole dominance over the weaponization of space, instead the two nation must build trust through dialogue to tackle the issues which is in the best interest of both nations.
