1. Introduction
"During
the IPPNW World Congress in Beijing in September 2004, we have seen a
breakthrough for the Nuclear Weapons Inheritance Project. The NWIP team
had activities constantly going on; work shops during both the
students’ and the doctors’ congresses and a dialogue with the Chinese
students. Beside this, the team also had one very important task to
look into: how to coordinate NWIP after Richard Fristedt’s retirement
from the project.
Now, with a bit of perspective to the
congress, I can see that we had almost too much to do, and that it
would have been nice to have more time together with the other students
and to have seen at least one workshop that wasn’t about NWIP. I think
we were quite successful, though, and that this congress was a
breakthrough for NWIP in IPPNW. Everybody in IPPNW seems to know about
our project by now, and we have seen major interest from new students
to join the project. During the congress, we made our first contacts
with Chinese students, and we are invited to USA, Russia, India,
Pakistan and China within the coming six months. We have solved the
problem with coordination by dividing the tasks among a core group of
students, and by having two new coordinators replacing Richard
Fristedt: Inga Blum from Germany and Camilla Mattsson from Sweden."
Camilla Mattsson
2. NWIP
teambuilding day
 "The
ideas behind the teambuilding day was to have a full day with the sole
purposes of making the international group and national representatives
feel like a team as well as for exchange of ideas for delegations for
the coming year. For this reason Richard and SLMK had put a lot of work
into identifying and sponsoring students from all Nuclear Weapon States
where we are working so that they could participate in the meeting. The
team day would be the first real chance for all students involved
actively in the project to get to know each other.
We had also deliberately chosen not to
spend time on actual planning and discussion of the project. From
experience we know that congresses are very busy. People are dispersed
at different workshops and meetings and there is an overload of hard
work and meetings. We wanted to give the participants a kick-start to
the congress and therefore wanted the day to be fun.
We had discussed to get a professional or at least
external team-builder to run the day so that the role of Richard and me
as “leaders” would be downplayed and we could participate in the
general teambuilding. Unfortunately that was too expensive and not
feasible although we had a very good candidate.
Another unfortunate thing was that
despite their presence at the congress (except for the Pakistanis who
could not get visa) and having been invited several times practically
none of the students from nuclear weapon states attended. The two IDPD
Indian students participated the last few hours. It was
also unfortunate that most people had arrived the same day and
therefore suffered seriously from jet lag. It was too long to have a
full day when people were so tired and we had not taken that into
consideration. I have run trainings and teambuilding several times for
other groups, but the program was new and I had never run trainings on
intercultural communication. In addition to that it was not ideal that
I as a part of the team had to play the role as facilitator.
Some students wrote in their feedback
that they felt more time should have been spent on planning. A lot of
planning was done later during the congress and I hope that the hard
work and many different activities covered during the congress filled
this wish since we deliberately left it out of the day and expected the
need would be covered later. Although attendance was limited it was
very positive that several students who are not in the project
(including the two newly elected international representatives)
participated in the training. Several physicians also spent shorter
periods of time with us. "Caecilie Buhmann
"Thanks
to the teambuilding day, and all the time spent together during the
whole congress of course, I feel now as not only part of a great team
but that I have several new good friends. This is very important for
doing whatever you can to keep up the work, because who wants to let a
friend down... That we had the teambuilding day before the rest of the
congress started was very good, because this made us feel as a team
before others arrived. In a way it was a pity that students from e.g.
India or USA were not there also, but it worked out fine anyway. The
game with the rope was indeed a bit terrifying, but it threw us into
having to trust each other
immediately, which was good."
Martina Grosch
3. Work shop:
Crash course
 "Having
done the alternatives part once before at the Atomkongress in Berlin
(together with Jenny) I knew more or less what it was about. Compared
to the first time I felt more secure, and I am sure this feeling will
grow for every time doing it. What is important is to be well prepared,
which I cannot say that I was completely. Next time I will make sure to
be even better prepared. Doing the Model of Change is a very satisfying
way of ending a workshop, but it would be even better if there would be
enough time also for discussion, for not having to rush as we had to.
After the workshop it was really awarding to experience the positive
feedback we got from many students wanting to work with us in the
future."Martina Grosch
"The time for the Crash Course was only one hour, and I
believe that all of us in the workshop felt that was a bit short. I did
NW basics with Richard, and there were a few issues that we didn’t have
time for, or discussed just briefly. Personally I feel I didn’t do a
very good job, but Richard saved the day. Perhaps we should have
made more detailed plans on who to say what etc. Not too many students
attended the workshop, but of the ones who did, there were some (Chris,
Lisa, Liam, Ruth) that we’ll hopefully work closely with in the future.
I don’t have any good suggestions on how to cope with the time-issue,
except that it might be a bit too ambitious to run all the topics of
the Crash Course in one hour. Having only one hour in the future, maybe
we should consider doing the Health & Security workshop instead?"
Rune Dahl
"When
we held the students workshop at the IPPNW Students Conference in
Beijing, there where quite a lot of parallel workshops at the same
time. Therefore we had only about 12 participants in our workshop,
which didn’t keep the workshop from being a success, because among
those there were some who showed a big interest in the project and will
stay in touch with us in the future. In the workshop we had five
different speakers, which is good because it is more interesting for
the listeners and because it shows how much NWIP is actually teamwork.
The security part was good, I think all of the questions which were
raised in the brainstorm could be clarified. For the Model of change
there wasn't enough time left to go deeper into it, but to give an
overview it was also useful."
Inga Blum
4. Dialogue
with Chinese students
 "After
a lot of hard work from many NWIP-members, we finally got the
opportunity to have a dialogue with a group of Chinese students. We
didn’t have a very long time, and we didn’t have the opportunity to
meet that many students, but still, I would say that the dialogue was
quite a success. The Chinese students were very interested in
continuing working with us, and they invited us to come back as soon as
possible. In the text below, you can
read the impressions of the NWIP-students who were speaking during the
dialogue. After this, you can read the thoughts of Ruth Mitchell, a
student from Australia who joined NWIP after the congress, and
Mary-Wynne Ashford, a Canadian doctor who attended the dialogue and has
given us a great support."Camilla Mattsson
"This was my first experience of a dialogue; after
hearing so much about it, we put our knowledge to the test. It was
decided that we would discuss the Health and Security module that we
had prepared. Due to time constraints, we had to select some of the
most relevant points for our Chinese student audience and address some
of the issues present in their country. I was to speak about the
Nuclear weapons convention, the huge costs of developing and
maintaining NW and then the possibility of horizontal proliferation. I
was glad to be able to quote facts and figures specific to china and
its economy from our fact sheets when answering questions for the local
students.
The thing that amazed me about the
dialogue was the conversational, two-way communication style of the
discussion. It was not all about us talking and everyone else
listening; instead questions were asked of the audience and then the
responses were taken into account. This is extremely important in
assessing the general level of knowledge among the audience and what
their ideals are. The job of the facilitator is of the utmost
importance. It is he who brings it all together, asks the questions,
takes in the responses and then allows for one of the team to speak a
little on an important topic. The amazing thing from this dialogue was
the apparent textbook nature of the discussion. The students mostly
came in thinking that nuclear weapons were vitally important for their
country, and then for the most part left questioning the rationale
behind this assertion. It was amazing to have a Russian, an American
and a Pakistani student all present to contribute to this discussion.
The input from a wide variety of nuclear weapon states helped greatly
in convincing the Chinese students that nuclear weapons were not such a
great idea after all."
Patrick O’Donnell
For me
personally, this probably was the first time I presented my arguments
without my usual hesitation. It was a good experience in that respect,
and generally it was good for us new ones to experience our first
dialogue. Although I don’t have anything to compare with, I think the
dialogue went well, and the fact that we had a Russian, Indian, and an
American in the room, gave the dialogue an extra aspect. I think this
shows how important it is for us to try to expand so that we can have
students from NW-states going on the delegations. Although Caecilie did
a great job making us look like a team, at this point I see us as
completely dependent upon her as chair; she controlled the dialogue
excellently, taking it in the right directions at all times, and
masterfully managed to incorporate us others at the right times.
Hopefully some of us will learn to chair in a similar way in the year
to come.
Rune Dahl
"As most of us
participated for the first time as speakers in a dialogue we were all a
bit nervous before. But afterwards, back in the Boshi-Hotel when we
read the evaluations that the participating students had written, we
were all very lucky and proud of how it went. What were the reasons for
those positive feedbacks? Was it because the Chinese students were a
good audience? Most of them did play an active part in the dialogue,
speaking freely about their concerns and asking intelligent questions.
Or was it because we were well prepared to answer to every question and
argument in clearly and concisely? Or maybe it was because Cecilia
succeeded in creating a friendly, and not too serious,
atmosphere?
I think all of these factors came
together. Another very important reason is the fact, that we had
students from other Nuclear Weapons States in the audience who
strengthened us the back when the Chinese students seemed to feel
criticised by us, as outstanding observers, talking to them about their
Nuclear Weapons. A slight tension, which was in the room in the
beginning, because the Chinese might have thought that we were there
just to criticize them, was so swept away very soon by an open and
honest exchange of thoughts. It impressed me when after half an hour of
dialogue the Chinese students."
Inga Blum
"I was very
nervous before the dialogue, but I feel that I get more and more secure
about speaking in front of people for every time I do it. I was very
excited about seeing a dialogue for real, since I had heard a lot about
it, and since the dialogues are the core of this project. So far, I had
been a part of NWIP for half a year, without really seeing what the
project was all about. After the dialogue, I felt that NWIP really has
something special – it was amazing to see how the Chinese students
discussed these topics with us, and that they, after talking with us
for almost an hour, actually began to agree with us that nuclear
weapons might not be the best solution for their national security.
When they approached us afterwards and asked us to come back for
dialogues with more students, I felt proud of being a part of a project
with such potential as this one."
Camilla Mattsson
"I
have always had the deepest appreciation for dialogue between people of
different cultures and traditions, so I was very pleased to discover
that members of the Nuclear Weapons Inheritance Project were going to
have an opportunity to speak with Chinese students and to learn about
their perspectives on nuclear weapons and nuclear disarmament. As a
newcomer to the project I had never seen a dialogue at work and I did
not know what to expect. I knew that the students involved had made an
effort to prepare for the discussion, but I had no idea how everything
would come together.
At the beginning of the dialogue the
room was full of Chinese students sitting in neat rows with a number of
other students and physicians from several countries sitting around the
outsides. After an initial presentation on the medical effects of
nuclear weapons, the Chinese students were invited by Caecilie, who
chaired the meeting, to share their perspectives on nuclear weapons.
The first students who spoke emphasised that China needed nuclear
weapons in order to be safe and secure. When I heard this, I had mixed
feelings. On one hand, I thought it was extremely valuable that the
Chinese students felt they could speak their minds and tell us what
they really thought, but on the other, I wondered how the discussion
might proceed, and I didn’t know if it would be possible for them to
see another perspective on human security.
I should not have worried, because a
lively interchange of ideas began, and students from Russia, India, and
USA were able to communicate with those from China that they understood
the need for security and the desire to protect one’s own country. In
turn the Chinese students said they realised that those from other
countries did not want to hurt them and that perhaps the only way to a
secure world was through less nuclear weapons, not more.
Throughout the discussion I was struck
by the skill and open-mindedness of the students chairing and
facilitating discussion, and I was impressed by the clear and
thoughtful manner in which cross-cultural communication was achieved. I
left the dialogue with a renewed sense of hope – for meaningful human
communication, for friendship between students from different nations,
and for peace. "
Ruth Mitchell
"The
student NWIP meeting I visited was an energetic and enthusiastic
gathering of medical students, including about 20 from China. The
leaders asked questions about why countries might want to have nuclear
weapons and what the group thought about them. The Chinese students
were very engaged and obviously enjoyed the discussion. They offered
reasons that they thought China needed nuclear weapons, and students
from other countries responded by adding new information to counter
those arguments in a helpful and inclusive way. They described
the dangers of a world order based on the threat or use of nuclear
weapons. The topic appeared to be a new one for many of the students,
not just the Chinese, and all were very responsive to learning new
information. The interactive discussions and small group activities
worked well to sustain interest even though many students did not speak
English as their first language. The dialogue was very inclusive of all
the students, with gentle humour often surfacing as they worked through
the issues. I was most impressed by the active learning and the warm
relationships established among all the students."
Mary-Wynne Ashford
5. Workshop
during the doctor’s congress - “New thinking needed to bring disarmament
to the 21st century”
Goals for the session:
· Further
integrate NWIP into the IPPNW disarmament campaign
· Integrate
students and NWIP into IPPNW
· Pass on our
achievements and methods to the physicians on a broader level
· Get physician
input to the NWIP to help it evolve further
 "As
can be seen from the outcome of the brainstorm the focus lay more on
accessing the strength within NWIP - what makes it a sustainable and
attractive project, than on producing new ideas where to incorporate
these “traits”. It was important to get the participants to think about
these issues, since this is vital when coming up with other projects.
Hoping to be able to use these thoughts and putting them into concrete
use in a not too distant future. We were able to present our
results to the other workshop. Probably due to lack of time, there was
no exchange of the “Revitalizing IPPNW workshop” Better communication,
was a great opportunity to get more input and listen in, since these
two workshops had one important common goal – bringing IPPNW and its
message into the 21st century."
Richard Fristedt
"I had only a very small role in this workshop, but I
felt that it was good that the doctors could see me doing something,
since I had been presented to them as one of the new coordinators of
NWIP. I think the wall-to-wall game was a good start, since it made the
workshop more interactive and the participants got something to think
of right away. Overall, I liked the idea of having small groups
discussing a question, since everybody gets the chance of giving their
opinion to the topic. It was very nice to see that we had attracted
quite many doctors to our workshop, and that they all were very
enthusiastic about discussing how to use the NWIP-experience in IPPNW
with us."
Camilla Mattsson
"The
workshop clearly demonstrated why the students from NWIP are booked to
present workshops in many countries as often as they are able to fit
them into their busy schedules. I congratulate the organisers on their
thoughtful, effective strategies."
Mary-Wynne Ashford
6.
Presentation for the International
Council
 "The
project had a 5 min presentation for the international council. We had
fought hard to get that chance to address the physicians – both to get
attention to the project and to advertise for the workshop later on
during the congress. We showed a power point presentation of pictures
from the past 3 years, gave a short speech (see synopsis below),
introduced Camilla Mattsson as one of the new coordinators and thanked
Richard for his work for the project and distributed the Activity
Report to all affiliates and all members of the Board of Advisers (and
the central office). "
Caecilie Buhmann
The context in which we work
1) Dual process where both
decision-makers and the general population have to be targeted
2) This is a task for civil society
3) DwDM
4) Students in NW states are
apparently even less active than students in other states
The Project
1) Two main objectives
2) Raise Awareness and educate
amongst university students
3) Capacity-build and empower the
students to undertake continuing activities
4) At this point dialogued with
about 1000 and trained 150 students.
5) The project has active students
from 15 different countries from 3 continents
The challenge for the future
1) How to bring disarmament to the
young generation and into the 21st century?
2) Internet / Zapper generation and
many competing offers
3) Be role models
4) Use interactive methods
5) Develop material specifically
for young
6) Branding the project to give
disarmament a new image
7) Develop web-page
8) Target future decision-makers
9) Contribute to confidence
building based on “new security”
10) Put disarmament into a broader context of
peace-building and development
Conclusion
1) Civil society has an important
role to play in disarmament and confidence building
2) To target the future we need to
think in new ways
3) We believe we have touched upon
a possible solution
7. New
coordination of NWIP
"The
process to find new coordinators was difficult and no one had foreseen
the problems. On the other hand it helped build the team and the group
markedly grew into their responsibility and dedication to the project
over the weekend. Since the process of finding new coordinators will
have to be repeated next year I would find it very important to get
constructive feedback and ideas from those who participated in it. "
Caecilie Buhmann
8. Overall impressions of the congress
"
think all of you would agree with me that this Congress really proved
the importance of the NWIP for IPPNW and that we are so grateful to
Caecilie and Richard for their hard work in the last years and during
this Congress to make it become a reality. This Congress, seeing how
important the NWIP is, taking part in the workshops and having
experienced a dialogue and for Patrick and I meeting with the Chinese
students afterwards, has really convinced me about my commitment to the
project. Meeting international students, networking with them, is what
only a Congress like this can give us and I think all of you would
agree with me that having met all the people, that we are going to
e-mail and cooperate with to plan the upcoming delegations. This makes
our work so much easier."
Martina Grosch
"The
Congress for me was pretty much all about NWIP, so I’m afraid I don’t
have much to tell about other workshops, plenary etc. The days were
very hectic; I felt there was a meeting up in a few minutes all the
time. But as the days went a long and we slowly started to see the
fruits of our work, it was all worth it. And, I really learnt to
appreciate the importance of students experiencing the NWIP, in order
for us to work with them in the future. The enthusiasm of some of the
US-students for example, gives good promise for our future work in that
region."
Rune Dahl
"The
conference as a whole was a whirlwind of activity for the week we were
there. The NWIP had something on every day. We really used the short
time to promote the project well to both students and doctors. It was
great to do this and everyone commented on how well we worked as an
efficient team over the week. Sometimes running something as complex as
the NWIP is very difficult by email, that’s why meetings like this are
so crucial. It’s also important for people outside the project to meet
the faces behind the emails. We managed to have great time with all the
other medical students and enthusiasm for our project seemed
contagious. The difficult part is keeping up momentum after something
so intense."
Patrick O’Donnell
"Overall
I think the congress was a very positive experience. The core team was
shaken together as a team and everyone got to know the project much
better. Two new coordinators emerged to take over from Richard (and me)
and we made good contacts to students from US, India, Russia and most
importantly China.
We had a very successful dialogue with
Chinese students, a very successful workshop for the physicians and a
huge amount of attention and feedback from both students and
physicians. The project has now been recognized for its importance in
IPPNW and has been allocated staff time and resources as well as a
board member to supervise the project. Several new students were
interested in the project and in the weeks after the congress the
activity on all levels have been amazing.
To conclude I think the NWIP has grown
with this congress on all frontiers and I am very positive for the
future. The greatest inspiration for me was to see the NWIP team form
and grow and I believe that absolutely no one in the core group could
be replaced. Everyone bring his or her strengths to the group and the
project and I look forward to handing over to the team in the coming
months."
Caecilie Buhmann
|
