EARTH FEDERATION NEWS                                    








 December 10, 2018


The Emerging World Parliament University

(now on-line and registering students)


We are developing the following

Masters’ Degree in Global Issues and Planetary Solutions

The M.A. Degree in Global Issues and Planetary Solutions involves 6 modules. Each module consists of 4 courses of 3 credit hours, for a total of 12 credit hours per module. Successful completion of each course earns a “Course Completion Certificate.” Completion of each module earns a “Module Diploma” for that module. Completion of the 72 credit hour program in the six modules earns an advanced MA Degree in Global Issues and Planetary Solutions from World Parliament University.


International Law and World Legislation Module

 (four on-line courses)

1.      International Law, the UN System, and Prospects for World Law

                                                 (this first course is now open for registration)

This seminar studies the philosophy and practice of international law and emerging world legal systems.  The course looks at the historical foundations of law and distinguishes between international law and emerging world law. The seminar examines both constitutional as well as legislative aspects in development of world law.

Instructor: Eugenia Almand, JD, MA

JD in Legislative Counsel, Institute on World Problems (IOWP)

MA in Computer Education, California State University, Northridge.

2.      World Judicial System and World Court Orders

3.      Global Problems of Law and World Law Solutions

4.      The Earth Constitution and Dynamics of World Law


Environmental Sustainability Module

(four on-line courses)

1.             1. Causes, Conditions, and Dynamics of Climate Collapse

2.         2.  Political and Economic Dynamics in relation to Sustainable Development

3.               3. Environmental Collapse and Conversion to Sustainable Development: Economic, Political, and        Technological Factors

4.   Integrative Sustainability under the Constitution for the Federation of Earth (Earth Constitution)


Poverty and Prosperity Module

(four on-line courses)

1.     1.   Defining Poverty and Prosperity: Models of Development

2.    2.    Neoliberal Globalization: Critiques and Prospects

3.     3.   Political Aspects of Poverty and Prosperity: Democracy, Capitalism, and Socialism

4.     4.   Integrative Prosperity under the Earth Constitution


Population and the Carrying Capacity of the Earth Module

(four on-line courses)

1.      1.  Theoretical Models of Planetary Carrying Capacity

2.     2.   UN Conferences on Population Growth and Modulation

3.     3.   Family Planning Technologies in relation to Cultural Dynamics

4.     4.  Integrative Family Planning under the Earth Constitution


Human Rights and Responsibilities Module

(four on-line courses)

1.     1.   History of Human Rights and Responsibilities

2.    2.   Political Dynamics of Human Rights in the Contemporary World

3.     3Theoretical Foundations of Global Citizenship and responsibility in relation to Human Rights

4.     4.   Integrative Human Rights under the Earth Constitution


Peace, Conflict, and Disarmament Module

(four on-line courses)

1.  1.      Historical Examination of the issues behind War and Peace with focus on the Modern World

2.  2.     Theoretical Foundations of the Critique of War: Imperialism, Colonialism, World Systems, National Sovereignty, and Human Aggression

3.  3.     The UN System, International law, Philosophy of Law, and the Prospects for World Law

4.  4.      Integrative Peace and Disarmament under the Earth Constitution

World Constitution and Parliament Association (WCPA)
WCPA was founded in 1958 by Philip and Margaret Isely

12 November 2018
Building the World Parliament Conference 2018
WCPA friends and members,
We are excited about the upcoming third annual WCPA Conference in India and soon will be announcing the final schedule of speakers and participants.
Registration is still open for this Building the World Parliament Conference at O.P. Jindal Global University, December 10-11, 2018.  The call for participants and presenters is attached above.
December 10 is World Human Rights Day, and this conference will articulate human rights in relation to our quest for democratic world law and ratification of the Earth Constitution.
All room and board is covered by O.P. Jindal Global University. Participants need only cover the low registration fee and their own transportation.  We very much appreciate this great support from the university.
Please forward this announcement to others who might want to attend.  For students and participants, this conference should be very educational.
In peace,




Sponsored by the World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. (WCPA), International Philosophers for Peace (IPPNO), and
O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonepat, India
December 10 and 11, 2018, at O.P. Jindal Global University



Conference Theme:  “Human Rights, Resistance to Empire,
and Establishing a World Parliament.” This conference recognizes the Earth Constitution as a universal model and blueprint for a transformed World System:

We have spaces for 21 thirty-minute presentations and matching spaces for 21 session chairpersons. In addition, we have many spaces for non-paper presenting participants.


Room, board, and conference materials are
generously hosted by
O.P. Jindal Global University
Arrival and registration: December 9, 2018, afternoon.
Conference dates: Dec. 10 and 11. 
Departure: December 12, morning.
Participants are responsible to cover the costs of their transportation.

Conference Registration fee:

2500 rupees (35 dollars) for presenters and 1500 (17.50) for participants.
Students or hardship 800 rs (11 dollars) and 400 rs (5.50 dollars).

Deadline for early registration was October 30, 2018.

We have consolidated the registration to a single location.
You can register, and pay the fee in advance of the deadline at:

Please send in your registration fee to the “Eventbrite” website, and, send your
Name, address, position, phone numbers, email address and the category for which you are registering (“presenter,” “participant,” etc.) to:
Mr. Amit Paul, WCPA Vice-President, in New Delhi
with a copy to Dr. Glen T. Martin, President, WCPA at

November 8, 2018

Elected representatives issue call to action for a UN Parliamentary Assembly

UNPA NEWS  Andreas Bummel

Lawmakers establish new international group / "UN has serious limits"

A group of elected representatives was established this Wednesday at an international online meeting with the goal to promote the establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, in short UNPA. The new Parliamentary Group for a UNPA adopted a call to action warning that “the United Nations, the multilateral order and democracy are under attack.”

Possible logo of a UN Parliamentary Assembly

The declaration urges the UN and its member governments to take steps towards the creation of a UNPA in order to address the UN’s democratic deficit. It refers to a statement by former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali who said that “we need to promote the democratization of globalization, before globalization destroys the foundations of national and international democracy.”

The meeting elected five co-presidents: Fernando Iglesias, Member of the Chamber of Deputies of Argentina; Daniel Jositsch, Senator from Switzerland; Jo Leinen, Member of the European Parliament from Germany; Naveed Qamar, Member of the National Assembly of Pakistan; and Ivone Soares, Member of the National Assembly of Mozambique and the Pan-African Parliament.

"Democracy currently stops at national borders"

“Democracy currently stops at national borders. At the global level, the United Nations brings together diplomats appointed by member state governments. There is no UN body composed of democratically elected representatives. As a consequence, the UN reaches serious limits when it comes to finding solutions for global problems. Take climate change as an example. There has been little progress for decades,” said Senator Daniel Jositsch who chaired the meeting.

Other initial members of the group include, among others, Ireland's Thomas Broughan, Jens Holm from Sweden, Smári McCarthy from Iceland, Florence Mutua from Kenya, Achyuta Samanta from India, Lilia Puig de Stubrin from Argentina and Nomsa Tarabella-Marchesi from South Africa. 

Group members already in action

Responding to a question of Thomas Broughan in the Irish parliament this week, Irish foreign minister Simon Coveney responded again that Ireland was “open minded” on the UNPA proposal. Together with four other parliamentarians, Smári McCarthy these days re-introduced a resolution in the Icelandic parliament calling for support of a UNPA. 

Previously, with the involvement of group members Fernando Iglesias, Jo Leinen and Ivone Soares respectively, the Latin-American Parliament, the Parliament of Mercosur, both chambers of the Argentine parliament, the European Parliament, and the Pan-African Parliament endorsed the proposal. 

In addition, the international campaign for a UNPA so far was endorsed by over 1,500 current and former individual members of parliament. The new parliamentary group aims at building “the political momentum and pressure that is needed to achieve our goal”.

The creation of a Parliamentary Group for a UNPA is another step forward in the way towards a world parliament, global democracy, a stronger UN and a fairer and more peaceful world”, commented Fernando Iglesias.

By Andreas Bummel

************                  ***************                       *************                  *************

October 22, 2018
Editor's note:  Here is the Pentagon's Life Extinction Program on display on its way to Europe, an ominous warning as to why we need a "new United Nations," one that is given the authority to intervene between opposing nuclear powers.  Why is the US allowed to provoke the Russians?  What is stopping the UN from blocking this dangerous scheme?  Answer:  A wrongly designed UN Charter.  Just another reason for the nations and world community to turn to the Earth Constitution to replace the defective UN Charter and put an end to the nuclear nightmare.  -- RK

US Nuclear Missiles Deployed in Italy, … against Russia

Global Research, October 18, 20

The B61-12, the new US nuclear bomb which replaces the B-61 deployed in Italy and other European countries, will begin production in less than a year. The announcement was made officially by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). It reveals that the revision of the final project has now been completed with success, and the qualification stage will begin this month at the Pantex Plant in Texas. Production will be authorised to begin in September 2019.

In March 2020, the first unit of production will begin fabricating a series of 500 bombs. As from that time, in other words in about a year and a half, the United States will begin the anti-Russian deployment in Italy, Germany, Belgium, Holland and probably certain other European countries, of the first nuclear bomb in their arsenal with a precision guidance system. The B61-12 is designed with penetrating capacity, built to explode underground in order to destroy bunkers housing command centres.

Since Italy and the other countries, in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, are offering the USA the bases, the pilots and the aircraft for the deployment of the B61-12, Europe will soon be exposed to a greater risk as the front line of the developing nuclear confrontation with Russia.

An even more dangerous situation appears at the same moment – the return of the Euromissiles, meaning the nuclear missiles which are similar to those deployed in Europe in the 1980’s by the USA, with the official aim of defending against Soviet missiles.

Source: PandoraTV

This category of ground-based nuclear missiles of intermediate range (between 500 and 5,500 km)  were eliminated with the INF Treaty of 1987. But in 2014, the Obama administration accused Russia of having experimented with a cruise missile (# 9M729) whose category was forbidden by the Treaty. Moscow denied that the missile violated the INF Treaty and, in turn, accused Washington of having installed in Poland and Romania launch ramps for interceptor missiles (elements of the “shield”), which could be used to launch cruise missiles bearing nuclear warheads.

The accusation aimed by Washington at Moscow, which is not supported by any evidence, enabled the USA to launch a plan aimed at once again deploying in Europe ground-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles. The Obama administration had already announced in 2015 that “faced with the violation of the INF Treaty by Russia, the United States are considering the deployment of ground-based missiles in Europe”. This plan was confirmed by the Trump administration – in fiscal year 2018, Congress authorised the financing of a “programme of research and development for a cruise missile which could be launched from a mobile road base”.

The plan is supported by the European allies of NATO. The recent North-Atlantic Council,  at the level of Europe’s Defence Ministers, which was attended for Italy by Elisabetta Trenta (M5S), declared that the “INF Treaty is in danger because of the actions of Russia”, which it accused of deploying “a disturbing missile system which constitutes a serious risk for our security”. Hence the necessity that “NATO must maintain nuclear forces which are stable, trust-worthy and efficient” (which explains why the members of the Alliance rejected en bloc the United Nations Treaty for the prohibition of nuclear weapons).

So the grounds are being laid for a European deployment, on the borders of Russian territory, of ground-based intermediate-range US nuclear missiles. It’s as if Russia were deploying in Mexico nuclear missiles pointed at the United States.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

Translated by Pete Kimberley

Manlio Dinucci is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.


Sponsored by the World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. (WCPA), International Philosophers for Peace (IPPNO), and
O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonepat, India

December 10 and 11, 2018, at O.P. Jindal Global University



 Conference Theme:  “Human Rights, Resistance to Empire,
and Establishing a World Parliament.” This conference recognizes the Earth Constitution as a universal model and blueprint for a transformed World System:
We have spaces for 21 thirty-minute presentations and matching spaces for 21 session chairpersons. In addition, we have many spaces for non-paper presenting participants.
Room, board, and conference materials are
generously hosted by
O.P. Jindal Global University
Arrival and registration: December 9, 2018, afternoon.
Conference dates: Dec. 10 and 11. 
Departure: December 12, morning.
Participants are responsible to cover the costs of their transportation.

Conference Early Registration fee: 
2000 rupees (28 dollars) for paper presenters and 1000 rupees (14 dollars)
for all other participants.
Students or hardship 600 rs (8 dollars) and 300 rs (4 dollars)
Deadline for early registration is October 30, 2018.
We have consolidated the registration to a single location.
You can register, and pay the fee in advance of the deadline at:

Please send in your registration fee to the “Eventbrite” website, and, send your
Name, address, position, phone numbers, email address and the category for which you are registering (“presenter,” “participant,” etc.) to:
Mr. Amit Paul, WCPA Vice-President, in New Delhi
with a copy to Dr. Glen T. Martin, President, WCPA at
After October 30, registration fee for participants is
 2500 rupees (35 dollars) for presenters and 1500 (17.50) forpaticipants.
Students or hardship 800 rs (11 dollars) and 400 rs (5.50 dollars).
Please send paper proposals and submissions to: 
Dr. Patricia Murphy, Chairperson, Submissions Committee:
Deadline for paper title and abstract: October 15, 2018
Deadline for
completed paper: November 15, 2018
Please note: free membership in WCPA to all
August 31, 2018  United Nations Parliamentary Assembly Campaign News

Mexican legislators call for a review of the UN Charter and "effective international legislation"

31. August 2018

The Commission on Foreign Affairs of the Mexican Congress supports a United Nations conference to review the UN's Charter of 1945 and calls on the new Mexican government to pursue the matter at the upcoming UN General Assembly

Following Mexico's general election in July that was won by Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the Juntos Haremos Historia alliance, the Sub-Commission on Foreign Affairs, National Defense and Education of the Permanent Commission of the Mexican Congress which includes legislators of the Mexican Chamber of Deputies and the Senate called on the new Mexican federal government to push for UN reforms "in accordance with the UN's Charter" at the upcoming session of the UN General Assembly which will be opened on September 18.

Deputy Macedonio Tamez and Francisco Plancarte in Mexico City. Image: CEMERG

The declaration adopted on August 14 says that the next UN General Assembly should take a decision to convene a General Review conference as provided for in Article 109 of the UN's Charter. The document explains that in the light of global issues "Mexico and the international community must respond to the world population with a new paradigm of global governance and with international legislation that is effective to tackle new threats to peace and worldwide stability."

The resolution was tabled by Mexican deputy Macedonio Tamez, leader of the parliamentary group of the Movimiento Ciudadano in the outgoing legislative term. Commenting on the declaration, Mr. Tamez said that "We support the call for open and inclusive intergovernmental preparations of a UN reform summit in 2020. This will be a good opportunity to launch a review of the UN Charter. In addition, we endorse the efforts for the establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly as a first step towards a world parliament."

"Preparations for a UN Charter Review Conference and the creation of a global parliament are overdue," commented Francisco Plancarte, a Mexican lawyer and long-time promoter of UN transformation according to Art. 109 of the San Francisco Charter with Planetafilia and now the Centro Mexicano de Responsabilidad Global, CEMERG.

With the declaration, Mexican legislators are adding momentum to international calls for an overhaul of the UN's structure and a UN Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) ahead of the UN's 75th anniversary in 2020. In July, the European Parliament requested the European Union's governments to promote the creation of a UNPA and early preparations for a UN 2020 Reform Summit.

Observers hope that another boost for global governance reforms may be achieved through the Paris Peace Forum that will take place from 11-13 November 2018 on the initiative of French President Emmanuel Macron. The Global Challenges Foundation in Stockholm is supporting working groups that are to present proposals.

Top image: Cristiano Oliveira/Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Read the declaration

14 July 2018
Trump, Putin and A Special  GLOBAL PEACE SUMMIT
Regarding the upcoming July 16th US-Russian Summit meeting, I have written President Trump to urge him to discuss with President Putin the idea of making this important meeting a first step to an even larger, expanded Summit:  A GLOBAL PEACE SUMMIT.
Talking to each other is far better than war.
I urged Trump to co-host with Mr. Putin such a future SUMMIT.  If designed properly, it could capture the imagination of a public which yearns for world peace and peace of mind from the danger of nuclear disaster. 
Imagine the world community's excitement over such a surprise GLOBAL PEACE SUMMIT that includes Donald Trump (USA), Vladimir Putin (Russia), Xi Jinping (China), Narendra Modi (India), Jean-Claude Junker (EU), and Antonio Guterres (UN Secretary General).
These leaders might meet for up to 30 consecutive days under the guidance of peace psychologists and other experts. This proposed SUMMIT would not be traditional diplomacy in its design which would likely not be effective, nor would traditional conflict resolution methods.  
In my letter to Trump, I have noted that the call for a GLOBAL PEACE SUMMIT comes from a collaborative effort of Russian and American peace activists, as well as activists including from India, France, Argentina, Japan, Israel, Australia, and elsewhere.    
We would hope that Trump and Putin agree with world federalists who believe that militarism is a dead end, and who insist that only a world federal union can bring the world to safety.  This means a "new UN' with a new world charter such as the Earth Constitution drafted by the World Constitution & Parliament Association.
Trump's staff is referred to "THE GREAT PEACE CHARTER: A Manifesto and Roadmap of Global Peacebuilding in the 21st Century" created by Global Harmony Association (Russian-based) as a joint effort of world civil society consisting of 72 peacemaking leaders from 27 countries.
-- Roger Kotila, Ph.D.
   Psychologist, peace activist
   VP, World Constitution & Parliament Association
   President, Democratic World Federalists
   (415) 328-2341 San Francisco
                     *****                                             ******                                          *****
Open Letter for Secure Elections and True National Security

By Gloria Steinem, Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Daniel Ellsberg, RootsAction

13 July 18     Reader Supported News


"Activists and writers including Noam Chomsky, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Alice Walker, and Daniel Ellsberg have signed the Open Letter on this page -- to call for secure elections in the United States and steps to ease tensions between the United States and Russia in order to prevent a catastrophic conflict between the nuclear superpowers....

...At the same time, the U.S. and Russian governments show numerous signs of being on a collision course. Diplomacy has given way to hostility and reciprocal consular expulsions, along with dozens of near-miss military encounters in Syria and in skies above Europe. Both sides are plunging ahead with major new weapons development programs. In contrast to prior eras, there is now an alarming lack of standard procedures to keep the armed forces of both countries in sufficient communication to prevent an escalation that could lead to conventional or even nuclear attack. These tensions are festering between two nations with large quantities of nuclear weapons on virtual hair-trigger alert; yet the current partisan fixations in Washington are ignoring the dangers to global stability and, ultimately, human survival."
Sponsored by the World Constitution and Parliament Association (WCPA), International Philosophers for Peace (IPPNO), and Jindal Global University (JGU)
  [This announcement posted June 30, 2018]

O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonepat, India
International Conference, 10-11 December 2018
“Building the World Parliament”
Conference Theme:  “The World Parliament and Human Rights”

The future peace, security, and ordered progress of the world demand a world federation of free nations, and on no other basis can the problems of the modern world be solved. Such a world federation would ensure the freedom of its constituent nations, the prevention of aggression and exploitation by one nation over another, the protection of national ministries, the advancement of all backward areas and peoples, and the pooling of the world’s resources for the common good of all.”
Mahatma Gandhi


The Earth Constitution as a universal model and blueprint for a transformed World System

Conference Goals and Reflections:

1. We must articulate the need for the world to unite politically in the light of the threats to human existence such as weapons of mass destruction, climate destruction, worldwide wars, and ever-worsening global poverty. How are human rights fundamental to this process?

2.  We must understand why and how the Earth Constitution is essential for uniting the world in these ways. What are its main features?   How will it work?  What is the role of human rights?

3. We must understand basic structure and functioning of the Earth Constitution and how it deals with war, WMDs, climate change, and poverty. How are human rights related to this structure?

4. We must show how the World Parliament can be established as rapidly as possible and how it will operate to serve this goals for world transformation.  What is the role of human rights in relation to the Parliament?

5.  We must articulate and actualize the process of ratification.  How can we do it as rapidly and efficiently as possible?  What can each of us do to make this happen?  How are human rights fundamental to this process?

6. We must articulate the process of establishing the Parliament and the ministries of the World Government even prior to ratification (as specified in Article 19).  Will human rights be a feature of this process?

Tentative Agenda:
 Day One:   Opening ceremonies, keynote speeches, welcome to all participants. A call to action. Initial papers on the conference theme
Day Two:  Remaining papers on the conference theme.  Evening, Conference Grand Meeting and Planning Session for the 15th Session of the Provisional World Parliament planned for December 2019 or January 2020.
Room, board, and conference materials are
generously hosted by
O.P. Jindal Global University
Arrival and registration: December 9, 2018, afternoon.
Conference dates: Dec. 10 and 11. 
Departure: December 12, morning.
Participants are responsible to
                  cover the costs of their transportation.
Conference Early Registration fee: 
1000 rupees for participants and 2000 rupees for paper presenters.
Students or hardship 300 and 600 rs
Deadline for early registration is October 30, 2018.
This should be paid in advance of the deadline on the website of
Please send your registration fee along with your
Name, address, position, phone numbers, email address.
After October 30, registration fee for participants is
 1500 rupees and 2500 for paper presenters.
Students or hardship 400 and 800 rs
Please send paper submissions to: 
Dr. Patricia Murphy, Chairperson, Submissions Committee:
Deadline for paper title and abstract: October 15, 2018
Deadline for completed paper: November 15, 2018
Please note: we will give free membership in WCPA to all participants.  You can also sign up at   
For more information see or email Dr. Glen T. Martin at
June 21, 2018  Earth Federation News & Views
["Universal rights for the child ignored by US immigration authorities."]
June 11, 2018
by Dr. Fred Unterleitner 
[Letter from Dr. Unterleitner to Democratic World Federalists, San Francisco.  The wonderful quality of life this scientifically minded physicist finds in certain nations matches the living standards that Earth Federation activists believe could be possible for all peoples in all nations by adopting the Earth Constitution. -- R Kotila, PhD, Psychologist & activist.]
I'd like to invite you join me in appreciating some really good news.
The good news is that there are many nations, with populations in the millions, where citizens feel free to carry on their lives and that of their families, express their opinions and participate in politics, while being willing to share that freedom with all their fellow citizens under a truly democratic government.
As a long retired experimental physicist, I appreciate the necessity of experimental verification of hypothesizes. Being retired, I feel free to apply this attitude to matters concerned with the problem of how we individuals can live happily with the billions of other humans on this planet. That is a problem remote from physics, (perhaps aside from nuclear weapons systems) but sometimes called "political science". As a "science addict", I consider all knowledge to be a work in progress, where ideas (hypotheses) can be freely expressed, but before we judge their truth, we do experiments to see if they work in "real life".
We could learn from these countries 
There are interesting experiments in governance that have been going on for more than half a century (several generations) in a number of nations, yielding interesting and very hopeful results. For a number of years now surveys have been made to judge how satisfied with their lives citizens of countries all over the world are. Among the top countries in this ranking of satisfaction are always:
Costa Rica
Costa Rica is an interesting case. It has had a democratic government since 1869, but is presently operating under a constitution adopted in 1948, after a disputed election. That constitution requires all citizens to participate in elections, and eliminated the national military, relying on the recently adopted UN Charter to protect its national borders. Since the adoption of that constitution the government, often with a democratic socialist majority, instituted a social security system like the U.S., emphasized universal free education, improved countrywide infrastructure such as roads for transport of farm products and provision of rural electricity. While the export of farm products is still a major factor in the economy, the good education system has paid off by encouraging high tech companies to establish branches in Costa Rica to take advantage of the available highly educated work force, creating an increasingly diversified economy. The low crime rate and friendly population also has led to increasing tourism as a growing factor in the economy. The good news is that a truly democratic multiparty system has made Costa Rica an outstanding success relative to other Central American countries, and even many countries all over the world.
Low crime rates, almost no poverty 
The other countries mentioned above are culturally similar Nordic nations which have progressed from royalties to parliamentary democracies, like England also has, for example. After WW II and the preceding great depression, many people were willing to try something new and gave democratic socialists a chance at governing. Luckily, looking at the disadvantages of a militarized totalitarian socialism in the neighboring USSR, they emphasized the need to maintain the "democratic" part of their name, and thus had to govern with significant conservative parties, requiring compromises. This has resulted in a society in which essential services needed by all people were government utilities, such as health care, education and essential infrastructure, are provided from tax funds. Most other functions are provided by private enterprise and cooperatives. As this system has developed over decades it has resulted in societies with almost no poverty, remarkably low crime rates, and a population generally satisfied with their lives.
What helps create a satisfied and happy citizenry
The socialist impetus required that certain minimum human needs be met by the community:
Universal availability of healthcare
Universal free education at all levels
Full employment, so everyone can contribute to the best of their ability
Minimum wage for all employees, to cover ordinary life needs
Excellent transportation and utility infrastructure
Adequate income for the elderly.
As these programs were put in place for all people in the nation, there was no need for special programs for the poor or homeless.
Providing all these services turns out to require using about 50% of the GDP. High taxes of all kinds are used to transfer individual wealth to these programs. To justify this, one might say that the choice in such a nation is to find an optimum balance between individual wealth and the common wealth. The perhaps surprising result of a successful balance is not only a happier and more compassionate community, but also better economic performance of the nation as a whole. Another surprising result is that wealthy citizens have mostly stayed in their countries, and are appreciated for providing their service for the economy and the welfare of the nation.
Lately the Nordic nations have been popular places for refugees from war or persecution to seek sanctuary. Many with valid refugee claims have been admitted and given special assistance for a year while getting adjusted to the new country, but they have put a strain on the social consensus because of the diverse customs they have, and the normal difficulty in adjusting to a different culture and being accepted by their new neighbors. It will be interesting to see if the human solidarity, required to make their democratic society function well, can hold with a significant fraction of the population being "racially" or culturally different.
My conclusions:
1. Humans have an inherent biological capacity for compassion with other humans, since our children mature so slowly that it takes many years of compassionate care to permit them to survive to become mature contributing members of our community. The above examples of compassionate governance, which provide basic human needs for all members, also permits grater freedom for each individual to develop their own capabilities.
2. A truly democratic government can provide an optimum environment for all members of the society to develop their skills and, in freedom and cooperation, develop a satisfying lifestyle. To maintain this long term, it is necessary to have alert citizens who do not follow propaganda by self important plutocrats or autocrats. Those autocrats know that they need to spread hate and fear of scapegoats, in order to destroy the human solidarity required for democratic governance.
3. Human rights and ethics need to be taken seriously. We need to generally recognize that war is an unethical criminal activity which permits mass murder of fellow humans without respect for the right to life of the victims on all sides of a dispute. Taking into account available technology for communications, travel and weapons, we must achieve the goal of a human civilization governed by a planet wide democratic federation. 
As a minimum, the possession, development or use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, which are inherently indiscriminate murder weapons, need to be totally outlawed on the planet if human civilization is to continue into the future. Most people understand this and would support such a law if true democracy were permitted to operate, with honest discussion of the issues involved.
Fred Charles Unterleitner  PhD (Physics)
 [Letter sent 6/8/18  to Democratic World Federalists, San Francisco]
Sponsor for the Constitution for the Federation of Earth
Dr. Glen T. Martin, President      Dr. Eugenia Almand, Secretary General
Announcement of another Major Breakthrough 
for the Earth Federation Movement

23 April 2018

16 April 2018 (original date)
Dear fellow World Citizens within WCPA and the Earth Federation Movement,

         You will recall that the Provisional World Parliament, at its 7th session in Chennai, India, in December 2003, passed World Legislative Act #22, called “The Equity Act.”  Under this act, the right of the people of Earth to a guaranteed annual income provided by the Earth Federation government under the Constitution for the Federation of Earth was enacted into official world legislation.

            Yesterday, Secretary General Eugenia Almand and President Glen T. Martin met with Mr. Eric Stetson, a Founder, and leader in The People’s Currency Foundation.  This non-profit organization produced the digital currency originally known as “Grantcoin” and now known as “Manna.”  The People’s Currency Foundation believes that everyone has the right to live and to have an income, which is exactly what the Earth Constitution says as articulated in World Legislative Act 22. Their website declares:
                 Manna is the first publicly traded, blockchain-based currency to be distributed as a  Universal Basic Income subsidy to anyone in the world who applies and is verified as a unique human being. Manna, originally called Grantcoin, is also the first cryptocurrency to be managed and distributed by a U.S.-based tax-exempt nonprofit 
organization, and to be value-backed not only by investors, but also by tax-deductible donations which are used to buy back the token on markets where it trades....
     As we witness the growing scourge of inequality and its consequences, we see that the existing system is unjust and unsustainable. Recognizing and accepting the moral obligation that arises from such knowledge, we stand united in the decision to create a better alternative: a currency of conscience designed to facilitate the emergence of a more just and sustainable global economic system. 
     Manna, therefore, is a digital currency of real value that is free to anyone in the world who wishes to sign up on the People’s Currency Foundation website to receive the currency at regular intervals.  Of course, the exchangeability of Manna for goods and services will depend on building “a global network of socially conscious businesses, nonprofit organizations, and their customers and supporters, using the Manna currency as a tool to create a more equitable economy for a better future.”
     Under the authority of World Legislative Act 22, WCPA, as representative of the Provisional World Parliament, declares that Manna is available to all our members, and we urge you to transmit this message to your associated organizations and to all people, especially those who struggle economically.
     This is free currency intended to address the injustice of the current world system and recognize everyone’s right to an income. The more people who subscribe to Manna, the more value the currency will have, so it is in our self-interest to promote this to associated organizations, websites, and friends.
As you know, WCPA is the official sponsor for development of Provisional World Government, which is organized under the authority of Article 19 of the Earth Constitution.Elements of the emerging world government now in existence consist in the Provisional World Parliament, the Collegium of World Judges that was activated under World Legislative Act # 48, the Earth Environmental Ministry which has recently been inaugurated under the leadership of the organization Healing Earth and Provisional World Government Environmental Minister, S.D. Vijeyan, and, finally, the right of all people to free currency in the form of Manna, which helps actualize the commitment made by World Legislative Act 22.
      Together, under Article 19 of the Earth Constitution, we are all participating in the exciting emergence of democratic world law and a world system based on the common good of people everywhere, a world no longer based on extravagant accumulated wealth and/or military power.

 Again, we urge you to sign up for Manna at the website of the People’s Currency Foundation for a Manna “wallet” to receive your free currency automatically, deposited at regular intervals:    And we request that you forward this message to the membership of your associated organizations.
For Humanity and the Future!
Dr. Glen T. Martin,  President
Dr. Eugenia Almand,  Secretary General

April 14, 2018

Statement on Syria by World Beyond War Director David Swanson

“Donald Trump has just committed a murderous immoral criminal action and sought to depict it as law enforcement,” said David Swanson, the director of World BEYOND War, a non-profit global organization opposed to all warfare. “Congress has sat on its hands, failed to cut off funding, and failed to move on impeachment. It is to be hoped that those Congress members who said such an attack on Syria would be impeachable will at least find the decency now to act after the fact.”

“Trump may have acted just in time to prevent any reports from inspectors weakening his propaganda,” said Swanson. “This is a disturbing replay of the 2003 attack on Iraq, which Trump supported at the time, condemned on the campaign trail, and has now imitated. But it is critical for us to reject the nearly universal pretense that proof of use by Syria of chemical weapons, just like proof of WMD possession by Iraq, would somehow constitute legal or moral grounds for committing additional criminal actions –potentially far more serious actions that risk confrontation between nuclear armed governments.

“While the New York Times tells us that Trump has acted to ‘punish’ Assad, using what Trump calls ‘precision strikes,’ such strikes have a long history of being anything but precise, and the people dying have a habit of not being their nation’s leader. No court has authorized Trump to punish anyone, of course, and the claims of Secretary of So-Called Defense Mattis that attacking Syria is ‘defensive’ can hardly pass the laugh test with even the most war-prone lawyers.

US attack on Syria illegal, a world crime

“This criminal action is a blatant violation of the UN Charter and of the Kellogg-Briand Pact, both of which Congress, likewise, prefers to ignore in order to focus on its own supposed power to authorize such crimes. And yet the same Congress will not stand up and defend that power, but rolls over on Yemen so pitifully that Trump could expect no consequences from Capitol Hill for his latest outrage. If an AUMF could legalize this action, the fact remains that there isn’t one that even remotely claims to do so.

“Trump takes us for fearful children when he resorts to the tired propaganda of calling a foreign leader an ‘animal’ and a ‘monster,’ and pretending that war made against a country is somehow actually made against only an individual. In reality, of course, the bombs always kill people depicted (sometimes accurately) as having suffered under the rule of the ‘monster.’

“The fact is that Syria, its opponents, the United States, Russia, and other parties active in Syria for years now have killed many thousands of people using murderous weapons of war. That a relatively small number of people may have been killed with chemical weapons (weapons in the possession of multiple parties in this war) is no more or less murderous than the ongoing mass-murder by respectable bullets and bombs. The use by the United States in recent wars of white phosphorous, napalm, depleted uranium, cluster bombs, and other notorious weapons is no more grounds for some foreign self-appointed global savior to bomb Washington, than any events in Syria are grounds for Trump’s latest flaunting of his apparent impunity.

Where's the UN?

“Trump mocks all of humanity with his claim to be praying for peace while imposing war. Will humanity continue to roll over and take it? Will the United Nations begin to do its job? Will the people and parliaments of Britain and France rise to the occasion? Will the people of the United States pursue strategic and escalating nonviolent action arising out of this weekend’s events? We shall see.”

David Swanson 
is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of and campaign coordinator for Swanson's books include War Is A Lie. He blogs at and He hosts Talk Nation Radio. He is a 2015, 2016, 2017 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee.
March 3, 2018
World Beyond War Meets Earth Federation Movement
This is an important meeting between two titans in the peace movement:  David Swanson of World Beyond War, and Glen Martin of the Earth Federation/Earth Constitution Movement.  A merger of these two strategies could mean a means to build a lasting peace movement, rather than suffer the disappointment of networking alone which falls apart as soon as the latest crisis is over.  The Earth Constitution could provide a guide for the building blocks to end perpetual war which the present geopolitical UN system gives us, and establish a growing yet lasting means to achieve perpetual and permanent peace.  It would be the joining of the short term with the long term as an overall strategy.  
The retreat for an April weekend is at Oracle in Independence, Virginia.
-- Roger Kotila, Ph.D
Democratic World Federalist
Earth Federation activist
Beyond Nationalism:
The History & Future of the Peace Movement

This weekend retreat will guide you through the fascinating history of the Peace Movement, from World War I to the present. We also will learn about the Earth Federation Movement – a logical solution to the problems of perpetual war and earth changes.

Participants will learn how they can contribute to these important peacebuilding efforts from two amazing activists who are leading the charge to abolish war and federate the Earth. Participants are guaranteed to be inspired by these masters of the Peace Movement and will leave with a sense of true empowerment and concrete goals for sacred activism.
David Swanson David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host at Talk Nation Radio. He is the Executive Director of and the campaign coordinator for His books include War Is A Lie and When the World Outlawed War. He blogs at and David is a 2015, 2016, and 2017 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee.
Glen Martin Glen T. Martin, Ph.D is an author, professor of Philosophy & Religion at Radford University, and President of the World Constitution & Parliament Association, an international group that promotes federation of the Earth. He also is President of the International Philosophers for Peace and Institute on World Problems. Glen has received multiple peace awards, including the Gusi Peace Prize.
Date: Saturday & Sunday, April 14 & 15, 2018
Time: See FLIER for details
Cost: Early Bird Price $200 (all meals included)
Students $150
Oracle River House
Oracle River House

The Oracle River House is located along the New River - the oldest river in America - where you can fish, kayak, and hike the Blue Ridge Mountains. The local "Old Time" music festivals, zipline, wineries, and other attractions are sure to please guests of all ages!.

Oracle Campground
Oracle Campground

The Oracle Campground is located along Saddle Creek and features 10 campsites, a picnic pavilion, and rustic outhouses. You can rent one of our "U.S. Army Commando" tents or bring your own - an affordable and fun way to visit the Virginia Highlands!

Guests receive a free tour of the Peace Pentagon and a lodging discount if attending an Oracle event.
To book a stay at the Oracle River House or Oracle Campground,
go to the below website or contact

February 19, 2018 [Editor: The "World Government Summit" mentioned in the following article is not real world government although participants at the Summit looked at global issues.  If analyst Rich Scheck is correct, open warfare in the Middle East may soon erupt provoked by Israel and the U.S.]
[The United Nations, due to its obsolete Charter, lacks the tools it needs to prevent Netanyahu or Trump from launching full scale war.   A "new UN" under the Earth Federation's Earth Constitution is what would be needed. How long can the world afford to wait to create a "new UN" under the Earth Constitution?]
          Do Netanyahu and Trump Need New Wars To Survive?
                                               by Rich Scheck
Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is under enormous pressure to resign his office in the wake of the latest corruption allegations against him.

Similarly, President Trump has had a continuous and massive assault on the legitimacy of his presidency since winning the 2016 election.

Both might arguably benefit enormously from a war that would allow them to change the subject and step up boldly as action-oriented executives ready to meet the challenge of foreign aggressors.

For Bibi that entity would be the Shia Crescent of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

For Trump, that might include a larger group of foes including Russia and China as well as North Korea, Iran and the ISIS/terrorist threat around the globe. 
World's #1 enemy?
I agree that the US should be the world's number 1 enemy as many participants at the World Government Summit in Dubai concluded this weekend.

But it is not because of the reasons given by the Hollywood elite and other Globalists who embrace the Neoliberal agenda discussed in the above article. 
For me it is because of our unending wars based on lies to perpetuate Pax Americana and to protect those like Sheldon Adelson and Jared Kushner who promote Netanayahu's plan for a Greater Israel.  I prefer a left-right antiwar alliance to put an end to our imperial ways that has most of the world seeing us as an enemy.

Even though the Russiagate investigation has produced no real evidence against the president, the Democrats will use it to increase their partisan attacks against him.  That sets the stage for him to support any acts of aggression by Israel and Bibi so he can distance himself from that scandal and focus the conversation on a subject virtually guaranteed to get bipartisan support.....war against Iran.
The situation in Syria is particularly dicey because of the presence of NATO member Turkey which invaded the Kurdish region on their border to constrain or demolish that group's desire to establish the independent state of Kurdistan which the US and Israel appear to support.

Can you say, Spain, 1936?
With Russia still actively backing Assad's regime in Damascus and with China apparently on board as well, the proxy war in that beleaguered nation may well portend the start of WWIII.  Can you say, Spain, 1936?

That seems to be exactly what Bibi is attempting to achieve with his constant belligerence towards Iran.  With both President Trump and the Congress seemingly in his pocket, it is quite easy to imagine that war is imminent!

What better way to move beyond his personal dilemma and emesh both the US and Israel in a battle for the Holy Land that the American people are likely to support?

For me there is a more intelligent and peaceful way forward that might even include democratic world government in the future.  As an interim step, we first need to create a true anti-war movement that embraces the disaffected on both the left and right who are disgusted by our endless interventions and wars for regime change.

A global peace party
As a first step we need a peace party that is strongly opposed to more wars and increased defense spending that perpetuates the domination of the national security state:

If we do that then maybe in the years ahead we can create a society that reflects the noble sentiments expressed by the idealists attending the World Government Summit.  But unless and until we take that first baby step, we are doomed to endless wars for a non-existent peace abroad and terrorists acts including school shootings at home.

Yes, Bibi and Trump need wars in order to survive.  We who reject that approach and want to be on the right side of history, must find a way to unite in order to prevent them from destroying more lives and nations.
~ by Rich Scheck   [Article received 2/18/18.]

     **********          **********          **********          ***********          **********          **********           **********
[Editor's note: To my knowledge, Democratic World Federalists is the first world federalist organization to publish a critique of "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P), a principle developed and supported by world federalists. The original idea was that the world community had an obligation to protect citizens living in nations oppressing their own citizenry.  But R2P, according to Ajamu Baraka writing in Counterpunch, has been a disaster for the citizenry of the countries that R2P was supposed to "protect," the principle being criminally abused and violated with military invasions by US/EU/NATO's "axis of domination."
I am reminded that Martin Luther King, Jr. was in his heart a world citizen, and firmly anti-war.  King believed in one world humanity, and was a supporter of the work by the World Constitution and Parliament Association to draft a new world constitution -- the Constitution for the Federation of Earth (aka "Earth Constitution") to be designed to do what the UN Charter has been unable to do -- unite the world and end war. -- R Kotila]

January 15, 2018  Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
"Fifty years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated the obvious: the United States was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. He also said the public allowing this violence would lead to a kind of national spiritual death that would continue to make the U.S. state a danger to the world."
We say to progressives that you can’t pretend that you believe “Black Lives Matter” in the United States and not be opposed to the assault on the humanity of Palestinians, of Yemenis, of the millions lost in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, of the destruction of Libya and of coups in Honduras and destabilization in Venezuela.

The Responsibility to Protect the World … from the United States

One of the most ingenious propaganda weapons ever developed is that the powerful nations of the West—led by the United States—have a moral responsibility to use military force to protect the rights of people being repressed by their governments. This “responsibility to protect” (R2P) always had a dubious legal standing, but its moral justification also required a psychological and historical disengagement from the bloody reality of the 500-hundred-year history of U.S. and European colonialism, slavery, genocide and torture that created the “West.”


This violent, lawless Pan-European colonial/capitalist project continues today under the hegemony of the U.S. empire. This then begs the questions of who really needs the protection and who protects the peoples of the world from the United States and its allies? The only logical, principled and strategic response to this question is citizens of the empire must reject their imperial privileges and join in opposing ruling elites exploiting labor and plundering the Earth. To do that, however, requires breaking with the intoxicating allure of cross-class, bi-partisan “white identity politics.”


Neocons like William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Pearl were the driving forces in pushing for the war in Iraq. They understood if they wanted to sell war, “Americans” needed to believe the conflict was about values, not interests. The neocons dusted off and put a new face on that old rationalization for colonialism—the white man’s burden. Interventions were to bring democracy and freedom to those people who were struggling to be just like their more advanced models in the white West. Liberal interventionists further developed those ideas into “humanitarian interventionism” and the “responsibility to protect.”


The fact that the United States and Europe can wrap themselves in the flag of morality, practice savior politics and get away with it is a testament to the enduring psychopathology of white supremacist ideology.


The most extreme expressions of this cognitive dissonance occurred during the Obama administration, when the notion of U.S. exceptionalism was used to justify continuing the barbarism of the Bush administration’s so-called War on Terror. With this justification and the outrageous assertion that it was defending democracy, the U.S./EU/NATO axis of domination committed crimes against humanity and war crimes that resulted in the deaths of millions, while millions more were displaced and ancient cities, nations and peoples were destroyed.


The result? International Gallup and Pew research polls have consistently shown the peoples of the world consider the United States the greatest threat to world peace on the planet.


National Security Strategy Under Trump: More of the Same


When the Trump administration released its National Security Strategy, Liberal pundits suggested it was a significantly different than any previous U.S. strategy. But beyond some specific references to putting “America” and its citizens first in relationship to the economy, and the reactionary stances of tightening border security and enforcing strict immigration policies, Trump’s strategy did not stray much from the post-Cold War strategy of the preceding years.


The difference that did exist was more in style than substance. The Trump administration completely dispensed with all pretexts used by previous administrations. Even domestic law, like the War Powers Act that was ignored by the Obama administration continues to be of no concern for the new Trump administration.  Now it is Trump’s “America first” with no concern for international law or accepted standards of behavior.


Unchecked by the countervailing power of the Soviet Union, the bi-partisan National Security Strategy produced in the 1990s that committed the U.S. state to pursue policies that would ensure continued U.S. economic, political and military hegemony through the 21st century—the “new American century”—is still the overall strategic objective of this administration.


Even explicitly naming China and Russia as “competition” that threatens to harm the country’s security was not that much of a departure since the centerpiece of U.S policy has been checking any state that challenged U.S. power in any region. The Trump administration named threats to U.S. interests—North Korea in Asia, Russia in Eurasia, Iran in West Asia, with jihadist groups included in case the United States needed a War on Terror (WOT) justification for U.S. interventions anywhere in the world.


While Neocons and liberal interventionists in previous administrations sugarcoated U.S. geo-strategic objectives to mask hegemony, the Trump rhetoric is crude, direct and unambiguously aggressive. Protecting U.S. interests in the 21st century means relying on military aggression, war and subversion.


Building the U.S. anti-war movement as the responsibility to protect from Empire


Fifty years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated the obvious: he United States was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. He also said the public allowing this violence would lead to a kind of national spiritual death that would continue to make the U.S. state a danger to the world.


That spiritual death has not quite happened completely. Yet accepting the “inevitability” of violence and the necessity for waging war is now more deeply ingrained in the collective consciousness of individuals in the United States than it was 50 years ago when King warned of the deep malady of U.S. society. For most of the 21st century, the United States has been at war. Culturally, mass shootings, the wars on drugs and terror, violence and war as entertainment, livestreamed videos of horrendous police-executed murders as well as of a head of state being sodomized with a knife have resulted in what Henry Giroux refers to as a “culture of cruelty.


But the very fact that the authorities need to lie to the people with fairy tales of the responsibility to protect in order to give moral coverage for the waging of war is an acknowledgement that they understand that there is enough humanity left with the public that it would reject U.S. warmongering if it was only seen as advancing narrow national interests.

It is this remaining moral core—and the objective interests of the clear majority of the people to be in opposition to war—that provides the foundation for reviving the modern anti-war movement.


Baltimore was the site of the rebellion in response to Freddie Gray’s murder by the domestic military we refer to as “the police.” There, a couple of hundred activists will convene January 12 to kick off a new campaign to close all U.S. foreign bases. This gathering is the result of a new coalition of forces—both old and new—to revive the U.S. anti-war movement. This conference comes on the heels of another meeting that took place just a few months ago in Washington, D.C., where some of the same forces came together to kick-off a campaign to “divest from the war machine.”


Strategically these efforts are designed to be the first steps toward building the confidence, institutional strength and programmatic focus of a new, reinvigorated, broad-based, anti-war, pro-peace and anti-imperialist movement in the United States We are opposing the warmongering both corporate political parties have normalized.


The difficulties and challenges of this endeavor are not lost on the various organizations, networks and coalitions that are part of these efforts. We all recognize that there are no shortcuts to the delicate reconstructing of our existing forces and the challenge of expanding those forces by bringing in new formations. The ideological and political differences that have surfaced among left and progressive forces around issues of war and imperialism make it more challenging.

But the imperative of expressing solidarity with the victims of U.S. warmongering must take precedence over our differences and should serve as a basis for building political unity.


Solidarity, however, is not enough for those of us in the Black Alliance for Peace (BAP). We recognize its importance as a baseline principle for (re)-building a broad anti-war movement. Our common interests with other oppressed peoples, nations and states that find themselves in the cross-hairs of U.S. imperialism demands we offer more than solidarity—we must stand as allies.


Those of us building the Black Alliance for Peace understand we cannot afford the comforting myths of U.S. benevolence that attempts to conceal the naked deployment of U.S. state power in service of Western capitalist/colonialist interests. And so, we view with suspicion, if not treat with disdain, our comrades who support U.S. interventions, even when they frame that support with “leftist” justifications. For oppressed nations and peoples of the world, the U.S. white supremacist, colonial/capitalist patriarchy is and remains the principle contradiction. There must not be any nationalist sentimentality or equivocation on that position.


We saw how the anti-war opposition that emerged during the Bush years in opposition to lawless state-sanctioned violence, dissolved during the Obama administration. Liberals and major elements of the “left” objectively aligned themselves with the U.S./EU/NATO axis of domination through their silence or outright support in the name of opposing authoritarian regimes.


The consequence of that class collaboration is the spectrum of war has today become a permanent feature of policy discourse. The obscene $80 billion increase in military spending that was supported by both parties and the corporate media reflects that collaboration and the corrosive impact of almost two decades of militarism on the politics and consciousness of the public.

So, for BAP, the historic task is clear.


The people must be separated from the capitalist oligarchy and the nature of the state must be exposed. Our politics must be clear and our rhetoric devoid of liberal ambiguities. We must expose the underlying capitalist-class interests that are masked by appeals to national interests and patriotism. The anti-war movement must advance a clear understanding of the economic and class interests that are at root of imperialist strategies and great power conflicts. We must assert without equivocation the position that we can’t get rid of the scourge of war without getting rid of racism and capitalism and that the people should reject all calls to protect the national interests promoted by the ruling elites.

We must say if the rulers want war, let them fight it themselves!


The anti-war and anti-imperialist position must be seen as the highest expression of internationalism and global solidarity. Activists in the United States must reject all efforts to pink-wash militarism and recognize their moral obligation—as citizens of empire—to oppose all U.S. military interventions. We must take the position that we will no longer allow chicken hawk politicians to send our sons and daughters off to other lands, where they become war criminals fighting other working-class and poor people who only want social justice, national sovereignty and self-determination for themselves.


The permanent war agenda of the capitalist dictatorship must be met with permanent opposition from the working class and all oppressed people. The people must understand the link between the racialized justifications for making war abroad with the intensification of the war being waged against Black and Brown communities in the United States

We say to progressives that you can’t pretend that you believe “Black Lives Matter” in the United States and not be opposed to the assault on the humanity of Palestinians, of Yemenis, of the millions lost in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, of the destruction of Libya and of coups in Honduras and destabilization in Venezuela.


Reject the racist 21st century version of the white man’s burden with its absurd notion of humanitarian war and the responsibility to protect and understand that the real threat to world peace is the empire that we are all a part of.

Our task is clear: the anti-war position is not an add-on. It is a fundamental moral and political obligation for the citizens of empire. The world can no longer wait.

December 12, 2017
A New UN?  WCPA President Calls For Earth Constitution and World Parliament

Frustrated with the inability of the United Nations to resolve growing global crises, the President of the World Constitution & Parliament Association, Professor Glen Martin, issued a position paper which condemns the UN Security Council and the fatally flawed UN Charter. 

The UN Charter according to Dr. Martin is an obstruction to world peace.  The solution is to replace the UN Charter with the Earth Constitution which, he explains, would be the basis for a World Parliament and also provide world laws that can be enforced, unlike the current geopolitical system under the UN wherein leaders of powerful nations commit crimes with impunity. 

WCPA members and ratifiers of the Earth Constitution are asked to bring to the public and media the message of the need to form a World Parliament now rather than waiting for a UN which is stuck in a governing structure that cannot bring peace or prosperity to the world community.

President Martin's WCPA vision for the future:

"The ratification of the Earth Constitution will integrate the top with the bottom of the world system. At present top and bottom are fragmented from one another by the fractured world system. The global bankers, multinational corporations, military security complexes, and the superrich of the 1% now control the nations and economics of the world in their own interests.  The people of Earth (especially the bottom 70-80 %) are cut off from the power of government designed to serve their needs and interests. Our needs and interests include our common human interests of sustainability, a protected environment, a peaceful world without war, education, healthcare, and reasonable prosperity."

"20th century science has shown that this world is a whole, that our planetary biosphere is a whole, and that humanity is a whole. (We are all 99.9% genetically identical.)  We are one humanity living on a fragile planet that is in great danger because it is not whole.  Instead, it is fragmented into some 193 militarized “sovereign” entities who are ruled by their respective ruling classes and dominated by transnational corporate interests and global profit-oriented banking. The result are the global disasters that we see all around us.  Wars, weapons of mass destruction, destabilization of whole countries by the CIA and other criminal organizations, everywhere debt of the poor to the superrich, everywhere corruption, bribery and graft. These are largely consequences of the fractured world system, not of any so-called “corrupt” human nature."

World Parliament to contain 1000 electoral districts

"The Constitution for the Federation of Earth establishes a World Parliament representing the people of Earth from 1000 electoral districts worldwide.  There is today no legitimate top (government) for the Earth, only the fragmented system run by and for the 1% that prevents a legitimate global public authority from emerging.  By ratifying the Earth Constitution, the people of Earth create for themselves a holistic world system in which the top and the bottom (the vast majority) become integrated and harmonious.  Government everywhere then begins to serve human interests and not purposes of the few."

"Are human rights being violated in Myamar, Israel-Palestine, or Saudi Arabia?  The Earth Constitution prohibits this. Make this publicly clear. Is climate collapse proceeding unchecked?  The Earth Constitution is designed to restore and protect our planetary biosphere.  Tell the world this fact.  Is war on the horizon between the U.S. and North Korea or Iran?  The Earth Constitution is the standard for elimination both war and weapons of mass destruction. Make this clear on Facebook and elsewhere."

Let the public know what a difference the Earth Constitution could make

"By everywhere making the Earth Constitution the standard by which we evaluate the present failed world disorder, we raise it to a globally recognized authority with legitimacy and supremacy. Write letters to the editor, speak about this at meetings, write articles, give seminars, promote the Earth Constitution in every possible context."

"The 15th Session of the Provisional World Parliament is scheduled for December 2019 or January 2020. We must be serious about Provisional World Government. This must not be just another useless conference, but the emerging world government in action." 

-- The above have been selected excerpts from President Glen T. Martin's WCPA position paper.

(Editor's note:  Because the UN may be unable, or unwilling, to form an effective "new UN," the world community must proceed forward by concurrently establishing a new world organization parallel to, but independent of, the UN -- Earth Federation government under the Earth Constitution and World Parliament.) 
October 21, 2017
What's Missing in the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize?

San Francisco -- While the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to ICAN for banning nuclear weapons is a step forward, it is not a big enough step.  What's missing is a legal ban on war itself.

The International Coalition for the Abolishment of Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) should now set its sights on banning war and demanding the establishment of a new World Judiciary system given real enforcement powers. 

The United Nations lacks this essential feature.   Currently under the present UN Charter the leaders and military generals of the nuclear armed nations, even when they commit world crimes, do so with impunity.  And they refuse to give up their nukes.

No sheriff in town
Leaders of these powerful nations, particularly the UN Security Council's Permanent 5 (who hold the veto) are above the law.  No one goes to jail no matter how egregious the world crime. 

There is no sheriff in town at the global level.

There is also a psychological obstacle. Each nation insists upon the right to keep secret its military arsenal. Such absolute sovereignty breeds paranoia which can only be eliminated by establishing open inspections everywhere. Such openness will require establishing  a world federal union.

In a federal union, there are open inspections everywhere without exception.  That is why we in California never worry that Texas is secretly preparing to attack us.  We are both part of the Union.  We can form a similar safe relationship between Russia and the USA and the other nations by joining in a world federal union.

Treaty-based agreements can't be trusted
The new ban on nukes is a treaty-based agreement. Treaties are notoriously unreliable. They cannot be trusted. The history of treaties is the history of broken treaties. 

To fix this problem the UN needs a legitimate federal constitution. A constitution-based agreement is the only way to insure that no nation will cheat to gain advantage over the others.

That is partly why America's founders abandoned the Articles of Confederation and switched to the U.S. Constitution thus federating and unifying the 13 colonies -- a governmental design that stopped the wars and conflicts that were erupting between the colonies. 

We must constitutionalize the UN Charter
Forming a world federal union is the smart move.  It is essential.  The World Constitution & Parliament Association's Constitution for the Federation of Earth, also known as the "Earth Constitution," provides the needed governing structures which are missing in the obsolete UN Charter.

Democratic World Federalists based in San Francisco is calling for UN Charter review.  They call it THE SAN FRANCISCO PROMISE.  The Center for UN Constitutional Research (CUNCR) based in Brussels is ready to examine the Charter and the implications of amending or replacing it. 

It is time to reach out to the UN General Assembly, the NGO's working so hard to eliminate nuclear weapons, peace groups wanting to go beyond war, and the general public to inspire support for a "new UN." 

The Constitution for the Federation of Earth is ready to go.

Roger Kotila, Ph.D. 

-- R Kotila, PhD
U.N. Enablers of ‘Aggressive War’

Special Report: U.N. investigative reports, like a new one condemning Syria for alleged sarin use, are received as impartial and credible, but are often just more war propaganda from compromised bureaucrats, reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Many people still want to believe that the United Nations engages in impartial investigations and thus is more trustworthy than, say, self-interested governments, whether Russia or the United States... But trust in U.N. agencies is no longer well placed; whatever independence they may have once had has been broken, a reality relevant to recent “investigations” of Syrian chemical weapons use.

There is also the larger issue of the United Nations’ peculiar silence about one of its primary and original responsibilities, shouldered after the horrors of World War II – to stop wars of aggression, which today include “regime change” wars organized, funded and armed by the United States and other Western powers, such as the Iraq invasion in 2003, the overthrow of the Libyan government in 2011, and a series of proxy wars including the ongoing Syrian conflict.

After World War II, the Nuremberg Tribunals declared that a “war of aggression … is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

That recognition became a guiding principle of the United Nations Charter, which specifically prohibits aggression or even threats of aggression against sovereign states.

The Charter declares in Article One that it is a chief U.N. purpose “to take effective collective measures … for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace.” Article Two, which defines the appropriate behavior of U.N. members, adds that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…”

However, instead of enforcing this fundamental rule, the United Nations has, in effect, caved in to the political and financial pressure brought to bear by the United States and its allies. A similar disregard for international law also pervades the U.S. mainstream media and much of the European and Israeli press as well.

There is an assumption that the United States and its allies have the right to intervene militarily anywhere in the world at anytime solely at their own discretion. Though U.S. diplomats and mainstream journalists still voice outrage when adversaries deviate from international law – such as denunciations of Russia over Ukraine’s civil war – there is silence or support when a U.S. president or, say, an Israeli prime minister orders military strikes inside another country. Then, we hear only justifications for these attacks.

Shielding Israel

For instance, on Friday, The New York Times published an article about Israel conducting a bombing raid inside Syria that reportedly killed two Syrians. The article is notable because it contains not a single reference to international law and Israel’s clear-cut violation of it. Instead, the article amounts to a lengthy rationalization for Israel’s aggression, framing the attacks as Israeli self-defense or, as the Times put it, “an escalation of Israel’s efforts to prevent its enemies from gaining access to sophisticated weapons.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the United Nations in 2012, drawing his own “red line” on how far he will let Iran go in refining nuclear fuel.

The article also contains no reference to the fact that Israel maintains a sophisticated nuclear arsenal and is known to possess chemical and biological weapons as well. Implicit in the Times article is that the U.S. and Israel live under one set of rules while countries on the U.S.-Israeli enemies list must abide by another. Not to state the obvious but this is a clear violation of the journalistic principle of objectivity.

But the Times is far from alone in applying endless double standards. Hypocrisy now permeates international agencies, including the United Nations, which instead of pressing for accountability in cases of U.S. or Israeli aggression has become an aider and abettor, issuing one-sided reports that justify further aggression while doing little or nothing to stop U.S.-backed acts of aggression.

For instance, there was no serious demand that U.S. and British leaders who organized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, should face any accountability for committing the “supreme international crime” of an aggressive war. As far as the U.N. is concerned, war-crimes tribunals are for the little guys.

This breakdown in the integrity of the U.N. and related agencies has developed over the past few decades as one U.S. administration after another has exploited U.S. clout as the world’s “unipolar power” to ensure that international bureaucrats conform to U.S. interests. Any U.N. official who deviates from this unwritten rule can expect to have his or her reputation besmirched and career truncated.

So, while harshly critical of alleged abuses by the Syrian military, U.N. officials are notoriously silent when it comes to condemning the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Israel and other countries that have been “covertly” backing anti-government “rebels” who have engaged in grave crimes against humanity in Syria.

The U.S. and its allies have even mounted overt military operations inside Syrian territory, including airstrikes against the Syrian military and its allies, without permission of the internationally recognized government in Damascus. Yet, the U.N. does nothing to curtail or condemn these clear violations of its own Charter.

Breaking the Independence

The reason is that, for much of this century, the U.S. government has worked to bring key agencies, such as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), under U...S. control and domination.

At the start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. military to conduct a devastating aerial assault on Baghdad, known as “shock and awe.”

This drive to neutralize the U.N.’s independence gained powerful momentum after the 9/11 attacks and President George W. Bush’s launching of his “global war on terror.” But this effort continued under President Obama and now under President Trump.

In 2002, after opening the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and effectively waiving the Geneva Convention’s protections for prisoners of war, Bush bristled at criticism from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary C. Robinson.

Soon, Robinson was targeted for removal. Her fierce independence, which also included criticism of Israel, was unacceptable. The Bush administration lobbied hard against her reappointment, leading to her retirement in 2002.

Also, in 2002, the Bush administration engineered the firing of OPCW’s Director General Jose Mauricio Bustani who was viewed as an obstacle to the U.S. plans for invading Iraq.

Bustani, who had been reelected unanimously to the post less than a year earlier, described his removal in a 2013 interview with Marlise Simons of The New York Times, citing how Bush’s emissary, Under-Secretary of State John Bolton, marched into Bustani’s office and announced that he (Bustani) would be fired.

“The story behind [Bustani’s] ouster has been the subject of interpretation and speculation for years, and Mr. Bustani, a Brazilian diplomat, has kept a low profile since then,” wrote Simons. “But with the agency [OPCW] thrust into the spotlight with news of the Nobel [Peace] Prize [in October 2013], Mr. Bustani agreed to discuss what he said was the real reason: the Bush administration’s fear that chemical weapons inspections in Iraq would conflict with Washington’s rationale for invading it. Several officials involved in the events, some speaking publicly about them for the first time, confirmed his account.”

The official U.S. explanation for getting rid of Bustani was incompetence, but Bustani and the other diplomats close to the case reported that Bustani’s real offense was drawing Iraq into acceptance of the OPCW’s conventions for eliminating chemical weapons, just as the Bush administration was planning to pin its propaganda campaign for invading Iraq on the country’s alleged secret stockpile of WMD.

Bustani’s ouster gave President Bush a clearer path to the invasion by letting him frighten Americans with the prospect of Iraq sharing its chemical weapons and possibly a nuclear bomb with Al Qaeda terrorists.

Dismissing Iraq’s insistence that it had destroyed its chemical weapons and didn’t have a nuclear weapons project, Bush launched the invasion in March 2003, only for the world to discover later that the Iraqi government was telling the truth.

Compliant Replacements

In comparison to the independent-minded Bustani, the biography of the current OPCW director general, Ahmet Uzumcu, a career Turkish diplomat, suggests that the OPCW could be expected to slant its case against the Syrian government in the current Syrian conflict.

Not only has Turkey, a NATO ally of the United States, been a key player in supporting the proxy war to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but Uzumcu also served as Turkey’s ambassador to Israel, which has long sought regime change in Syria and has publicly come out in favor of the anti-government rebels...

Another one-time thorn in the side of the U.S. “unipolar power” was the IAEA when it was under the control of Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian. The IAEA challenged the Bush administration’s claims about Iraq having a nuclear program, when one really didn’t exist.

However, being right is no protection when U.S... officials want to bring an agency into line with U.S. policy and propaganda. So, early in the Obama administration – as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was pushing for a hardline on Iran over its nascent nuclear program – the U.S. government engineered the insertion of a pliable Japanese diplomat, Yukiya Amano, into the IAEA’s top job.

Before his appointment, Amano had portrayed himself as an independent-minded fellow who was resisting U.S.-Israeli propaganda about the Iranian nuclear program. Yet behind the scenes, he was meeting with U.S. and Israeli officials to coordinate on how to serve their interests (even though Israel is an actual rogue nuclear state, not a hypothetical or fictional one).

Amano’s professed doubts about an Iranian nuclear-bomb project, which even the U.S. intelligence community agreed no longer existed, was just a theatrical device to intensify the later impact if he were to declare that Iran indeed was building a secret nuke, thus justifying the desire of Israeli leaders and American neoconservatives to “bomb-bomb-bomb” Iran.

But this U.S. ploy was spoiled by Pvt. Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning’s leaking of hundreds of thousands of pages of U.S. diplomatic cables. Among them were reports on Amano’s hidden collaboration with U.S. and Israeli officials; his agreement with U.S. emissaries on who to fire and who to retain among IAEA officials; and even Amano’s request for additional U.S. financial contributions.

The U.S. embassy cables revealing the truth about Amano were published by the U.K. Guardian in 2011 (although ignored by The New York Times, The Washington Post and other mainstream U.S. news outlets). Despite the silence of the major U...S. news media, Internet outlets, such as, highlighted the Amano cables, meaning that enough Americans knew the facts not to be fooled again. [For details, see’s “Did Manning Help Avert War with Iran?”]

A Collective Collapse

So, over the years, there has been a collective collapse of the independence at U.N.-related agencies. An international bureaucrat who gets on the wrong side of the United States or Israel can expect to be fired and humiliated, while those who play ball can be assured of a comfortable life as a “respected” diplomat.

A heart-rending propaganda image designed to justify a major U.S. military operation inside Syria against the Syrian military.

But this reality is little known to most Americans so they are still inclined to be influenced when a “U.N. investigation” reaches some conclusion condemning some country that already is on the receiving end of negative U.S. propaganda.

The New York Times, CNN and other major U.S. news outlets are sure to trumpet these “findings” with great seriousness and respect and to treat any remaining doubters as outside the mainstream. Of course, there’s an entirely different response on the rare occasion when some brave or foolhardy human rights bureaucrat criticizes Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. Then, the U.N. finding is just a sign of anti-Israeli bias and should be discounted.

In the far more frequent cases when a U.N. report is in line with U.S. propaganda, American journalists almost never turn a critical eye toward the quality of the evidence or the leaps of logic. We saw that happen this week with a thinly sourced and highly dubious U.N. report blaming the Syrian government for an alleged sarin incident on April 4. A major contradiction in the evidence – testimony given to OPCW investigators undercutting the conclusion that a Syrian warplane could have dropped a sarin bomb – was brushed aside by the U.N. human rights investigators and was ignored by the Times and other major U.S. news outlets.

But what is perhaps most troubling is that these biased U.N. reports are now used to justify continued wars of aggression by stronger countries against weaker ones. So, instead of acting as a bulwark to protect the powerless from the powerful as the U.N. Charter intended, the U.N. bureaucracy has turned the original noble purpose of the institution on its head by becoming an enabler of the “supreme international crime,” wars of aggression.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative as an e-book (from Amazon and


 “Building the World Parliament 2017”

International Conference featuring the Earth Constitution

 and Building the World Parliament under its authority

November 8, 9, and 10, 2017

Call for papers and Participants

Jindal Global University

In Haryana, near Delhi, India

Room and Board supplied for all Participants

Participants are responsible for their own transportation costs

Co-Sponsors: World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. (WCPA)

               and Jindal Global University


All participants register with Dr. Glen T. Martin at

Participants are welcome who do not wish to present a paper.

Proposal for papers due by September 30.

Final draft of papers due by October 30.

All presenters have 30 minutes. It is recommended that you leave 10 minutes for questions.

                     Visit our websites:                                


Conference Goals: (1) Why is there an absolute need for the world to unite spiritually, conceptually, and politically?  (2) What is the role of the Earth Constitution in uniting the world in these ways?  (3) How does the structure and functioning of the Earth Constitution establish peace and justice on Earth? (4) Why is the Parliament necessary for world peace and justice?  (4) What specific plans can we make to actualize the Parliament and Constitution? (6) How will the World Parliament promote the spiritual as well as political transformation of the Earth? (7) How will the World Parliament affect global education? (8) What measures can we take to get rid of the lethal arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and also taking steps to redirect the huge expenditure incurred for deploying Military / Police Personnel on a massive scale, towards human development?

August 27, 2017

[Article first published 8-10-17 from authority-to-use-nuclear-weapons]

Donald Trump has complete, unchecked authority to use nuclear weapons

The military chain of command provides the president with complete authority to order the use of nuclear arms, Princeton researcher and Global Zero founder Bruce Blair tells DW. He also talks about potential objections.
DW: Does the US military chain of command give President Donald Trump the unilateral authority to order the use of nuclear weapons?
Bruce Blair: The protocol that has been set up for this purpose is streamlined and designed for speed and efficiency, not for deliberation. And this protocol gives the president carte blanche - complete unchecked authority to order the use of nuclear weapons.
Bruce Blair is a nuclear security scholar at Princeton University and a co-founder of Global Zero
Now some people argue that that authority can violate the constitution if the president orders the first use of nuclear weapons, others say the constitution provides this authority through Article 2, which designates the president as commander of chief of the armed forces. So you get into a little bit of debate about what is constitutional or not. But the system, the protocol, is designed to allow for one person with a single verbal order to launch nuclear weapons.
Can you describe the nature of this protocol and how the use of nuclear weapons would be carried out in practice?
The way that would work is that the president would consult as he desires with his top advisors. He is not obliged to consult with anyone, including the Secretary of Defense or the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or the national security adviser.
He likely would and the teleconference protocol has been designed to patch in his top advisors into a secure conference call if they are not in the room with him, including the commander of the strategic forces in Omaha, Nebraska. In this case he would have a discussion with his advisors if he chose to do so.
The US is the only country to use a nuclear weapon against another country, dropping two atomic bombs on Japan in World War II
The main talker in this conference call is the commander, the four-star general in charge of our nuclear forces in Omaha, Nebraska. He is the person who talks to the president about what options are available and what the consequences would be and he would ask the president about what kind of conditions the president would like to impose on the use of nuclear weapons, for example whether or not he would like to withhold strikes against urban populations. So that conversation is the main one in this protocol and other advisors may be invited to weigh in or may not.
And then the president makes a decision and then conveys that decision to another critical party that is patched into this emergency teleconference, and that is the emergency action center, the so-called war room at the Pentagon. So the president makes a decision, chooses among the options to him and instructs the war room, which is patched into this call to carry out that order.
At which point the war room requires the president to verify his identity using a special code, known colloquially as "the biscuit," also known as "the gold code." And if the president gives the right codes to the Pentagon, the Pentagon transmits an emergency message or a launch order to the forces designated by the president's choice.
That launch order, which is roughly the length of a tweet, would be formatted and would include special codes to unlock missiles and to provide instructions to the executing commanders in the field as to the time the war plan should be carried out. And then the crews would receive that message within five minutes of the president's decision and begin to carry it out.
Trump has issued heavy-handed threats to the regime in Pyongyang
How long would it take for the president's order to be carried out?
In the case of land-based rockets in the middle west of the United States, of which there are 400, each with one warhead, those crews can carry out the order in one minute from the time they have received it. The missiles could be leaving their silos en masse in one minute from the time they have received the order. Crews on submarines would take about 10 minutes longer to carry out the order because they have extra steps that they need to carry out.
Could there be opposition among the senior advisors that's so strong that they would try to intervene not only to oppose, but to disobey orders and to instruct the chain of command in the Pentagon war room not to carry out the order?
There you are entering into a psychological arena, and I can't really speculate more than anyone else how that might play out.
And the fact that the military is already planning conventional and nuclear operations against North Korea, that there is already a nuclear plan for North Korea, the fact that that is an ongoing process of fine tuning, is an indication that that is already accepted that nuclear weapons might be used against North Korea. And the mere planning for that by the military indicates the accommodation and acceptance of a presidential decision to order that plan be carried out.
US intelligence authorities claim North Korea can mount a nuclear missile on a rocket
Once an option is chosen by the president in this protocol of decision making that I described to you, someone like the commander of the strategic command might be saying, "Mr President I think this is ill-advised, we have conventional non-nuclear options to deal with this threat and furthermore the nuclear option you prefer is probably a violation of the law of war under the circumstances."
He may well receive that kind of advice in the emergency conference, but he can ignore it and proceed and I believe that - based on my conversations with people in the military that would be involved in situations like that - they would give their best advice and then they would carry out the order that the president gives, even if it were viewed as ill-advised, misguided and a violation of the law of war. I believe the system is very strongly predisposed to accept and carry out the president's wishes.
Bruce Blair is a nuclear security scholar at Princeton University and a co-founder of Global Zero, an international initiative dedicated to the elimination of all nuclear weapons. He also served as a member of the US State Department's International Security Advisory Board from 2007 to June 2017.
The interview was conducted by Michael Knigge.
     June 1, 2017

Swami Agnivesh, WCPA Distinguish Advisor, recently met with the Dalai Lama and presented him a copy of the Earth Constitution. 

Breaking news: Swami Agnivesh, WCPA Distinguish Advisor, recently met with the Dalai Lama and presented him a copy of the Earth Constitution. It appears that the Dalai Lama may be able to participate in the second WCPA Conference on “Building the World Parliament” to be held in the Delhi area in December of this year.
Dr. Glen T. Martin
President, World Constitution and Parliament Association (WCPA)
President, Institute on World Problems (IOWP)
Professor of Philosophy and Emeritus Chair, Peace Studies, Radford
Laureate, GUSI Peace Prize International
May 17, 2017 
"Mother India" Campaign for Earth Constitution Global Communication Center

The World Constitution & Parliament Association in collaboration with Dharma Pratishthan has launched a fundraising campaign to staff and equip a Global Communication Center in New Delhi, India with office space provided by Swami Agnivesh along with a large coordinating group of similar minded leaders from India.    

The Big Picture goal?  Uniting the world under the Earth Constitution.

The plan is to focus on gaining attention for the Constitution for the Federation of Earth, also known as the "Earth Constitution," a strategy developed at the Pune "Building the New World Conference" last year.  The campaign seeks an initial $100,000 start-up target with a goal of launching operations in September, 2017.   Both individuals, businesses, and corporations will be approached for contributions. 

The Earth Constitution is a visionary yet practical  geopolitical document designed to form the foundation to manifest Global Conscience, global family, and world union.  India is a country whose spiritual values lend strong support for uniting the world. 

The world public is largely unaware that there exists an answer to the world's main problems:  war, the threat of nuclear annihilation,  international lawlessness, poverty, environmental dangers, and violations of human rights.   That is why this Global Center is so important -- the public, once informed of the new way, will gain a new sense of direction.

Dr. Martin writes:  "Businesses in India, especially with its wonderful tradition of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, will be interested in starting this WCPA Global Communication Center to make "Mother India" the center of a worldwide effort to unite the human family."

We are all world citizens by birthright.  People and businesses the world over have a stake in fixing the mess the world is in, the danger facing ourselves and the people we love.  This inspiration is not limited to India.  We all must help. 

See the flyer below for information for volunteering and for your donations. 

- Dr. Roger Kotila (WCPA Vice President, USA and Senior Fellow, Institute On World Problems)