Kathmandu 23 September : Resist US Military Bases! Fight for Land, Liberation, Sovereignty, and Just Peace! US Out of Everywhere!
On the so-called “International Peace Day” 2025 proclaimed by the US-dominated United Nations, the below-signed organizations condemn the imperialist drive for war, alive today as ever before, while international institutions attempt to pacify our militant calls for land, liberation, sovereignty, and a peace that is both just and lasting. On International Peace Day 2025, we recommit ourselves to the militant struggle of the people, the only force that will actually bring about genuine peace in the world.
The US commands a sprawling global military infrastructure. Its major strategic theaters pit forces against rivals in Asia and the Pacific, West Asia and Eastern Europe, but its reach simultaneously fuels proxy conflicts and US counter-insurgency and regime change efforts across Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. A new northern front is emerging as bases break ground in the Arctic’s stark wilderness. Moreover, the mobile might of US aircraft carriers and submarines transforms entire oceans into operational zones, while terrestrial airbases, now sporting rocket launchpads, extend this militarization into the final frontier: space.
US military bases function as logistical hubs to prepare for and wage wars of aggression that kill, injure, and displace millions, destroying infrastructure and environments that subjugate nations to poverty and misery, all to secure US control over land and resources. Hosting these bases draws countries directly into US-provoked conflicts and subjects them to constant surveillance and imperialist pressure. American soldiers stationed overseas have committed violent abuses, including extrajudicial killings and rape, while the bases cause environmental devastation and disrupt civilian life. The accumulation of toxic waste from these bases makes it impossible for surrounding communities to sustain their means of living amidst ongoing military drills, buildup, violence and crime. These harms persist with impunity, as unjust agreements with puppet regimes shield US personnel from accountability and deny victims justice.
Seven hundred days have passed since the Zionist entity unleashed its genocidal war upon the Gaza Strip. This war, unprecedented in its length and brutality in modern times, is waged by what effectively functions as a vast US military base: the zionist entity of “israel” itself. This satellite serves as an instrument in a strategy of constant regional warfare, building towards a broader confrontation with Iran. The US, through its extensive network of proxy institution, has provided comprehensive and unwavering political, military and financial support, critically reinforced by international diplomatic power. This persistent backing has empowered the occupation to pursue its objectives and continue its crimes with impunity: the forced displacement of populations, systematic ethnic cleansing, and the deliberate obliteration of the foundations of life within the Strip.
Since its declared pivot to Asia in 2012 the US has increased its military footprint in the region and taken every move to paint the economic, diplomatic and military rise of China as “aggressive”, engendering a new Cold War mentality and preparing public support for a future war. This move was accompanied by and justified the building of new military bases, expansion of existent ones and de facto controlling other nations bases through so-called “cooperation agreements.” These US military outposts have been used to support war games and military exercises that terrorize local communities, destroy the environment, increase violence against local and native women, create a strain on natural resources and aim to provoke the US’s most powerful rival into what would be the most destructive war in human history.
The US is currently staging provocative military maneuvers off the coast of Venezuela, even executing over a dozen civilians in cold-blooded murder via drone strike, claiming with no evidence that they were drug smugglers and so-called “terrorists”, a strategy still used since the birth of the Bush-era “War on Terror” doctrine. To prepare for its potential invasion of Venezuela, the US uses its military bases in Puerto Rico to stage its troops, despite mass protests from the Puerto Rican people against the use of their land for US military strategy, and despite the Venezuelan people’s brave resolve to resist a US invasion by any means necessary.
US bases are not invincible, despite the coercive power that these bases project, communities are organizing and taking direct action to resist and expel these outposts of US imperialism. People’s resistance to US military bases today follows decades of rage against these symbols of occupation and centuries of unbowed resistance to colonialism and neocolonialism that US imperialism tries desperately to maintain. Women play a key role in leading their people in militant struggle against the extrajudicial killings, kidnapping, and horrors of sexual slavery that foreign troops bring to to their communities. Indigenous people fight across generations for their national patrimony and to eject the foreign occupiers from their lands and safeguard the environment. Workers, peasants, fisherfolk, and all toiling people unite to reclaim their lands and livelihood from the economic, political, and environmental devastation that imperialist militarization thrusts on their communities. The people of the world are united in their rage and just struggle against the use of their nations as staging grounds for imperilaist war!
A sustained, multifaceted struggle, ranging from legal advocacy to militant confrontation, is essential to defeat the expansion of aggressive military bases. People fight not just to limit militarization, but because united, they can shut bases down. Mass movements have blocked new bases in Korea and Japan and expelled US forces from Subic Bay and Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines, the US Navy in Vieques and Culebra (Puerto Rico), Ecuador’s refusal to renew a US lease, and the recent removal of French and US bases from Senegal, Chad, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger. The Axis of Resistance has struck US and Zionist bases, proving these installations are vulnerable with popular support. Ending US imperialism and its fascist allies is crucial to stopping military base violence permanently, and each victory strengthens the movement toward liberating nations from US-led war and imperialism.
Category: Opinion
-
Joint Statement on the Occasion of International Peace Day
-
BAN GOLDEN RICE, BAN GMOs: TOWARD A PEOPLE-LED BIOSAFETY FRAMEWORK AND GENUINE FOOD SOVEREIGNTY
Kathmandu, Nepal, August 8, “MASIPAG and Stop Golden Rice Network once again register our collective resistance to corporate-led genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their growing encroachment on our farms, seeds, and food systems. This day is not simply a remembrance of the historic action of more than 400 farmers in Bicol that decisively uprooted the highly dangerous Golden Rice in their community, but a continuation of a movement that asserts the right of the people to define and control their own food and agriculture.
The struggle against Golden Rice is part of a larger movement for food sovereignty, ecological justice, and national dignity. We believe that science and technology must serve the people, not the profits of a few. We believe that knowledge and seeds must remain in the hands of those who feed the nation. We believe that our future lies not in laboratories owned by corporations, but in the fields cultivated by farmers, the wisdom of communities, and the collective defense of our right to define our food and agriculture systems.”On this 12th International Day of Action Against Golden Rice, MASIPAG and Stop Golden Rice Network once again register our collective resistance to corporate-led genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their growing encroachment on our farms, seeds, and food systems. This day is not simply a remembrance of the historic action of more than 400 farmers in Bicol that decisively uprooted the highly dangerous Golden Rice in their community, but a continuation of a movement that asserts the right of the people to define and control their own food and agriculture.
Golden Rice, which has long been promoted as a technofix solution to the deeply rooted problem of malnutrition, represents more than just a single genetically engineered crop. It is emblematic of a broader strategy that displaces community-based and farmer-led solutions in favor of top-down, profit-driven interventions. The development and promotion of Golden Rice are tied to a global architecture of control that privileges corporate patents and scientific monopolies over local knowledge, biodiversity, and farmer autonomy. -
Europe : Organic GMO-free :IFOAM
Resolution of the organic movement in favour of a system-based
approach of innovation and sustainability – Keep Organic GMO-free.
Resolution from the European organic food and farming movement, adopted at IFOAM Organics Europe General Assembly on 21.
The European organic agricultural movement re-affirms its position that the organic production process should remain free of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the future, including GMOs derived from New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). Organic breeders, farmers, processors, certifiers, traders, and retailers demand the preservation of their freedom of choice to remain GMO-free. To that end, the principle of labelling and traceability enshrined in the current legislation, which allows for the identification of GMOs throughout thesupply chain, must be maintained and applied to all NGTs.
Notably, genetic engineering is used to legitimise patents on seeds and animals. Exempting genetic material protected by a patent from traceability would expose all operators in the food supply chain to significant legal uncertainty as to what they can or cannot do with the plants and animals they work with due to patent infringement concerns. The increasing number of patents on specific traits and genetic material is a threat to the
innovative European breeding model, which relies on lighter forms of intellectual property rights that allow for the circulation of genetic material. This would lead to a harmful concentration and corporate control in the seed sector connected with business models from the chemical industry.
The European Green Deal, the Farm to Fork, and the EU Biodiversity Strategies rightfully put organic farming at the core of a transition to sustainable food systems, with a target to expand European agricultural land under
organic production to 25%. This is a welcome and necessary recognition of the environmental benefits of organic farming, for less dependency on inputs for farmers, and a resilient food supply for our society.
The organic movement strongly condemns the attacks against the Farm to Fork Strategy and the misleading claims that reducing the use of synthetic pesticides and restoring nature would not allow Europe to ensure its food security. With smart changes in land use and agroecological innovation, combined with a shift in diets and
types of production, European farmers can produce sufficient food while safeguarding natural resources.
A healthy environment with a prospering flora and fauna above and below the soil is one of humanity’s most precious goods and the bedrock of our food system. We are its beneficiaries, tasked with responsible stewardship towards nature. This also includes the application of the precautionary principle, and the principle of care, health, ecology, and fairness rooted in holistic, agroecological approaches.
To make our food systems truly sustainable, we need to transition away from input-intensive, short-term fixes, which include the promotion of specific technologies with unproven benefits and potential unintended effects and risks. Genetic engineering with its currently still empty sustainability promises exhibits a narrow, and short-
term view of the complex challenges of food systems. A focus on specific genes or traits does not account for the importance of interactions between crops with their environment and geophysical properties, including soil health, and symbiotic relationship with other species. This understanding of agricultural systems is not the type of innovation that Europe so desperately needs in the face of various environmental challenges.
Contrarily, organic farming consistently delivers resilient agroecological systems, taking into account the complexity of interactions in nature. Organic agriculture has proven benefits for biodiversity, climate change mitigation, animal welfare, and many other environmental and social challenges. The organic movement has been for decades a main driver for nature-based regenerative systems of agroecological innovation. The EU has a leading position in the whole world in the development of an organic agri-food system, with policies enabling competitive practices for organic and GMO-free feed and food. Following the road of GMO exporting countries
would entail losing this leading position in organic production and agroecological innovation.
Organic operators want to continue to fulfil their commitment towards consumers to guarantee a GM-free production process. Consumers are largely and rightfully still sceptical of the benefits of new GMOs. A potential deregulation of certain NGTs would threaten consumers’ confidence in the integrity of the organic food supply chain, and taking away consumers’ right to information on the use of NGTs would undermine confidence in the EU decision-making process.
The Organic movement has severe concerns about the potential exemption from the EU legal framework on GMOs of so-called “conventional-like” NGT crops, which would exempt them from identification and traceability.
This would de facto, legally speaking allow the use of these NGTs in organic production, without providing legal and technical means to identify these products. This poses a threat to the right and freedom to farm without these techniques and to the integrity of organic products.
Importantly, the cumbersome burden of ensuring GM-free production must not fall on operators who do not wish to use NGTs, as this would significantly hinder the development of organic agriculture in the European Union.
European Union policies should focus on resilient agroecology with a systemic understanding of sustainability.
Promises of expected benefits of NGTs do not justify watering down the successful EU precautionary principle and EU standards on environmental protection and farmer and consumers’ choice.
Thus, the organic movement calls for the maintenance of a system of identification and traceability, so that organic and conventional operators have the right and freedom to continue producing GM-free throughout the entire supply chain. -
Nepal’s First National Yak Day: Working together to protect the guardians of the high Himalaya
Kathmandu April 20, International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) Director General Pema Gyamtsho Release a press statment and said happya day of first yak on ocasssion of yak conference 2025, organizing conference of first time in Nepal, he said.
,.Today marks a historic and heartfelt moment for Nepal and for all those who call the mountains home. Nepal has made history as the first yak range country – or country in which yaks are found – in the Hindu Kush Himalaya to declare a national day dedicated to this magnificent species of long-haired domesticated cattle. This is a proud and timely recognition of the immense cultural, ecological, and economic value of yaks in our mountain regions.
In 27 mountain districts across Nepal, Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities – particularly Sherpa, Tamang, Thakali, Rai, and Limbu – have nurtured and protected yak herding traditions for generations. These communities are the backbone of mountain agropastoralism – which combines growing crops with raising livestock – their lives deeply intertwined with the rhythms of transhumance, the seasonal movement of livestock across mountain pastures. This unique system, recently inscribed by UNESCO as Intangible Cultural Heritage, is not only vital for food and livelihood security, but also for the sustainable management of fragile alpine ecosystems.
Yak: more than a mountain animal
Yaks are a lifeline for the people of the mountains. They provide meat, milk, fibre, manure for fertiliser and draught power for agricultural tasks such as ploughing, in some of the world’s most challenging terrains. They play a vital role in the high mountain communities – not just as a source of sustenance, but as a keystone of cultural identity and socio-economic resilience. Their hybrids have enabled access to wider resource areas across altitudinal gradients, helping agropastoralists adapt to their mountain environments. The ‘folk taxonomy’ – or the way people name and organise these generational hybrids is a fascinating expression of deep Indigenous knowledge – scientific, spiritual, and cultural all at once.
In many respects, the yak is an iconic animal and can be described as both the ecological and cultural architect of the Himalaya. Yak herding is deeply embedded in the traditions, festivals, and spiritual practices of Himalayan communities. Conserving yak is not only about protecting an animal – it is about safeguarding mountain livelihoods, Indigenous knowledge, and fragile ecosystems in the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH).
However, yak herding livelihoods are increasingly under pressure.
Climate change, shifting socio-economic patterns, and increasing restrictions on traditional mobility have placed immense pressure on yak herding systems. Rangelands are degrading. Genetic erosion is on the rise due to reduced cross-border exchange. And yet, the solutions are within reach – if we act together.
ICIMOD’s commitment to yak and rangeland resilience
At ICIMOD, we are proud to support the revitalisation of yak-based agropastoralism. Our work includes:
•Formation of the Nepal Yak Chauri Farmers’ Federation, a national platform uniting district yak networks to amplify herder voices. We have established a similar federation in Bhutan and are planning new federations in Pakistan and India, building a regional network of yak herders across the HKH.
•Supporting national partners to develop evidence-based policies and institutions for managing these lands to provide multiple benefits – livelihoods, carbon sequestration, water provisioning, biodiversity, and cultural tourism.
•Conducting dietary research to understand the nutritional needs and improve productivity of yaks in Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Pakistan.
•Addressing the seasonal feed scarcity, piloting winter fodder development initiatives to improve year-round nutrition for yaks.
•Mapping grazing areas and understanding pastoral mobility patterns, which are crucial for sustainable rangeland management and climate resilience.
•Piloting rangeland restoration activities to enhance pasture quality, support biodiversity, and secure the long-term viability of yak herding systems.
On this first National Yak Day, I call on all of us – policymakers, researchers, development partners, and mountain advocates to celebrate, support, and sustain yak herding in the HKH. Let us listen to the voices of herders, invest in their knowledge, restore their rangelands, and ensure that future generations continue to witness the majestic silhouette of a yak on a mountain ridge. ICIMOD stands committed to supporting our partner countries in promoting sustainable, climate-resilient agropastoralism in the high mountains of the HKH.
Nepal has shown the way by dedicating a day to honour the yak. Let this be the beginning of a regional movement to recognise and protect the high-altitude heritage of the HKH.
Let Nepal’s leadership in declaring this National Yak Day inspire the region. It is time to elevate the yak – a symbol of resilience, heritage, and harmony with nature – to its rightful place on the sustainable development agenda.
Let us not relegate the existence of this majestic animal and the beautiful landscape it occupies to photographs and paintings for future generations of the Himalayan communities. -
Organic Europe Press Release
Kathmandu march 25, Brussells, IFOAM Organics Europe calls for concrete action in the Water Resilience Strategy to reduce agricultural pollution and associated costs
BRUSSELS, 25 MARCH 2025 – IFOAM Organics Europe welcomes the European Commission’s intention, outlined in the Vision on Agriculture and Food, to publish a Water Resilience Strategy. Addressing Europe’s growing water crisis is crucial, as 63% of surface water bodies are still not in “good ecological condition”, despite existing legislation. The European Environment Agency recently identified agriculture as one of the main pressures on EU water resources and highlighted that the development of organic agriculture should be further supported to improve water resilience.
Jan Plagge, President of IFOAM Organics Europe, stated: “Organic farming can offer a systemic, effective solution to improve water quality, enhance water availability, and strengthen resilience to extreme weather events. Organic farming contributes to water resilience by reducing pollution, improving soil health, and supporting climate adaptation. By prohibiting synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, organic farming significantly reduces nitrate leaching and contamination of groundwater by chemicals, easing the financial burden of water treatments.” For instance, a study found that the cost on ground water pollution for a hectare of conventional potatoes amounts to 1298 €, while the same cost for a hectare of organic potatoes amounts to 0.4 €.”
Eduardo Cuoco, Director of IFOAM Organics Europe, emphasised that “the upcoming Water Resilience Strategy and relevant pieces of legislation should explicitly recognise organic farming as a key solution for water resilience, especially in areas affected by extreme weather events and water scarce areas”. He added: “Banning synthetic pesticides in water catchment areas is essential to safeguard drinking water and reduce the costs of groundwater depollution.”
IFOAM Organics Europe urges the European Commission to explicitly integrate organic farming into the Water Resilience Strategy as a core measure for protecting water quality, biodiversity, and climate resilience, as well as a means to considerably reduce costs related to ground water pollution. -
Advancing land degradation neutrality through local action and global integration
Feed, care, and protect are the three pillars for anchoring sustainable land management to achieve land degradation neutrality, ensure food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. Applying a sustainable land use systems approach will support the achievement of land degradation neutrality and several other SDGs.
These were the key messages emerging from a high-level panel discussion at a side event on land degradation neutrality on 5 December 2024 at UNCCD COP 16, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Annette Cowie, a senior principal researcher and scientist at the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and an adjunct professor at the University of New England, shared insights from the most recent report from Objective 1 of the Science Policy Interface (SPI) of the UNCCD. The report, “Sustainable Land Use Systems: The Path Forward to Collectively Achieve Land Degradation Neutrality.”
“Our aim was to provide scientific evidence on sustainable land use systems and their potential to achieve land degradation neutrality while supporting other sustainable development goals (SDGs). This task was assigned to us by the COP at its previous session,” said Cowie, who co-led the study.
Cowie noted that the concept of sustainable land use systems is relatively new to the UNCCD but builds on previous SPI work. Over the years, the SPI has produced several significant reports, including the Land Degradation Neutrality Conceptual Framework, studies on sustainable land management practices, guidance on building soil organic carbon, and recommendations on implementing integrated land use planning. Sustainable land use systems apply these concepts with a fresh emphasis on viewing land within its broader landscape context.
Sustainable land use systems are defined as a dynamic mosaic of integrated land uses within a landscape, designed to balance competing demands while promoting environmental sustainability, economic viability, and social justice, particularly for those relying on the land for their livelihoods.
“The novelty lies in adopting a systems-level approach, focusing on social-ecological systems, and emphasizing local context and participatory governance,” said Cowie, adding that their approach is rooted in three key objectives: Economic viability that involves fostering market development and enhancing productivity; environmental sustainability whose key elements include improving soil health and nutrient cycling; and social justice where the emphasis is on community involvement and participatory governance across all levels. By integrating these elements, sustainable land use systems can deliver critical outcomes, including food security and resilience in agricultural systems.
However, success requires an enabling environment. “We recommend embedding this approach within existing land use planning and management processes. Furthermore, it must be tailored to the specific ecological context and participatory governance,” she said.
Reflecting on science-policy interfaces and collective intelligence, Patrick Caron, Vice Chair of the CGIAR Integrated Partnership Board, and chair of the High-Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) on the Committee of World Food Security (CFS) emphasized the role of science in shaping agendas. He gave the example of IPCC that has been pivotal in bringing climate change to global attention. Similarly, scientific evidence is essential for addressing desertification and other crises.
He lamented that while decision-makers increasingly recognize the need for convergence, especially as food systems intersect with economic, environmental, and social justice concerns, knowledge landscapes remain fragmented. “Today’s crises-be it climate change, desertification, or biodiversity loss-are interconnected, often described as a ‘perfect storm.’ Each expert panel operates within its own constituency, governance, and reporting structures. This fragmentation makes it challenging to integrate insights across sectors.”
Caron reiterated the importance of local-level initiatives that offer fertile ground for learning and integration. Organizing dialogue at the local level helps identify obstacles, trade-offs, and costs, fostering collective plans that integrate environmental, economic, and social dimensions. He cited the Montpellier Process as a model for collective intelligence. “The Montpellier Process exemplifies efforts to stimulate dialogue and reinforce the role of scientific communities in cross-sectoral collaboration. By fostering convergence across stakeholders, sectors, and scales, this process seeks to co-design knowledgeable actions to address complex crises.”
(From left): Cargele Masso, Director of the CGIAR Impact Area Platform on Environmental Health and Biodiversity; Manon Albagnac, a desertification project officer at CARI and coordinator, RESAD; Jean-Luc Schott, a soil scientist and senior researcher at the French Research Institute for Sustainable Development; Annette Cowie, a senior principal researcher and scientist at the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and an adjunct professor at the University of New England. Photo credit: CGIAR/Wandera Ojanji
Stefano Fautou, Director of the Office of Sustainable Development Goals at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and the Director of the UN Food System Coordination Hub elaborated on three opportunities for local action in food systems areas that can create opportunities for actionable dialogue between scientists, policymakers, and communities at the local scale.
One action is using local action as a catalyst for systemic change. Fautou argued that sectoral and linear approaches have proven ineffective in transforming food systems. “What we need is systemic change, which must start at the local level. This is because systemic change thrives on field-proven solutions and scalable models. Like biological evolution, systemic change requires a diversity of ideas. These ideas undergo variation, selection, and application processes, leading to the establishment of institutional rules, policies, and business models. By fostering diverse ideas at the local level, we can identify what works and what doesn’t, laying the foundation for systemic transformation.”
The second action area is multiple co-benefits from local efforts. Local initiatives offer significant opportunities to achieve multiple co-benefits. For instance, local actions addressing land degradation often simultaneously enhance biodiversity, improve nutrition, and increase climate efficiency. These efforts highlight that investments in sustainable food systems should not be evaluated solely based on monetary costs. Instead, we must consider their broader benefits.
On the third action, integrating local needs with a global perspective, Stefano noted that addressing local needs requires a global perspective that brings together scientists, policymakers, and society. “Creating these opportunities necessitates a global lens to align local actions with broader scientific and policy frameworks. This is a crucial aspect of the work being done by your institution and others involved in fostering actionable dialogues within the science-policy-society interface.”
Cargele Masso, Director of the CGIAR Impact Area Platform on Environmental Health and Biodiversity shared key messages from CBD COP16 on addressing challenges at the local scale biodiversity and sustainable food systems. One critical issue raised during COP16 is the need for benefit and cost-sharing mechanisms regarding the digital sequencing of genetic information. This is especially important for smallholder farmers in developing countries, who often face financial constraints. Incentives can motivate biodiversity conservation efforts, extending beyond genetic resources to include the ecosystems in which they evolve. The discussions in Cali achieved a consensus on providing greater visibility to indigenous peoples and local communities for their contributions to the global biodiversity framework.
Another key point emphasized the connection between biodiversity and climate resilience. Sustaining genetic diversity ensures resilience against climate challenges, such as droughts or pests, by maintaining crops with different resistance traits. However, gaps remain in monitoring and evaluation systems. While national-level strategies may look robust, implementation at the local level often falls short. Practical, user-friendly monitoring systems must be co-developed with local communities to ensure effective biodiversity conservation and restoration.
He further expounded on the role of biodiversity in resilience. “Biodiversity acts as a proxy for resilience against land degradation and climate change. When biodiversity declines, it often correlates with increased land degradation and climate impacts. Inclusive land-use planning and governance are essential for maintaining local biodiversity. Unfortunately, these practices often fail to achieve their full potential. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework offers a new opportunity for countries to update their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). Advocating for indigenous peoples, marginalized groups, and local communities to actively participate in these updates is crucial.”
The session – the Agropolis International/French Scientific Committee on Desertification – a focus on local scales – was moderated by Jean-Luc Schott, a soil scientist and senior researcher at the French Research Institute for Sustainable Development, a former UNCCD SBI member and chair of the French Scientific Committee on Desertification.