Minutes of 2nd National Organizing Conference on Iraq

[DRAFT*]

2nd NATIONAL ORGANIZING CONFERENCE

ON IRAQ

MINUTES

February 17, 2001 THROUGH February 18, 2001

DENVER, COLORADO

* DRAFT Minutes to be approved on 3/5/01 - Next Coordinating Committee Conference Call

INDEX of MINUTES

February 17th

First Plenary

Second Plenary

Third Plenary

February 18, 2001

Fourth Plenary

a. Logistics: Volunteers for press generated from conference; Jeff Goubler, Carolyn Scarf, Tom Steffle

b. Key note: Dan Winters “our anger fuels a single action: the end of sanctions.”

c. Introduction of Facilitators - the purpose of facilitation is “merging and culling”

Tomorrow: decision making: This is how we want to spend our enormous energies. We want all voices heard. Consensus. This doesn’t mean that this is exactly what you want, but it means that every person supports it, or would give it a “thumbs up.” We will, in the end, vote with a 2/3 majority. We will also do straw polling throughout.

8. Request for a discussion of structure after decisions have been made concerning actions.

9. Discussion of Non violence as an organizational point should be decided upon after decisions have been made concerning action.

Facilitator: our purpose is to bring your best thinking out and decide which is best

10. It is important to remember that not all our best thinking is on the green paper.

11. We should not be looking for one proposal to bind all of us. We should have multiple proposals.

12. The purpose is not to limit actions. It is to find out what we can do best together.

13. We need to be looking at this in small groups, about how we see the political environment and the purpose of actions. We do not see a decision regarding actions until tomorrow. There is time today for a full discussion on actions.

Question: If we have a proposal not in the green sheets, should we wait until small groups or is there a better time?

Response: We would have loved to have each group make its own presentation, but we do not have time. Reminder: every group has had an opportunity to plan this conference and this agenda. It has been very democratic. We should not waste time making agenda switches. We should stick to what we have here.

Comment: We understand this but still I can’t see how it would be possible to make network decisions without having made action decisions. PROPOSAL: a group makes a presentation of an action if it feels it necessary.

Facilitator: We will move along with the agenda with the caveat that we will allow for action presentations if necessary and if we have time. It is built into the agenda that we will not make decisions about network without decisions of actions having already been made. Ask for agreement: Agreed

14. Proposal: we should collectively make a statement to the press about the recent bombings. Some agree - others feel that this would take way too long.

17. Clarification: we need to decide about now because the media may be here anytime.

Final Proposal: a few people go out of the room and they create a statement to be read to the group for a vote. Agreed

Question: Should a reporter from the Denver Post come and sit in on the decision- making process? Agreed to have the reporter sit in.

Question: Vote on general policy. More press will be here, should they be let in.

Question: Should reporters in general be allowed to come in? And for as long as they want?

Agreed: Cameras will be let in but limited and reporters should be let in on an unlimited basis.

Facilitator: Channel four is here. We want to learn to move our agenda and to move our defining political motivation. We want to learn how to share and how we can compliment each other. We are not looking for absolute agreement, but we are looking for the maximum level of agreement. We are not here to limit each other. This body does not have the ability to say: “you cannot do that action.”

Paul Paulo Alto: the goal of the working group on the agenda was to have each group present its proposal. We cannot do that, as we do not have enough time. The key idea is that no proposal will leave here unchanged. These are just ideas that the conference will build on and change as they build. The Map of Action Proposals was built because we felt that it was unfair to summarize or paraphrase somebody’s proposal. It is an organizational tool. We also copied every group’s proposal in full.

Ben from CCMEP: Not included in the proposals are a lot of the key thoughts that people wrote into their proposals. These key thoughts should not be neglected, but should be looked over at least in the small groups.

From Washington DC: we need to remember how these things are interlinked. Their connectedness is now omitted.

Facilitator: We are now discussing the proposals ones that are not already mapped or have been omitted or changed in a significant way.

2. We need to link sanctions to the way we view humans, especially in light of religious Abrahamic faiths.

3. San Francisco: We should target civilian infrastructures as protest targets (blockades, etc) in the U.S.

4. We should not be afraid of loosing the focus on Iraq. We need to interlink with exciting movements elsewhere.

5. DC Coalition: we need to focus on the connectedness to Israel. We also need to link with working people. We do not want to alienate them. We need to make every one understand that Sanctions are an attack on working people.

6. Veterans for Peace: We need to publicize the war on Iraq. We need to make it known to all.

7. San Francisco: We need to stop talking about sanctions. We need to call it a blockade.

9. San Francisco: We need to think of ourselves as mass advertisers. Competing advertisers. We also need to think of ourselves as fund-raisers to pay for advertising.

10. Peace Action San Fran: We need to focus on the war, not just U-238. I am in favor of decentralized mass mobilizations.

11. Jack: Speaking out against linkage. Plenty enough to focus on with Iraq.

13. Larry: we need to have a clearinghouse of ideas so we can become more effective. At AFSC we need to have a quick response so we can speak truth to power immediately and that we can indeed no that it is truth.

14. Shay: its important to humanize the movement. Not just speak of children dying.

16. Dennis: We should not get involved with other issues. We should concentrate on getting other groups involved with us.

17. Bob CCMEP: Sanctions are an intended policy. Therefore we need to change our strategy. More significant changes must be made to eliminate genocidal policies.

18. DC: We have asked that a group be designated to study genocidal policies that would come out with a formal statement.

19. Voices: the most important thing is that we come out of here in a collective voice. We should not just talk about of logistics because we will all use different tactics.

20. Marvin ABC: The Bush Policy will be more militarized. We will need to be ready for that. It’s not just about sanctions anymore. I suggest decentralized mobilizations. Centralized mobilizations put all our eggs in one basket.

21. I feel like we lack the basic human resources to do so many of these great ideas. We need to be extremely realistic. We need to evaluate our past effectiveness and make decisions accordingly.

22. We need to debunk the myths and rationalizations for this war. Iraq needs our attention.

23. Austin: I hope small groups will focus on division of labor, which groups will devote themselves to the network and which will devote themselves to actions, either local or national.

24. San Fran (Reagan’s Insanity): We need to build ourselves into larger actions and give ourselves opportunities to make ourselves known. We need to be realistic but not limit ourselves.

25. Modesto Cal.: We need to think out of the box. (Facilitator notes that it is mostly men that have spoken)

26. Madison: we need to reach out to youth. We need to raise awareness among young people. Editorials are also important, which can be done along with whatever actions. I feel that our focus must still be Iraq.

27. Institute of near Eastern Studies: The idea of promoting Iraqis is not just about musicians but also about all Iraqis. It is a whole idea of promotion, that they are not terrorists. Question: if you had been bombed for 10 years would you be non-violent?

28. We need to move toward disruption. We are not a terrible vicious people. Americans are not being represented - I will not stand behind visits or letter writing.

29. Jeff: these proposals are not mutually exclusive. I argue against what was just said. We should be focusing on politicians. Any one who says otherwise is jumping the gun.

30. DC: people that have spoken out against linkage are missing the point. We are not taking about submerging the issue, but about being holistic.

31. We need to produce spokespeople. When misinformation comes out it takes us three days to fight it. Rebuttals need to be more immediate.

The goal of the small groups is to prioritize and to designate a spokesperson to share what was discussed.

Adjourn

6. Regular national e-mail list to send updates, announcements, not a discussion list

Small Group Proposals: Range of activities emerged in discussion groups (Leslie)

Develop a mechanism for an emergency response

Need to organize a decentralized, but nationally-coordinated, action once every 3 months, 2-3 times a year (perhaps international coordinated actions?)

2. There was agreement to share information to build on outreach and education and how to approach media, getting into high schools, colleges

3. Humanizing the Iraqi people, people-to-people contact, bringing the national orchestra to tour the US

4. Gathering humanitarian aid, how much time should be spent on this, rather than working on sanctions

General discussion

19. Organizations. have their own strengths, lobbying, etc… so groups who have strengths in particular areas should share information with one another

21. Mike Zmolek, Iowans for Peace with Iraq, focus on national proposal, do we want as a network to have a national action as a focus for mobilization, or if we are just talking about regional actions

23. Ann Arbor student might be a national day, looking at some regional actions, the middle of June, link a petition campaign to educate the public, in conjunction with national and international actions

24. Int’l Socialist Org. we could have a national action, not to take the place of decentralized regional or local actions, in order to give the movement a sense of national unity

II. Group #10 feels a national coordinated action is not realistic and we don’t have the resources to do it

Comment: Voices, Danny Muller, suggests nationally coordinated local actions, the second Tuesday of every month. There are always actions going on, decided by local groups (actions local that might evolve) 95 groups, 1,500 people in DC last August

Dayton, Ohio, Representatives from all 50 groups go to Washington to lobby officials

III. Group #4 suggests Emergency and Timely response, a committee of spokespeople, perhaps celebrities, press conference, exploratory committee.

2. Palo Alto, CA, this network is not going to be able to replace the activities of local groups, and resource sharing is going to help between groups, this network will not be capable of a single location national mobilization day

3. The first nationally coordinated action would be by local groups, the second action would also be based locally and the third would be regional.

4. We need a strong national message to attract national media, if we find a target we all have in common, for example, a congressional office, we all have a media outlet, a newspaper or TV station, a gas station, find a common target that all local groups have in common, so we can leave tactics up to the creativity of local groups.

5. Stephanie Phibbs: plan for representatives of groups, so every time we meet we have national coordinated actions

6. Suggest national days of action for local groups to work on their own initiatives

7. Florida group, sending group representative to government officials, lead a delegation to have meetings with public officials

8. Zmolek: we are not ready for a national action, but we need a national focus, where we are working together. Each region will decide what it is going to do, we have two names – a name for the network and a name for an ongoing national event, when the momentum seems right, with regional organizing going on, then you leave it up to a committee to decide on a national action

11. Jeff Gustafson: in Seattle, all are open to an eventual national action, no opposition to regional actions, nationally coordinated local actions, we should decide on a national day of action that is local

12. Bill of International Action Center: we have to be ready to implement national demonstrations if there is an escalation

13. St. Paul Catholic Worker: we have a goal of a national action on May 3^rd, statewide fast and prayer or a day of participation in normal economic activity

25. It would be good for the national network to help organize regional or local coordinated demonstrations, selecting a specific date, and on a periodic basis

26. For practical reasons, it was not appropriate now to make a movement decision for a national action

Rae: Call for a straw poll for nationally coordinated actions with an agreement that by the end of the conference we will come up with a date. National network organizes national coordinated local protest, days of demonstration, exact timetable, timetable

Consensus: the national network helps to coordinate national days of action, local groups deciding on the demonstration or types of demonstrations

Consensus: the national network will look into a national action down the line

Consensus: we support the development of national action in Washington or NYC not dependent on large numbers of people to make a political point, gathering to meet with representatives - not defined by numbers, or gathering at a national media outlet, or CD

2. Sara, small group wants a national educational campaign, to piece together an outline of what a national campaign would look like

4. Austin Coalition: the network tries to reach the national media, full-time, part-time media or PR figures

7. Videos that show how the people of Iraq are somehow surviving (AFSC) did a photo show, traveling exhibit in gallery or school, getting US folks to imagine if this were happening to them

9. Sending humanitarian aid to Iraq in opposition to US law, and we are going to break the law and help the people of Iraq

10. Middle East Children’s Alliance has supported direct aid for Palestinians, any aid that is given is direct opposition to the Iraqi government ---thousands of people are giving money in direct opposition to the US government –Aid breaks the blockade, and creates ownership.

11. It was agreed the discussion of humanitarian aid will not be included in the priority list, but it might be included as something the network might support

13. Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility: new administration, democrats might be willing to move, mobilize people to talk to their congress people

14. Jeff SF: the purpose of the network should be to support groups in what they are doing

15. St. Paul rep says that congress people in US foreign policy should be lobbied - argues political reps. are morally bankrupt, and it’s time to hit the streets

17. The network can help foster lobbying, but the problem is we don’t have anything to mobilize around

18. The network does not have to become a lobbying organization, but the materials can be made available

19. Eric G. says we need to identify lobbying liaisons, a network of congressional liaisons, identifying a point person, but we need to establish real relationships with congressional offices

2. Wafaa: Educational events - Sponsored a concert in Boston and Washington, DC in October. The concert in Cambridge is on videotape - available here for $30.00. Includes interviews with artist and teenager.

3. Stephanie: Hug the person next to you - this is getting tough. Let’s be happy with each other and support each other. Here’s what we’re hearing from all of you: a strong need to make progress. That means having enough time to take advantage of the pre-work and turn them into concrete actions. Then we need to make a plan for the rest of the day to direct the work for tomorrow.

After dinner, a plenary session, then spend the rest of the night in small groups to develop action-based proposals to form basis for tomorrow’s work.

I. Purpose and Goals: why come together, what to achieve, what to set as upper bar for the goals (end sanctions?)

II. Operating Principles: commitment to non-violence issue? How to operate collectively?

3. Not disband if the sanctions are lifted - we can then focus on related issues i.e. DU, war reparations, call for end to no-fly zones, etc.

4. Oil imperialism will continue after the sanctions end - not use the word “imperialism” for mass consumption…maybe bring in the environmental community then to talk about renewable resources.

5. Bring groups together to participate in discussions and find way to implement our actions.

6. Build a mass movement against the sanctions focusing on campaigns of mass education and mass action.

7. This network should be a democratic center for the movement with the over-all purpose of ending the sanctions/embargo

10. Build relationships - involving trust, communications, and efficiency as we go forward - keep it ongoing.

1. Focus on how we will be perceived back home - we are a viable and visible group that must support groups back home.

2. Consider the image of non-violence and restraint - not wanting an exclusive commitment to non-violence. This does not mean breaking windows…only by addressing what the US is can we move this - I don’t think in the history of trade union movements was there a commitment to non-violence.

4. Make a definite commitment to non-violence: tactical and strategic reasons (example of 50 people creating violence at the WTO) - and the underlying attitude toward the people whose work we oppose.

5. Base what we do on truth telling - don’t pander to the media…deal with underlying issues i.e. US foreign policy.

6. Have professionalism and strong credibility so that when we represent groups, we will be seen as a credible organization i.e. by government officials, etc.

7. Importance of mainstreaming - bringing more people into the movement - we have a better chance of doing this with a non-violent approach.

8. Look at the SOA effort where ways and techniques were developed to affect closure of the school - look at successful tactics.

9. Develop basic materials that are cultural: art, poetry, etc. to be used in education i.e. in the anti-apartheid work.

10. Non-violence Vs violence: If we employ the tactics of the system we purport to be against, we have no credibility. It is hypocritical to not be explicitly against violence.

11. Grassroots, organized from the bottom up, not top down, and be democratic and respectful of diversity.

Put discussion of violence Vs non-violence in small groups? This will then come back to the plenary. This is an extremely important issue and will spend a few moments on it. Opinions:

13. Divergence of the movement - followers of Ghandi Vs followers of Malcolm X. I think it is important not to separate the group.

14. Question re violence is to think about - be in empathy with those who are in the position of creating violence. We are peoples of different colors who are different in what we like to do.

15. Think this is not all that important. Make a distinction between property destruction and other destruction.

16. If you against the group taking a position against violence doesn’t mean you are pro-violence. There is a distortion of reality here - those of us who don’t disavow the use of violence see violence as a tool of self-defense.

17. Maybe if the network decides to sponsor a specific action, consider this question about violence in that arena.

1. Three categories: extremely loose (shared website), local network with committees given power to act between meetings, tight central group of an elected group of representatives. Comes down on side of central structure - sustainable.

2. Oppose any form of democratic centralism - don’t feel confident about such a structure.

3. Denver proposal in the packet mirrors the second option - working groups meet monthly - make decisions - let everyone else know. Coordination is Okayed on a quarterly basis. Are responsible to make sure things move forward - see p. 2 of proposals.

4. Middle East Task Force has proposal also in the book. Think there needs to be significant structure coming from this conference. Need some sort of structure to make decisions.

5. Another proposal, p. 8. Difference between grassroots and national organizations - don’t want this to distract the work. Name campaign and have members separate from the network, but others could also participate in our work.

6. Need a staff person to work on this. One or two and maybe a couple of interns to do the work of the network.

7. Don’t need another committee that we don’t have the resources to support - need an address and something beyond this to filter people in and out of this network.

8. We need to have some body that can make some decisions - no way to coordinate nationally - need a governing body, steering committee, coordinating committee - that can decide things they are authorized by us to decide.

9. If we are going to create a new structure, perhaps an existing organization could perform the functions needed - then we could all contribute to that organization doing the work - or find resources to pay for staff.

10. The idea of frequent meetings won’t work. Need to devote resources at a local level - can’t develop a tight structure.

11. At Ann Arbor, we decided on a loose structure and it didn’t work. We need a coordinating committee.

12. In the survey, there are 57 hours/week that people are willing to dedicate to this network. Maybe we could use these people to act as staff persons for working groups.

13. We have to have leadership if we are going to accomplish our goals. Could use a staff person or an organization already in place, but we need some structure.

Small groups: Go to same group in same place as this morning. If you need to be in a different group, arrange that on your own. Look more closely at the pink proposals and consider the options. If you want more discussion on violence/non-violence, go over this in your groups. Dinner at 6:30.

Representatives from small groups met over dinner – after the Plenary, will break into small groups again to try and make more headway by morning.

4. Major decisions would be made a national gatherings annually, but between these meetings, working groups and the coordinating committee would make decisions

5. Question: Authority and limits to authority of these groups (responsibilities and roles

7. Question: how do these groups/committees gain membership? Election? Volunteer?

8. Nonviolence. Should we issue a statement as a group? It would take a great deal of time/energy. We will take a straw poll tomorrow since we are too tired tonight

9. Issues with this plan: Small groups need to be representative of the divergent viewpoints in the group.

Facilitators will be selected in the groups, go to the group as you are interested.

Sunday, February 18

3. Conference will elect a coordinating counsel/steering committee of 15 people, taking gender balance and regional balance.

1. Will have authority to form ad hoc working groups as long as these working groups fit with the overall objectives of the conference.

3. Their main responsibility is holding people in the working groups responsible.

5. Steering committee will meet at least every six weeks by conference call. In times of high need, may need to meet every day, i.e. for emergency response.

9. Will represent the mandates of the conference, not individual groups or personal opinions

Discussion: Report of working groups to the committee and the committee to the full group: Mechanism for steering committee to report to full group will be established. This structure is not to limit anyone, but to set up an option.

4. Clarify time commitment: 5-10 hours/week. This is a lot of time to take away from local work. This structure came to be because of the high concern for accountability. This time commitment marks a promise to be serious about this responsibility to the larger group.

5. This movement can take an enormous step in the next six months. If you take that amount of time, this may take time away from local efforts? Not the plan - some of this effort can be dedicated to local efforts. But to create a national effort will require some time away from local efforts.

6. How did you come up with 15 members? And how do you expect to set guidelines for membership? Response: Fifteen is the number most often mentioned in proposals - anything larger would not function well in a conference call. As for geographical representation - the group will need to keep this in mind when selecting representatives. The conference should elect the members.

7. Clarification: recommendation that the steering committee represent the conference, not particularly regions, genders, etc. Members are expected to uphold mandates of the conference. Individual groups will be represented through working groups. Some groups, i.e. are good at public outreach, info sharing, lobbying, etc.

8. Is this proposal open to amendment? Our group felt strongly that there should be representation by region. Response: This was discussed. The sense of cooperation that was eventually reached was great. There was initially great opposition. These concerns were aired and there was consensus on the issue of representation, but not on regional representation, so it was decided that the major body would be the conference where regions are represented.

9. The coordinating committee is a not a steering committee. It is meant to make sure the work gets done. Setting geographical commitments would make it difficult to get the work done.

10. When an event happens, action needs to be taken quickly. If the coordinating committee doesn’t have power, how can we move quickly? It seems timely action is required. There is an idea for an emergency working group. The steering committee might respond to the emergency working group and get out an announcement within 12 hours. The coordinating group might also create an ad hoc group. The coordinating group needs to be able to respond quickly while looking at the long-term consequences.

11. This committee has no power. It would have limited authority based on decisions made at the conference.

12. Supposing someone objects to a decision that is made by the committee - how would they get their concerns addressed? Possibly, if 10 members object, a referendum could be called for to overturn the decision of the coordinating committee. Obviously, you need to elect people you trust.

13. Again, if I strongly object to a decision? Response: take it up with the membership and seek a mandate. There is a responsibility of the members to be accountable. This will be posted on the website, articulating what to do if a member is displeased with an action of the committee.

14. If everyone can announce where they are from geographically when we are voting for the committee, this may help in making decisions about who to elect?

16. As isolated groups in i.e. small cities, would they have access to this coordinating committee? Yes, this is a fundamental idea.

17. In trusting this body, as with nearly all boards, you have some who don’t meet the requirements or the group has a need for new members with other skill sets, I suppose the committee would have the authority to take on new members? No, the coordinating council would set up an ad hoc committee with people who have special skill sets.

18. Could conference members suggest setting up new working groups? This is fundamental - to maintain communication with the conference members.

19. Working groups would have autonomy. The coordinating committee would seek consensus, but majority would rule.

20. Please show communication across lines, showing that groups can work together.

Aside: Assumption is that individuals will pay their own way? Response: Committee will propose a finance working group to pay for conference calls, etc.

1. Plan to take volunteers first to submit themselves for election. Everyone will vote for five people.

Aside: stagger time commitment so there is overlap of group? Decision: stay with one year.

Aside: Is there a way to use people who aren’t here? Trade-off in July? Response: If not present at this conference, hard to uphold the goals. Commitment is for one year.

We will hear from small groups, then decide on working groups, and then have election.

1. Want to get reports of small groups with concrete proposals for work to be done.

Suggestion: Propose rough idea of working groups and go ahead with election now.

Vote to move to election now. Volunteers must divide themselves up into working groups. Volunteers for election will state working group preference.

3. Wafaa Salman, Cambridge, Mass. Working group: Education, networking with goal of promoting Iraqis and Arabs.