[gha] Re: suggestion internationale pour la paix de Guy CREQUIE !
- From: Leo Semashko <leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Guy Crequie" <guy.crequie@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 09:59:06 +0400
Dear Guy,
Thank you very much for you very important proposal,
which we will discuss in GHA after the publication of
our new book Global Peace Science in the end of 2014.
With love, best harmony wishes,
Leo
Dr Leo Semashko:
State Councillor of St. Petersburg,
Philosopher, Sociologist and Peacemaker from Harmony;
Director: Tetrasociology Public Institute, Russia;
Founding President, Global Harmony Association (GHA) since 2005;
Director, GHA Website "Peace from Harmony": www.peacefromharmony.org
Global Peace Science from Harmony: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=585
and
In Russian: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=606;
World Interfaith Harmony Project on the ABC of Harmony Base:
www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=541;
GHA Program Book, The ABC of Harmony for World Peace:
www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=478;
GHA Peace Video: http://youtu.be/hbxY5lREOeA;
My Web page: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=253;
Address: 7/4-42 Ho-Shi-Min Street, St. Petersburg 194356, Russia
Phone: 7 (812) 597-65-71; Skype: leo.semahko
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/leo.semashko?ref=tn_tnmn
----- Original Message -----
From: Guy Crequie, guy.crequie@xxxxxxxxxx
To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: 28 апреля 2014 г., 15:52:01
Subject: [gha] Re: suggestion internationale pour la paix de Guy CREQUIE !
Bonjour,
Comme je l’ai déjà indiqué précédemment, pour plusieurs raisons :mon emploi du
temps, ma non maîtrise de la langue anglaise, ma farouche indépendance de la
fonction critique de la philosophie = ceci, m’interdisant de m’assimiler
totalement à un seul système de pensée !
D’ailleurs, j’ai constaté par expérience, que tous les fondateurs ou
concepteurs d’un système de pensée, accaparé par celui-ci, ou absorbé par leurs
travaux, n’ont pas la disponibilité d’esprit pour étudier suffisamment les
autres systèmes ,et pour avoir d’autant plus un regard critique sur leur propre
système qu’ils estiment forcément le meilleur ou le plus scientifique !
C’est ainsi ,par exemple :que le Professeur GALTUNG a fait remarquer à Léo
SEMASHKO, que sa démarche est récente ,et n’ a pas pu être validée et
confrontée suffisamment au primat de la pratique !
En effet, depuis une quarantaine d’années, l’Institut mondial qu’il dirige, a
été sollicité, et a donné sa position et parfois contribué à régler des
conflits concrets, et ainsi, il est reconnu comme interlocuteur par l’ONU,
l’UNESCO, le Conseil de l’Europe, des ONG et Instituts mondiaux…………
Cependant, ce n’est pas parce que GHA est de création récente et n’a pas encore
la reconnaissance de certaines Institutions mondiales, que ses analyses et sa
méthode : sont à ignorer, ou à repousser sans autre considération.
Ainsi, et je ne maîtrise pas la connaissance de toutes les ONG, Académies et
Instituts de paix existants, il existe, par exemple : le centre mondial pour la
paix ; le centre Simon Rosenthal, le centre de recherche de la paix de Boston ,
l’Institut Josei Toda, l’Institut du Professeur Galtung , l’Association
mondiale des maires pour la paix, la Soka Gakkai, et les propositions
annuelles de Monsieur Ikeda, Gha , Iflac, etc.
Cependant, dans l’intérêt de la paix mondiale, de l’universalisme de la pensée,
je suggère ceci : GHA par Léo SEMASHKO ou Ernesto KAHAN = pourrait prendre
l’initiative de demander à l’ONU et à l’UNESCO, une rencontre internationale
sous leur égide rassemblant toutes les organisations, chercheurs et Académies
et Instituts de la paix .
Cette rencontre : permettrait de recenser toutes les expériences, analyses,
méthodes de pensées et d’actions, résultats obtenus, et ainsi : de dégager un
mode universel rassembleur, adopté par toutes les parties, et soumis à la
connaissance des Etats et des peuples.
Voici, quelle est ma proposition !
Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain français-observateur social
Chanteur pour la paix
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie
Hello,
As I already indicated previously, for several reasons:my timetable, my
noncontrol of the English language, my savage independence of the function
criticizes philosophy = this, prohibiting to me to be assimilated completely to
only one system of thought!
Moreover, I noted by experiment, that all the founders or originators of a
system of thought, monopolized by this one, or absorbed by their work, do not
have the receptiveness of mind sufficiently to study the other systems, and to
have all the more a critical glance on their own system which they consider the
best inevitably or most scientific!
It is thus, for example:how Professor GALTUNG pointed out to Léo SEMASHKO, that
its approach is recent, and could not be validated and confronted sufficiently
with the primacy of the practice!
Indeed, for about forty years, the world Institute that it directs, has been
requested, and gave its position and sometimes contributed to regulate concrete
conflicts, and thus, it is recognized like interlocutor by UNO, UNESCO, the
Council of Europe, of world ONG and Instituts ............
However, it is not because GHA is of recent creation and the recognition of
certain world Institutions does not have yet, that its analyses and its method:
are to be been unaware of, or to push back without another consideration.
Thus, and I do not control the knowledge of all ONG, Académies and existing
Institutes of peace, it exists, for example: the world center for peace; the
center Simon Rosenthal, the research center of the peace of Boston, the
Institute Josei Toda, the Institute of Professor Galtung, the Worldwide
association of the mayors for peace, Soka Gakkai, and annual proposals of Mr
Ikeda, Gha, Iflac, etc
However, in the interest of world peace, of the universalism of the thought, I
suggest this: GHA by Léo SEMASHKO or Ernesto KAHAN = could take the initiative
to require to UNO and of UNESCO, an international meeting under their aegis
gathering all the organizations, researchers and Académies and Institutes of
peace.
This meeting: would allow to count all the experiments, analyses, methods of
thoughts and actions, results got, and as follows: to release a universal mode
rassemblor, adopted by all the parts, and subjected to the knowledge of the
States and the people.
Here, what a is my proposal!
Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Writer social French-observer
Singer for peace
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
French representative of ONG international of peace and harmony
De : gha-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gha-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de
Leo Semashko
Envoyé : lundi 28 avril 2014 10:54
À : Rene Wadlow
Cc : gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Objet : [gha] Re: A federal Ukraine? ++ Federalization of Ukraine and Global
Peace Science (GPS) + Why stagnation of peace mind persists more than a century?
Dear Rene,
Thank you for your concerned letter about Ukraine. But I will be brief in
response due to the clarity of the situation for me.
I agree with your idea that federalization of Ukraine will reduce "the level of
tensions and an growth of violence" in it, as you put it, and will ensure the
rights of 10 million of Russians living in southeast of the country: 1. Right
to a referendum as freedom of expression, 2. Right to native language, 3. Right
to the Russian-speaking media sources and other human rights. I also agree with
you that federalization is not a "magic solution". Therefore, I agree with
Sergey Lavrov and you about necessity of "creative constitutional dialogue".
Unfortunately, from my perspective, it's empty dream in the current unipolar
militaristic civilization under the yoke of a most powerful military world
hegemon, which recognizes only violent solutions within the Western ideology of
double standards. Under these conditions, no solution is possible, except for
the violent in accordance to the hegemon, which supports the Kiev junta in
suppressing the rights of 10 million Russians.
We see that all the accepted international agreements (in Kiev in February and
in Geneva now), under these conditions are violated and they are meaningless.
The world today, as a hundred years ago, stood up on the brink of world war.
Nothing has changed in 100 years, except that in 1914 the first world war was
began by several equal military actors and now the war wants a one world
hegemon, which wants to repeat Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia, etc.
But not only governments are not able to dialogue, but also NGOs, which, like a
hundred years ago, are powerless before the threat of world war. Why stagnation
of peace mind persists more than a century? Because in the minds of governments
and NGOs reigns not peace but war, because in their minds there is no peace
science, because the peace mind is powerless before military science fostered
governments more than 200 years. No one, no government, no NGOs do not possess
a common platform for productive (and not empty) peace dialogue.
Such a platform could be GPS. Without this, scientific, without double immoral
standards, no any effective dialogue is possible, that proved the last century.
What do we see today? GHA sent in September 2013 to the G-20 leaders, including
Obama and Putin, 20 invitation letters to take up GPS. Similarly, we sent
letters to more than 100 NGOs, including you Rene, your AWC. So what? -
Complete silence from everyone, including you. In fact, global peace is not
interested governments. They are interested in the war. All right. We
understand the silence of the militarists. But we do not understand the silence
of peacekeepers, including you. Or do you think that Global Peace Science (GPS)
is superfluous and unnecessary for global peace?
What dialogue can be, for example, with Yulia Tymoshenko, when in her head get
on with the one hand, perfect desire of "harmony between East and West of
Ukraine," and on the other hand, militaristic and barbaric Nazi desire "to burn
the Russians by atomic bombs?" Overcome this intellectual mess can only in the
way of scientific knowledge - GPS.
I do not know where and with whom you want to start your, advance doomed,
dialogue without such a platform. This is utopia. I invite you better to
support for beginning GPS and write in its book 2 pages, no more theses on the
subject, for example: "Association of World Citizens: Global Peace Scientific
Vision." Of course, if your association and you have a similar vision to share
it with Obama, Putin, Tymoshenko, etc., that to think about peace and not war,
that they were capable at effective dialogue on a one scientific platform.
Looking forward to your dialogue with the GHA about GPS.
Sincerely,
.
Leo
Dr Leo Semashko:
State Councillor of St. Petersburg,
Philosopher, Sociologist and Peacemaker from Harmony;
Director: Tetrasociology Public Institute, Russia;
Founding President, Global Harmony Association (GHA) since 2005;
Director, GHA Website "Peace from Harmony": www.peacefromharmony.org
Global Peace Science from Harmony: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=585
and
In Russian: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=606;
World Interfaith Harmony Project on the ABC of Harmony Base:
www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=541;
GHA Program Book, The ABC of Harmony for World Peace:
www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=478;
GHA Peace Video: http://youtu.be/hbxY5lREOeA;
My Web page: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=253;
Address: 7/4-42 Ho-Shi-Min Street, St. Petersburg 194356, Russia
Phone: 7 (812) 597-65-71; Skype: leo.semahko
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/leo.semashko?ref=tn_tnmn
----- Original Message -----
From: Rene Wadlow, rene.wadlow@xxxxxxxxx
To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: 27 апреля 2014 г., 16:52:47
Subject: A federal Ukraine?
Ukraine: A Federalist Future?
Rene Wadlow | April 23, 2014
Map of Ukraine via Shutterstock
Can tensions in Ukraine be lowered without a federalist-constitutional
restructuring of the state?
On Thursday April 17, 2014, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov, Ukraine's acting Foreign Minister Andrii Deshchytsia,
and the European Union Foreign Policy representative Catherine Ashton met in
Geneva for a one-day exchange to lower growing international tensions over the
situation in Ukraine and to take steps to limit the increasing violence within
Ukraine.
The meeting came shortly after the office of the UN high commissioner for human
rights warned in an April 15 report that "Misinformation, propaganda and
incitement to hatred need be urgently countered in Ukraine to avoid the further
escalation of tensions in the country...It is critical for the Government to
prioritize respect for diversity, inclusivity and equal participation of
all—including minorities—in Ukraine."
Also on the eve of the Geneva talks, in a question-and-answer session on
Russian television, President Vladimir Putin said that he had been authorized
by the Parliament to use military force in eastern Ukraine if necessary but
hoped that it could be avoided. The statement highlighted the possible use of
Russian forces, some 40,000 of which are stationed on the Russian-Ukraine
frontier. Tensions, including the shooting of some pro-Russian demonstrators
around occupied government buildings in eastern Ukraine are growing. In
response NATO forces have been strengthened in Eastern Europe and the Baltic
States.
The diplomatic negotiations in Geneva were basically an appeal to lower
tensions and to avoid a growing escalation. The Russian government has denied
that the pro-Russian armed militias around government building in eastern
Ukraine are under their control. This leaves open the question of under whose
control are these men in military uniforms but without markings.
The negotiations stressed the "leading role" that the 100 civilian monitors
from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) should play
in monitoring the human rights situation including the rights of national
minorities and in reporting on the security situation and possible violent
incidents.
The concluding statement of the Geneva meeting called for the disarming of "all
illegal armed groups" and vacating "all illegally occupied streets, squares and
other public places in Ukrainian cities and towns." Since the pro-Russian
faction has said that they consider the provisional Ukraine Government as
"illegal," one must not expect a fast disarmament or an end to occupation of
buildings unless there are radical changes in the near future.
One possibility of lowering tensions on a longer-term basis is the start of
discussions on a federal-decentralized government structure for Ukraine that
would not divide the country but would foster local and regional autonomy. Both
the current president of Ukraine, in an April 13 statement, and authorities of
the Russian Federation have raised the possibility of new federal structures to
be approved by referendum. At a press conference following the Geneva meeting,
Sergey Lavrov said that the Ukrainian crisis must be resolved by the Ukrainians
themselves and that they should "start a nationwide national dialogue within
the framework of the constitutional process, which must be inclusive and
accountable."
Efforts of both governments and non-governmental organizations must be
undertaken to lessen tensions and to create opportunities for such a creative
constitutional dialogue. World citizens who have a long history of reflection
on federalist approaches in conflict resolution have warned against simplified
concepts in the Ukraine discussion. Federalism is not a first step to the
disintegration of the Ukraine. But it is not a "magic solution" either.
Government structures are closely related to the aims which people wish to
achieve. The aims of the Ukrainians are multiple. The current situation in
Ukraine does not lend itself to calm considerations of basic orientations or
for compromises. Dialogue and open discussion is needed so that these aims are
seen more clearly and then structures created to facilitate these aims. Those
outside Ukraine, both governments and NGOs must facilitate discussions of aims
and structures so that common interests may be found and current tensions
reduced.
Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens
Other related posts:
