EXECUTIVE VP DON KRAUS CHOSEN TO BECOME NEW CEO AT CGS
At the June 5, 2008 conference-call meeting the national CGS board and the national board of the CGS Education Fund voted to make Don
Kraus the new CEO of Citizens for Global Solutions. He assumed the position on Monday, June 9, 2008. He was promoted to the CEO position
from his present position of Executive Vice-President in charge of external relations. The boards decided this time to select a CEO from within our organization rather than trying to bring in a new person from outside as was done on the two previous occasions.
Don has shown his commitment to the World Federalist Association and Citizens for Global Solutions over a period of 14 years. He is dedi- cated both to our long-term vision of replacing the present war-prone militaristic international system of anarchy with a peace system of en- forceable world law and to our short-term work of getting political action in this country that moves us in that direction. He personally knows many of our members, and many of our members know him. Don has the experience of having run his own successful business before taking over the leadership of the Campaign for UN Reform
and then the CGS Political Action Committee. He knows people on Capitol Hill, and they know him. He has mentored many interns and employ- ees with great success.
We can look forward with confidence know- ing that our organization is under the direction of a dedicated world federalist who also is experi- enced with regard to bringing about political action within our country to move us toward that goal.
REPORT FROM CGS/STL 2008 ANNUAL MEETING
Forty people attended our local CGS annual meeting on Sunday afternoon, May 18 at CBC High School in west St. Louis County. We enjoyed snacks and conversation before the formal meeting began.
Dr. David Oughton, instructor at CBC High School, St. Louis University, Maryville Univer- sity, and St. Louis Community College (as well as Treasurer of our local chapter) gave the open- ing address on “World Religions and World Federation.” He noted that there is disagree- ment about whether the world’s religions have been harmful or helpful in the quest for peace and justice. He agreed with theologian Henry Nelson Wieman that we need to convince people from every religion to give their ultimate commitment to the divine process of creative interchange by
violate them. The permanent International Criminal Court that began in 2002 is an important step in that direction.
Many individuals from various religious tradi- tions have advocated the creation of such a demo- cratic world federation. These include Swami Satprakashananda of the St. Louis Vedanta Society, Buddhists, the Baha’i Faith, Unitarian-Universal- ists, and the Roman Catholic Church. For example, the bishops at the Second Vatican Council told Catholics around the world that “it is our clear duty to strain every muscle as we work for the time when all war can be completely outlawed by international consent. This goal undoubtedly requires the establishment of some universal public authority acknowledged as such by all, and en- dowed with effective power to safeguard, on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice, and respect for rights.”
Because nationalism and patriotism are both causes and effects in the current war system, the religions of the world need to promote globalism, world citizenship, and “humatriotism” (loyalty to the human family), things which will be both causes and effects in a new peace system. World citizenship and world democracy can be promoted by pledging allegiance to the world community as well as one’s country, displaying a world flag and other global symbols, having a world anthem, and the teaching all children a universal auxiliary language such as Esperanto. World peace, like local and national peace, requires structures, laws, customs, and a sense of community for implement- ing nonviolent methods for resolving conflicts that naturally arise between individuals and large groups of people. Religions can play a positive role in achieving both local and global peace by teach- ing the Golden Rule, their common principles of justice and humane living, the global ethic, and the realization that the nations and peoples of the world form an interdependent world community which needs a global system of laws and security in order to survive.
(For the complete text of Dr. Oughton’s speech
along with footnotes for the sources he cites, you can contact him at <OughtonD@cbchs.org>.)
Amy Lindel’s report from the CGS Annual Conference
I have studied political science, with many classes showing the international importance of non-governmental organizations. Studying this has provided me important fundamental knowledge of the structure and variance of such organizations. However, coming to Washington DC has opened my eyes to the work and dedication it takes to have success with organizations. On my first day, I was able to see first hand how the diverse opinions of the board members can shape the vision of the future. I heard different people speak on their hopes and aspirations for the organization, and how best to achieve those successfully. During these discussions, I was humbled in the witnessing of the technicalities that go behind the NGOs that I have often studied.
During the two day trip, there were various workshops and presentations. One presentation that interested me was the re-structuring of the Security Council of the United Nations. Last semester, I took a course on International Organiza- tions, with a specific focus on the United Nations. At the end of the course, we discussed the suc- cesses and failures of the United Nations as a whole, and also the outlook for the future. In this presentation, the Security Council would be weighted geographically, and a country could petition to be in another geographic region if it desired to do so (and was accepted by that region). Throughout this presentation, I thought of how much of the world would change with such a step. With such a step taken, the world powers, espe- cially the United States, would greatly reduce their dominance and influence in the world and the United Nations. It made me ponder—if the Secu- rity Council changed to have weighted voting, would more people at the basic level see them- selves as a global citizen to serve the world’s purpose? Do I see myself as a global citizen?
Another workshop that I enjoyed was the “guidelines” one should use while presenting their particular view to an audience. In this workshop, I defended the need to act on climate change in the world. Before this trip, I understood that politi-
cians took such workshops to help gain public support for their views. The interactive radio-show simulation helped me see the benefits of not scaring your audience to fear, not accepting the question that an audience member can pose to you, etc. I now see that I, like politicians, can use these guidelines to better explain and present my views to an audience.
On our second day in Washington DC, I was privileged to see what lobbying entails. We made our visit to Senator McCaskill’s office. I learned that the best and only way to make an appointment to see someone is through sending a fax. As we sat with down with an individual from her office, I was able to see how the people can have their voices heard. The Senator is there to serve us; we are telling her through information on how we want her to vote to best serve us. We left her information about The Law of the Sea Treaty for her to look over and hopefully support on the floor. We also were able to make it to the House of Representa- tives and leave information there. I learned that this is only the first part. The next part is the follow-up with the offices and that is much more drawn out and tedious. Though I did not make the call the following day to follow-up, I saw that lobbying is a continuous process.
I also was able to see the Library of Congress. The tour that we took in there was breath-taking. The guide was very knowledgeable and kind. I saw on the ceiling various symbols and figures showing the great accomplishments of the world, including Rome, Egypt, and Islam. Looking at this, I saw such a world vision. Americans celebrated world accomplishments while constructing this ornate building. Why can we not see our connections now on a daily basis? Why can we not see that we are global citizens that can benefit from each other now and in the future? We can still cherish Arabic numbers, the work of Shakespeare, the guidance of Plato and the construction of the pyramids, while still seeing a global vision for the future.
Amy Lindel (senior-to-be at St. Louis University)
At the business meeting following the talk, these announcements were made:
(1) The Board of Officers and Directors will meet 10:15 a.m. Saturday, August 2 at the World Community Center, 438 No. Skinker Boulevard.
(2) The annual Hiroshima Remembrance Day will be held Sunday, August 3 at Lewis Park in University City (north of Delmar and west of Yale Avenue).
(3) Our local chapter is hoping to have a booth at the Festival of Cultures to be held Saturday, September 6 in Belleville, Illinois.
(4) The next national convention of Citizens for Global Solutions will be held in Washington DC November 14-16, 2008.
Chair Ronald Glossop reported on the events of the past year, including the fact that our two student essay contest winners Amy Lindel and Mark Burch (both from St. Louis University) had just returned from the national meeting in Washington DC where they also had a chance to do some lobbying. In St. Louis Yvonne Logan had arranged meetings with the local staffs of Representative Russ Carnahan and Senators Christopher Bond and Claire McCaskill. Ron attended the national conventions in Minneapolis in October and Washington DC in May. We co-sponsored the Hiroshima Day Obser- vance in August and the Human Rights Day pro- gram in December. In February we had a member- ship meeting at the Ethical Society to view the DVD of Tad Daley’s talk at the national CGS meeting in Minneapolis. Ron Glossop gave several talks about world citizenship and taught a course on “Confronting War” at Washington University’s Lifelong Learning Institute. David Oughton gave a talk to the First Congregational Church of Clayton on religious views on pacifism, just war theory, and world federalism. The chapter purchased a brick for the memorial patio at the national office for David Oughton. During the year we published 4 newsletters. We instituted a new set-up for our chapter web-page at <http://stlouis.wordpress.com> and hired Nikki Llorin to manage it. The Board of Officers and Directors met seven times during the year. Our chapter membership has dropped to 155, partly because the Kansas City chapter is no longer functioning.
We now have $4,587.38 on hand ($2,414.78 in the education fund and $2,172.60 in the political action fund) plus a CD worth $8,430.46. We adopted a budget of $4,600 for the fiscal year Oct. 1, 2008 to Sep. 30, 2009. We elected Officers and Directors for the coming year: Chair – Ron Glossop; Vice Chair – Yvonne Logan; Treasurer – David Oughton; Record- ing Secretary – Suzanne Reinhold; Membership Secretary – Celestia Gaudreault; Directors – Bill Bartholomew, Paul Davis, Leon (Bud) Deraps, Joy Guzé, Katharine Kilpatric, Peggy Maslowski, Tom O’Gorman, and Robert Reinhold.
The meeting ended as usual with a turkey dinner served by Diner’s Delight.
Mark Burch’s Report from the CGS National Conference
We Are, but We Aren’t
(A Critical & Caustic Critique of Citizens For Global Solutions)
by Bill Bartholomew, St. Louis, MO
With hindsight and the passage of time, when the World Federalists Association was searching for a new name, a suggestion might have been “We Are, But We Aren’t.” Another might have been “The Farce.”
“We Are, but We Aren’t” could be shorthand for, “Yes we say we believe in enforceable world law; but we really don’t, and we’re sure not going to do much to make the concept known.”
With the “Farce” we could say, “But, we’re only emulating the United Nations and other ineffective, treaty-based organizations. Yes, we believe in the unity of nations and we seek an end to the scourge of war, but like the League of Na- tions following World War I and to a somewhat lesser extent the present United Nations we’re really incapable of doing very much.”
Frankly the name of the organization is second- ary. My preference is World Federalists, but I can live with Citizens for Global Solutions. I’m far more interested in what we are and what are we working to accomplish. Unfortunately, I cannot get excited with what I see CGS doing, nor am I sure what their ultimate goal is.
My own exposure to the concept of enforceable world law was many years ago when attending a talk on world government, which I later learnt was a short summary of World Peace Through World Law by Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn. I came away with many questions and reservations about what to me was a new concept; but also with a deep underlying feeling and hope for what not only might be, but for what can be. It was a belief that sustainable world peace is both possible and practical.
A seminar was later arranged with several speakers, one of which was St. Louis’s Ron Glossop. Over the years I’ve learnt much from Ron’s teachings and from his books. (However,
after reading this caustic critique, he’s liable to disown me.) I have also been fortunate to hear other world federalists and to read other books; particularly The Anatomy of Peace by Emery Reves, probably the first articulation of world federalism as we know it today. As a result this belief for what not only might be, but for what can be has only grown stronger.
I believe if we are to have sustainable world peace we must create what presently does not exist but is desperately needed — just enforceable world law. Global conflict must have a final arbiter — just world law enforceable directly on the indi- vidual lawbreaker, whether common criminal, terrorist, or a nation’s leader. We must have a governed world with institutions capable of making and employing enforceable world law across national borders. A part of this governed world must be a world judiciary where enforceable world law will be the final arbiter of global conflict.
What is this sustainable world peace we seek? I would suggest a paraphrasing of Emery Reves definition, “Peace is order based on just enforceable law. Peace means relationships among members of a society are regulated by law.” I also believe as Thomas Paine said in Common Sense, 1775, “We have it in our power to begin the world again.”
When I was first exposed to World Federalism, many federalists were still speaking honestly and openly on these subjects. However as time passed certain words and phrases began to become taboo and politically incorrect. There was a complete cowardice and fear of such words as world govern- ment, world federalism, and world law. Meanings and definitions have became blurred. We have become afraid of speaking out and making this concept known.
The CGS website <http://ww.globalsolutions.org> left me underwhelmed. At first it appears some- what impressive with what might pass for thought- out, reasonable, and statesmanlike positions and language. Unfortunately a closer look left me wondering about its real substance. Buried here and there, particularly in the World Federalist Institute section, were a few not particularly com- prehensive references to world federalism and world law. Unless you know better, it leaves you with the impression that international law and enforceable world law are the same thing, which they are not. International law may be the best that presently exists; however it is treaty-based, it is not enforceable, and it never has and never will accom- plish a sustainable world peace.
When asked if there’s an organization in the U.S. wholeheartedly working for the ultimate goal of a United Earth with enforceable World Law, I and others would like to reply, “Yes there is and this is who it is.” Unfortunately, at this time Citizens for Global Solutions is not such an organi- zation. It’s more like a rudderless ship foundering on the high seas.
The United Nations as it presently exists, while an improvement of past organizations, is incapable of solving the world’s problems and of ending the scourge of war. To do so, it must be drastically altered or replaced. In 1945 in the early days of the debate over adoption of the UN Charter Emery Reves wrote (possibly with tongue-in-cheek), “To amend the San Francisco Charter — if that is the road we choose — we will have to rewrite it so drastically to get what we need that nothing of the document will remain except the two opening words: ‘Chapter One’.”
Recently I heard a recording of Tad Daley’s talk at the October 27, 2007, CGS national convention in Minneapolis. On February 3, 2008 our local chapter sponsored a viewing of that talk at the Ethical Society, and Ron has a DVD of it to loan to
members who would like to view it. Tad strongly and forthrightly encourages CGS to go back to its basic roots. He states, “Our singular ultimate long term goal is enduring world peace through enforce- able world law, an end to the scourge of war for- ever, and something we could truly call a United Earth. Our highest loyalty is our universal loyalty. Allegiance to our nation must be transcended by allegiance to all humanity, to one world.” Tad thinks we can do it in the next 50 years.
Please! let’s stop pussyfooting around. Let’s follow Tad’s suggestion. Let’s say what we mean and mean what we say. Let’s leave this a better world for those who follow. Some of us may not be around to see this; but let’s lay the foundation and do our damnedest. Who knows. Maybe we might even better Tad’s prediction by a few years.
“World federation is an idea that will not die. More and more people are coming to realize that peace must be more than an interlude if we are to survive; that peace is a product of law and order; that law is essential if the force of arms is not to rule the world.” (William O. Douglas, Justice, U.S. Supreme Court)