Martin Smedjeback's testimony, Newbury Magistrates Court, the 8th of February, 2006

Thank you everyone in this room for the opportunity of letting me explain my actions in this courtroom today.

In spring of 2005 I got an invitation from Per Herngren and Stephen Hancock to join a vine and fig tree planting in England. After having considered it for a few weeks I decided to accept the invitation. In August I went to Oxford to organize and prepare the planting together with the others who had accepted the invitation. We discussed, made decisions and played role plays to ensure that we would do our civil disobedience in a nonviolent and safe way for all parties involved, including the police. On the 4^th of August 2005 some of us went to Aldermaston to plant vine and fig trees outside of Aldermaston. There we also established contact with the police and let them know that we would come back for some more planting. In the early morning of the 5^th of August we went back and planted some more vine and fig trees, both inside and outside of Aldermaston.

The tree planting I did at Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) Aldermaston on the 5^th of August 2005 was not a spur of the moment thing for me. I have been working full time with peace issues for almost five years. I have been thinking thousands and thousands of hours on how to create peace in the world. For me the trial is not about a broken fence – it is about the world we want to create tomorrow.

What makes humans truly unique is our ability to imagine. It is our ability to see another future and to have visions of something better. With my planting of vine and fig trees at AWE Aldermaston I wanted to create a small part of my vision for the planet. We, humanity, have the power to make peace happen. If we truly can see a peaceful future where no one has to be afraid, then we can feel secure enough to disarm.

When I was interviewed at Newbury Police Station the 5^th of August 2005 I was asked by Detective Inspector Stackhouse if there wasn’t any easier and more legal means to draw attention to our cause. I answered that yes, there are certainly many ways to work for peace, both more easy and more legal. During my five years of work for peace I have used only nonarrestable means. I think this work is of great importance and value. But sometimes when you want to live your vision; lines are crossed and boundaries broken. That is what happened on the 5^th of August 2005 at AWE Aldermaston. Our vision of a world of peace collided with the lack of vision and trust that some political leaders have. That is why we are in this courtroom today.

I could have stayed at home in Sweden and not have gone to this trial. I could have escaped my sentence. But I chose to answer your invitation to be a part of this exchange of thoughts in this trial. I am willing to take the consequences of my actions on the 5^th of August 2005. If you want to send me to prison for my action of peace you are entitled to do so. I still face very little punishment compared to all human rights activists sitting in prison today. But you don’t have to send us to prison or to give us a fine. If you also, Madame, share the vision of peace, you can by declaring us not guilty be a part of making this vision of peace a reality. It would not be the first time a similar thing has happened in a courtroom.

So why did I decide to be a part of creating a garden in a research facility for nuclear weapons? The answer for me is that it is not enough to have a vision, it is not enough to think and speak beautiful words. Neither is it enough to do actions without thinking, to work without goals. If we truly want to change the world into something better, then vision and work have to be one. That is what we tried to embody by planting a garden at the most deadly place we could find. Thank you for listening.

Martin Smedjeback

Our suggestion is: Nonviolence needs to leave the reactive saying-no-resistance and move to a proactive resistance.

One week before Phil Berrigan died, Democracy Now broadcasted an interview with him. He was interviewed as one of the initiators and organizers of Plowshares and as being a convict for more than 11 years for his nonviolent resistance. But he also shared his experiences from the civil rights and the Vietnam movements, as well as from his work trying to build resistance communities.

During the sixties, said Phil Berrigan, they tried dissent resistance but that didn’t work.

Our interpretation is that Phil Berrigan’s nonviolence was a proactive resistance, a resistance which says yes rather than no, where the aim is the way, where nonviolence is direct action.

Per Herngren

Editor: Treena Lenthall, Web slave: Per Herngren