Take Action | Peace Action of San Mateo County

If you would like to receive our action alerts in your email inbox, send a request to smpa@sanmateopeaceaction.org.

Ukraine War--A Call for Diplomacy and Negotiations

Russia’s illegal war of aggression in Ukraine continues to destroy civilian neighborhoods, impacting millions of Ukrainian lives as the conflict settles into a grim war of attrition. Beyond the conflict zones, the war is fostering a global economic crisis, threatening a perfect storm for food security, particularly in Africa and the Middle East, and risking a potential nuclear catastrophe.

The Ukrainian people have met Russia's cruel invasion with inspiring bravery. Ultimately, however, there is no proper military solution to such an intractable and complex global crisis. The longer the conflict goes on, the more bloodshed there will be. At the same time, the United Nations is warning of years of global hardship that include global “stagflation”, a refugee crisis, and severe disruptions to trade, food security, and human development. The UN is calling for urgent action to address this crisis, warning of a looming catastrophe that could bring global destabilization, starvation, and mass migration on an unprecedented scale.

President Biden is right that “at some point along the line there is going to have to be a diplomatic settlement.” But how long will it take for “some point” to arrive? Wars of attrition can grind on for years, as the belligerents seek to gain territorial advantage and put off inevitably negotiated solutions. Members of Congress can start to foster political space for diplomacy despite ongoing military dynamics. A recent U.S. Institute for Peace report about the possibilities for a diplomatic settlement argues that “strategic preparation now for an eventual peace process can lead to a broader set of choices, with a better chance of success, as Ukraine’s government calculates its options.” There’s no time to waste. It’s time for diplomacy to become a centerpiece of our Ukraine strategy, not just a tool to rally countries to levy sanctions and transfer arms.

Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) has recently drafted a Congressional sign-on letter to President Biden calling on the President to take crucial steps to help bring an end to this war. These steps include: making vigorous diplomatic efforts in support of a negotiated settlement and ceasefire, engaging in direct talks with Russia, exploring prospects for a new European security arrangement acceptable to all parties that will allow for a sovereign and independent Ukraine, and, in coordination with Ukraine, seeking a rapid end to the conflict and reiterate this goal as America’s number one priority.

We need to do our part to make sure this letter has broad and deep support from Congress. If there is a way to end the war while preserving a free and independent Ukraine, the steps outlined in Jayapal’s letter to President Biden are exactly the path the U.S. should be pursuing.

Action: Contact Rep. Jackie Speier or Anna Eshoo, or whomever represents you, and insist they add their name as co-signer to the letter. Tell them it’s the U.S.'s responsibility to pursue every diplomatic avenue to support a true diplomatic solution.

Attacking Yemen--Let Congress Have a Say

Sen. Bernie Sanders has introduced a resolution in the Senate that corresponds with the House version (cosponsored by both Rep. Speier and Eshoo) – “Directing the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress.” With the Biden administration considering resuming sales of offensive weapons to Saudi Arabia, we need to get Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Alex Padilla on board!

With over 400,000 dead and millions at risk of famine and disease, Yemen can’t wait for peace. The current truce, set to expire August 2nd, needs to be extended, and followed by comprehensive peace talks. The U.S. needs to support a peace initiative wholeheartedly, not hedge its bets by considering selling more weapons to Saudi Arabia.

Congress needs to assert its authority over matters of war and peace. It never approved U.S. participation in the Yemen Civil War, though it has continued through three administrations. Both the House and Senate now have War Powers Resolutions to end all U.S. support for the Saudi/UAE-led war on Yemen. The War Powers Resolutions need to pass in both chambers, as they did when Trump was president – and Congress failed to override his veto.

Action: Contact Sens. Feinstein and Padilla and tell them to co-sponsor S.J. Res. 56, the War Powers Resolution meant to end the world's worst humanitarian catastrophe.

Military budget – more than we should stand for

With the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on the upcoming Congressional agenda, the Biden administration and Congress are combining to propose raising military spending to again-unprecedented levels. Biden started the bidding at $813 billion, and the Senate Armed Services Committee added another $45 billion. These increases come despite the Defense Department failing its fourth consecutive audit last December…and despite the healthcare, infrastructure, clean-energy and many other priorities that are going unmet.

Members of the SASC have floated the argument that we need to replenish the weaponry that has gone to the Ukrainian military. But U.S. military spending already surpasses more than the next 9 countries combined…while pumping more hardware into the Ukraine war decreases any chance of a peaceful solution. This will not bring real security for Americans…but it will bring really big profits for American weapons contractors such as Lockheed-Martin, Boing and Raytheon.

Defenders of the increases in Congress as well as these companies – whose CEOs make over $100 million per year – talk up the jobs that military (which they of course call “defense”) spending create. But recent research has an answer: Heidi Garrett-Peltier, an economist with Brown University’s Cost of War Project, concluded that “(i)ncluding both direct and indirect jobs, the military creates 6.9 jobs per $1 million, while the clean energy industry and infrastructure each support 9.8 jobs, healthcare supports 14.3, and education supports 15.2.” She also calculated that the money spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could have created a net increase of between 1.4 and 3 million jobs had it been invested in other sectors of the economy.

With this in mind, East Bay Rep. Barbara Lee and Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan have introduced H.R.8040, the People Over Pentagon Act of 2022. Repeating their efforts in previous years, the bill’s goal is to cut $100 billion from the 2023 Pentagon budget, and reallocate those funds toward threats facing the nation that “are not military in nature,” such as the Covid-19 pandemic, the climate emergency, worsening inequality, etc.

Lee and Pocan are acting in part on findings by the Congressional Budget Office that the Pentagon budget could be cut by $100 billion each year over the next decade without compromising U.S. military readiness. They could also cite May ’22 poll results from Data for Progress that 63% of voters oppose a Congressional increase in military spending above Biden’s budget request…which is already an outrageous amount.

Action: Contact Rep. Jackie Speier or Anna Eshoo, or whomever represents you, and tell them to cosponsor H.R.8040, the People Over Pentagon Act of 2022. Add that along with supporting Pentagon reductions, they should also vote to prevent any additional Pentagon budget increase above Biden’s request, and also vote against any NDAA that does not cut the topline budget request. You can also tell Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Alex Padilla to encourage and support an identical bill to cut military spending in the Senate. Suggest the proposed military budget is far more money for security than the Pentagon needs, and leaves far less than the American people need.

A Congressional Letter on Ukraine

Congress, including some progressive members who voted for it, has received some pushback from activists lately over the amount of military aid that was approved for Ukraine in the midst of the war Russia has been waging on them since late February. Amid that reaction, Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal has drafted a letter to the White House which makes the case for a better direction with regard to the war than we have all seen.

The exact details of the letter are not widely known, but we have an idea of a few things: It emphasizes the need for bilateral diplomacy and the pursuit of peace in the region. It suggests that with the request for aid met by Congress, it is necessary to also begin talking again. And overall, it is a way for Congress to use its collective voice to call for such diplomacy. The more members of Congress sign on to the letter, the bigger its impact will be as an alternative to a war or “support-for-war” footing.

Action: Contact Rep. Speier or Eshoo to ask for their signature on the Jayapal letter to Biden calling for more diplomatic efforts. Suggest that sincere diplomacy should never be abandoned, but rather employed whenever possible as an alternative to war and killing – and the letter represents a time for Congress to raise its voice on behalf of this idea.

More About “Keeping our Republic”

The hearings about the January 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol are revealing the extent to which Donald Trump was ready to go to turn our government into something other than that “of…by…and…for the people”. As the hearings continue, we wait to see if they will result in consequences befitting a person who grabs onto power he or she has not earned.

We saw the signs during his administration. We watched as Trump abused the power of the presidency to enrich himself, how he shielded associates and family members from accountability, and how he attacked his opponents both in the press and in the political arena. In 2021, with the Protecting Our Democracy Act, Congress made an effort to curb such behavior with provisions designed to avoid future abuses.

The bill would, among other things:

Restore the balance of power between the federal government’s legislative and executive branches; prevent abuse of presidential pardons; make sure presidents and vice presidents can be held accountable for criminal conduct; strengthen enforcement of congressional subpoenas; and shield federal whistleblowers who uncover misconduct. The idea that codification of such provisions could even be necessary helps illustrate the bleak period we all went through when Trump was in the White House.

The Protecting Our Democracy Act, which passed the House in December (with exactly one Republican vote – Adam Kinzinger who was later named to the 1/6 committee), is now languishing in the Senate (as S.2921) and in need of a push. Since Sen. Feinstein is one of just 10 co-sponsors, that push from us would be toward Sen. Alex Padilla.

Action: Contact Sen. Padilla to urge his co-sponsorship of S.2921, to make sure future presidents play by set rules and do not jeopardize our system of government, with its necessary checks and balances. Suggest we do not want to go through an “imperial presidency” again. We can also thank Sen, Feinstein for her support for the bill – and ask her to also support getting rid of the filibuster to help facilitate its passage.

Stop Nukes Here Too

While we’re minding Iran’s nuclear future, we continue to focus on that of our own country. And if nuclear war has been on your mind recently, you’re not alone: A recent poll found that 88% of U.S. adults are concerned about a nuclear conflict between the U.S., Europe, and Russia. The consequences would be horrific: instant death for thousands, if not millions of people (“the lucky ones”, as anti-nuclear activist Dr. Helen Caldicott says), followed by environmental destruction, famine, and more death in the fallout.

What you may not know is that President Biden is pushing us closer toward the possibility. In March he proposed spending an enormous sum – $50.9 billion – on nukes alone. These expenditures would cover weapons labs, plutonium pits, and the production and testing of warheads and bombs.

We can attribute such a proposal to the failed logic of deterrence – an argument that has done little to make us, or anyone else, safe. Obviously our nuclear stockpile didn’t stop Putin (following in the footsteps of long-ago Soviet leaders) from building his own. And it hasn’t stopped him from threatening to use these devastating weapons as he wages a horrific war in Ukraine.

Biden’s proposed budget doubles down on a failed strategy, now in an even more unpredictable environment. Luckily a fight is brewing in Congress over whether to approve these funds, and it’s time to seize the moment to pressure Congress, as Peace Action and its allies are doing behind the scenes to draw a line in the sand and avoid a nightmare nuclear scenario.

As a candidate, Biden said the United States “does not need new nuclear weapons”, and while tensions are high right now, those words remain true. Meanwhile, pouring over $50 billion in completely unnecessary, apocalyptically dangerous weapons is a windfall for the weapons industry, but devastating for people and the planet.

One of the biggest risks with nuclear weapons isn’t even international conflict. It’s a simple mistake. In February PASMC screened a documentary film, “The Man Who Saved the World”, about a Soviet official who refused to launch nuclear weapons after a warning during the Cuban Missile Crisis. And in March, Cole Smith, a former U.S. air force nuclear missile operator wrote that “there have been more near-misses than the world knows." For instance, in 2018 an emergency alert system told everyone in Hawaii there was an incoming ballistic missile threat, and that people should take shelter immediately. The message said it was not a test.

So we’ve escaped disaster time and again not because of deterrence, but because of luck. But as the U.S. sets a course to ramp up their nuclear weapons development, other countries will follow – greatly increasing the risk of technological error and human miscalculation, as well as mutually assured destruction. Unless, of course, we set a new example for the world to follow of de-emphasizing nuclear weapons. Spending another $50 billion next year will not take us there.

Action: Contact Rep. Speier or Eshoo, as well as Sens. Feinstein and Padilla, and let them know how you feel about spending so much on a program that could destroy our world and our children’s future. Perhaps reiterate the importance of more health care (including COVID) funding, education and infrastructure to counter climate change.

...And Achieve a Better Nuclear Posture

President Biden's Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which lays out the nation's nuclear weapons policy priorities, is currently underway. On the campaign trail Biden promised to reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons, advance nuclear arms control, and declare that “the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack.” This would be similar to a no-first-use pledge. And such a pledge would be timely on all sides of the war on Ukraine.

The current NPR, as outlined by two previous administrations, called for spending upwards of $1.5 trillion over a 30-year period; some figures put it at closer to $1.7 trillion. Such numbers fly in the face of President Obama’s 2009 speech in Prague calling for a world free of nuclear weapons. They also lack the same pushback we’ve seen lately to the Build Back Better Act, as all Republicans and a couple of annoying Democrats ask how we will pay for infrastructure-related programs that we truly can use – as opposed to weaponry that for clear reasons we hope and pray we will never use.

As to nuclear weapons, the public agrees. A July 2020 Chicago Council Survey poll found that 66% of Americans believe that no country should be allowed to have nuclear weapons, including majorities of Republicans (54%), Democrats (78%), and Independents (64%). In April 2019, a ReThink Media poll found that 80% of Democrats and 64% of Republicans support bipartisan cooperation to “reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world.” There appears a general feeling that nuclear weapons won’t protect us from COVID, global warming or economic inequality. Now it’s time to tell Biden and Congress to weigh in on our priorities, as well as the idea of a no-first-use policy. There are in fact two bills in both the House and Senate addressing that policy.

Action: Contact the White House and remind Biden of his pledge to reduce nuclear weapons, and of the need for his Nuclear Posture Review to move our country’s priorities away from such destructive budget items. Also contact Senator Padilla and ask for his co-sponsorship of S.1219 and S.1148 (Feinstein’s name is on both of these), calling for a no-first-use policy from the U.S. for nuclear weapons. Likewise contact Reps. Speier or Eshoo, and tell them to co-sponsor HR 669 and HR 2603, the House’s no-first-use companion bills. Our electeds should also advise Biden of the need for a new nuclear weapons policy that moves us toward their elimination.

Not “Terrorists”

Over the years, being designated a “terrorist” organization has carried serious consequences – including an inability to get adequate funding for actual valuable human rights-related work. Such has been the case for six respected Palestinian human rights-related non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who in October were called terrorist organizations by the Israeli government. Besides facing fundraising issues, some of their members could face individual or mass arrest.

These groups are renowned for their work documenting violations of international law (Al-Haq), protecting the rights of Palestinian political prisoners (Addameer), supporting marginalized Palestinian communities (Bisan), documenting Israel’s targeted attacks on Palestinian children (DCI-P), supporting Palestinian farmers (UAWC) and empowering Palestinian women to defend their socio-political and economic rights (UPWC). All have played an important role in protecting the lives, lands and rights of Palestinians in occupied territories, and Israel has chosen an authoritarian path to try to suppress them.

Hundreds of individuals and organizations – including Peace Action – recently signed a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, urging him to condemn Israel’s “terrorist” designation of the six organizations. For Congress’s part, later in October Minnesota Democratic Rep and frequent champion for Palestinians Betty McCollum introduced H. Res.751 – “Condemning the repressive designation by the Government of Israel of six prominent Palestinian human rights and civil society groups as terrorist organizations, and for other purposes.” This is a time to push back against Israel’s (and any) loose definition of “terrorism”, which not only might persecute those undeserving of the label, but potentially makes the term less meaningful when confronting actual terrorists.

Action: Contact Rep. Speier or Eshoo, or whomever represents you, and ask for their co-sponsorship of H. Res. 751, condemning Israel for calling Palestinian human rights organizations “terrorists”. Suggest that such an action needs to be opposed, and Congress needs to weigh in. (Those with Twitter can click #StandWithThe6.)

Space Without Force

One of Donald Trump’s flights of fancy (so to speak) was the establishment, in 2019, of the U.S. Space Force. Part of the FY 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, approval of the Space Force codified the notion of space as a theatre of war. It runs counter to our commitment to the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which restricts the placement of weapons of mass destruction in space and banned military maneuvers on celestial bodies. It also added an initial $15.5 billion to our military budget (with the promise of much more), for a program that creates more military bureaucracy, duplicates much of the existing work within the Air Force, and poses a threat to national and world security.

In late September, North Bay Rep. Jared Huffman introduced the No Militarization of Space Act (HR 5335), which would abolish the Space Force and return what is left of its mission to the Air Force. It would leave the military budget with one less line item and one less unnecessary footprint in space.

Sean Vitka, senior policy counsel for Demand Progress, put it as well as anyone: “Militarizing space is an unconscionable waste of billions of tax dollars, and it risks extending the worst mistakes of history to the final frontier by inviting conflict and escalation”. Rep. Huffman said, “It’s time we turn our attention back to where it belongs: addressing urgent domestic and international priorities like battling COVID-19, climate change, and growing economic inequality.”

Action: Contact Reps. Speier or Eshoo, or whomever represents you, and urge their co-sponsorship of HR 5335, the No Militarization of Space Act. Suggest that we have far larger domestic priorities than this redundant branch of the military, which could take another step toward destabilizing our planet from thousands of miles above it.

How Much More for Israel’s Military?

In late September, the House of Representatives voted 420-9 to send an additional $1 billion to Israel, ostensibly for its “Iron Dome” anti-missile system. The U.S. line is that Iron Dome is a “purely defensive” program.

One problem is that we already help fund it as part of our $3.8 billion-per-year unconditional support for the Israeli military, which raises the question of how much more they need in their ongoing conflict with the Palestinians. Another problem is that “purely defensive” is a dubious term considering the money that could be thus freed up for more “offensive” plans such as Israel’s continuing deadly bombardment of Gaza. Surely there was virtually no mention in the House of what the people there are going through, nor of the fact that Israel is under investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza.

Neither Rep. Jackie Speier nor Anna Eshoo were among the 9 “no” votes for the additional $1 billion. And it’s very possible that both Senators Dianne Feinstein and Alex Padilla will vote for Ted Cruz’s companion bill in the Senate. But Congress should hear from anyone who opposes this funding – toward changing its members’ minds as well as being a counterweight to the many pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian voices they are hearing.

Action: Contact Rep. Speier or Eshoo, or whomever represents you, and tell them how you feel about the extra $1 billion for the Israeli military. Likewise contact Sens. Feinstein and Padilla and urge their “no” vote on S.2839, the Senate version to send Israel the $1 billion. Suggest that we send more than enough to their military and their “defense”, especially in light of our own country’s health and safety needs. Or those of Gaza.

Answering the Cycle of Violence in Israel and Palestine

Sadly, tragically, we’ve been here before. The grinding decades-long oppression of Palestinians is once again spiraling into a full-blown air war and mob violence across Israel and the Palestinian territories. First, there were the recent scenes of violent attacks by settler mobs and Israeli security forces on Palestinians who were protesting Israeli home demolition policies or simply praying in houses of worship. Now, tit-for-tat between Hamas and Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has escalated into indiscriminate IDF bombing of densely populated areas in Gaza. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, the death toll caused by Israeli airstrikes is at least 227, including 64 children. At least 12 Israelis including 2 children were killed in rocket attacks. We finally--for now--have a ceasefire, but we really need an end to the occupation, not more airstrikes and lives lost in the future.

The unconditional support of Israel by the United States, which includes $3.8 billion of our taxpayer dollars, reinforces a militaristic policy that includes annexation, evictions, home demolitions, and the detention and torture of Palestinians – even young children.

In the face of continued repression of Palestinians by the Israeli government and its authorities, Minnesota Rep. Betty McCollum in mid-April introduced the Palestinian Children and Families Act. H.R. 2590 has three main curbs on U.S. policy, bringing together individual pieces of legislation from McCollum in the previous Congress: It would stop U.S. support for Israel’s illegal annexation of Palestinian land, demolitions of Palestinian homes, and incarceration of Palestinian children in Israeli military jails. Under this bill, our tax dollars would no longer pay for these human rights violations.

Children in the territories would perhaps be the biggest beneficiaries of H.R. 2590. Of the roughly 2.9 million Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank, about 45 % are under 18 years of age. Like adults, they are at risk of arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment under an Israeli military detention system that denies them basic rights.

UNICEF reports that children in an Israeli military detention system face harsh treatment that is “widespread, systematic, and institutionalized throughout the process.” This includes interrogation, verbal abuse and physical and psychological violence – sometimes meant to extract confessions.

Congress is not known for staking out bold positions on Palestinian rights. The fact that this bill has even been introduced is a step forward politically. Given the strong support for the Israeli military in Congress, increasing support for this legislation can put real pressure on Israeli policy. At the same time, slowly but surely, we are building greater support for Palestinian rights in Congress.

Action: Rep. Jackie Speier is a co-sponsor of HR 2590...her constituents can contact her to express appreciation. If your Representative is Anna Eshoo, (or someone else), urge her co-sponsorship for the bill, which defends the human rights of Palestinian children as well as allows Palestinians to keep their property as communities and as individuals. Suggest that the Palestinians deserve to live with dignity, and our tax dollars should be used to invest in their future, not their harm.

Biden’s Saudi and UAE weapons sales

Sadly, President Biden recently gave the green light to continue selling Saudi Arabia and the UAE billions of dollars worth of fighter jets, armed drones, bombs, and missiles. This is a follow-up to a policy endorsed and pursued by his predecessor and by no means becoming of a new President whose policy seemed to be to stop such arms sales.

The Biden administration, in response to the horrors of the Saudi war in Yemen, had in its first days stated its intention to halt “offensive” weapons to these countries. But, as the New York Times reported earlier in April, “it will allow the sale of other matériel that can be construed to have a defensive purpose…”. In a region considered the site of perhaps the world’s worst human rights crisis, giving such nuance to the idea of weapons sales to countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE looks like throwing human rights to the winds.

On the campaign trail, Biden called Saudi Arabia a “pariah” and promised to end U.S. complicity in the moral and strategic catastrophe in Yemen. It now appears he and his administration team may not hold Saudi Arabia and the UAE accountable without some extra pressure. That is where we need to come in.

Action: Contact President Biden and tell him to cancel any weapons sales – defensive or otherwise – to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Perhaps suggest anything less would amount to a broken promise, as well as demonstrate acquiescence in a deadly military intention – with war crimes and mass famine of Yemeni civilians.

Vaccine, yes – nuclear missiles, no

The first step this year in an unfathomable $1.7 trillion nuclear weapons modernization effort is the proposal for an initial $100 billion, for the Ground-based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) – projected to cost a total of $264 billion by the time it’s completed. The program’s goal is an upgrade of missile systems in silos around the U.S., mostly in the northern Midwest.

The systems and silos mostly exist to be a vulnerable “nuclear sponge” in case of an enemy attack, to which we might respond with air- and sea- based nuclear weapons. In short, the ground-based silos exist to help “win” a nuclear war – a relative term considering the resulting destruction likely done to the earth and much of its population. The possibility of a false attack warning, which has already happened more times than publicly known, would make GBSD a typically dangerous and expensive part of the nuclear “triad”. It also makes populations subject to sacrifice in areas where the silos exist.

Enter once again Sen. Markey, along with South Bay Rep. Ro Khanna, who at the end of March introduced respective versions of the “Investing in Cures Before Missiles” (ICBM) Act. The bill numbers are S. 982 in the Senate, H.R. 2227 in the House. The measure first diverts $1 billion from the proposed program to funding for a universal COVID vaccine…“a vaccine of mass prevention before another new land-based weapon of mass destruction on” as Markey put it. It redirects additional GBSD funding to prevention of future bio-threats. And it would launch an independent study to “explore viable technical solutions to extend the Minuteman III” intercontinental ballistic missile to 2050. While we would prefer no such missiles exist, that provision would stop extra money for anything new like them.

Overall, the ICBM Act takes steps to redirect funding from arms-contractors’ needs to human needs. “With all of the global challenges we face,” said Khanna, “the last thing we should be doing is giving billions to defense contractors to build missiles we don’t need to keep as a strong nuclear deterrence.”

Action: Contact Sens. Feinstein and Padilla and urge their co-sponsorship of the Senate version of the Investing in Cures Before Missiles Act. Likewise tell Rep. Jackie Speier or Anna Eshoo, or whomever represents you, to co-sponsor the House version. Suggest that getting rid of COVID and other possible diseases would be far better for our national security than a new $100 billion missile system.