Formulated by the Greater Lansing Network Against War and Injustice (GLNAWI)

• We affirm the fundamental commitment to non-violent methods of conflict resolution, whenever and wherever possible.
• We reject the assumption that those who use violence to oppose the United States do so primarily because of extreme religious beliefs (e.g., Islamic fundamentalism) and/or opposition to principles of democratic government.
• We believe the primary basis for suicide terrorism is frustration and anger at the United States' military occupation and/or control of other people's territory, directly or through allies (e.g., Israel).
• We support the general principle that all acts of aggression must be investigated and prosecuted according to international law and via international institutions, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC). We urge the United States to join the ICC without delay.
• We believe that our nation's response to violent attacks (as well as other nations' responses) should be to minimize its own violence. Violent responses to violence are most often ineffective and serve to perpetuate the cycle of attack and counterattack. Invasion, warfare, and punishment of civilian populations are unjust and counterproductive responses to any attack by any person or group.
• We believe that enduring peace and security can only be achieved when the human rights of all people are respected. In particular, we reject the use of torture as completely unacceptable treatment of any person, no matter what the context.
• We urge substantial reductions in Defense Department budgets of $400-500 billion dollars (not counting the costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) allocated annually to pursue the false goal of achieving national security through military power. We must begin to invest our resources in the tools and strategies of non-violent conflict resolution.
• The rhetoric of the current "war on terror," fails to acknowledge the United States' direct violence and occupation of some countries (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan), and indirect control of others (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Haiti, Columbia). We reject this phrase since "terrorism" against the United States is a lopsided and inaccurate description of the current conflict between the U.S. (and its allies) and groups that oppose its power, occupation, and influence through violent action.
• We believe that U.S. military strength continues to be used to control people, territory, and natural resources for the primary benefit of large U.S. corporations, not the American public (nor the rest of the world). A more productive relationship with the rest of the world requires serious steps toward sustainable consumption of resources, especially energy.