Back Issues

Rwanda ten years after the genocide: Some reminders of the international response to the crisis

Gerald Caplan

2004-02-05

Around the world, commemorations of the 10th anniversary of the Rwanda genocide are about to be launched. The central actors responsible for allowing Hutu extremists to perpetrate the genocide are well known: the government of France, the United Nations Security Council led by the USA with British backing, the UN Secretariat, the government of Belgium, and, by no means least, the Roman Catholic Church. The Organization of African Unity also refused to condemn the genocidaires and proved to be largely irrelevant throughout the crisis. As a consequence of these acts of commission and omission, 800,000 Tutsi and thousands of moderate Hutu were murdered in a period of 100 days. Reviewing the events of those days, I find myself thinking not once but repeatedly: It's almost impossible to believe that any of this actually happened. The following is a selection of some of those events. They, and the lessons they suggest, are worth bearing in mind as we who refuse to let the memory of the genocide dissipate begin our commemorations of the 10th anniversary.

1. Time and again in the months prior to and during the genocide, the Commander of the UN military mission to Rwanda (UNAMIR) pleaded with the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations in New York to expand his very limited mandate. The only time his request was ever approved was in the days immediately after the Rwandan president's plane was shot down, triggering the genocide. UNAMIR was then authorized to exceed its narrow mandate exclusively for the purpose of helping to evacuate foreign nationals, mainly westerners, from the country. Never was such flexibility granted to protect Rwandans.

2. Heavily armed western troops began materializing at Kigali airport within hours to evacuate their nationals. Beyond UNAMIR's 2500 peacekeepers, these included 500 Belgian para-commandos, 450 French and 80 Italian troops from parachute regiments, another 500 Belgian para-commandos on stand-by in Kenya, 250 US Rangers on stand-by in Burundi, and 800 more French troops on stand-by in the region. None made any attempt to protect Rwandans at risk. Besides western nationals, French troops evacuated a number of well-known leaders of the extremist Hutu Power movement, including the wife of the murdered president and her family. All non-UNAMIR troops left within days, immediately after their evacuation mission was completed.

3. From the beginning of the genocide to its end, no government or organization other than NGOs formally described events in Rwanda as a genocide.

4. From beginning to end, all governments and official bodies continued to recognize the genocidaire government as the legitimate government of Rwanda.

5. The months of the genocide happened to coincide with Rwanda's turn to fill one of the non-permanent seats on the Security Council. Throughout those 3 months, the representative of the government executing the genocide continued to take that seat and participate in all deliberations, including discussions on Rwanda.

6. Almost all official bodies remained neutral as between the genocidaires and the Rwandan Patriotic Front, the mostly Tutsi rebels in the civil war that was being fought at the same time as the genocide. As if they were morally equivalent groups, both the genocidaire government and those fighting to end the genocide were called upon by the UN, the Organization of African Unity and others to agree to a cease-fire. They did not call on the genocidaires to stop the genocide. Had the RPF agreed to a cease-fire, the scale of the genocide behind governemtn lines would have been even greater.

7. Only days after the genocide began, 2500 Tutsi as well as Hutu opposition politicians crowded into a Kigali school known as ETO, where Belgian UN troops were billeted; at least 400 of them were children. They were seeking protection against menacing militia and government soldiers outside the compound. In the midst of the stand-off, the Belgian soldiers were ordered to depart ETO to assist in evacuating foreign nationals from the country. They did so abruptly, making no arrangements whatever for the protection of those they were safeguarding. As they moved out, the killers moved in. When the afternoon was over, all 2500 civilians had been murdered.

8. After 10 Belgian UN soldiers were killed by Rwandan government troops the day after the Rwandan President's plane was shot down, Belgium withdrew all its troops from the UN mission. So that Belgium would not alone be blamed for scuttling UNAMIR, its government then strenuously lobbied the UN to disband the mission in its entirety.

9. Two weeks after the crisis had begun, with information about the magnitude of the genocide increasing by the day, the Security Council did come very close to shutting down UNAMIR altogether. Instead, led by the USA and the United Kingdom, it voted to decimate the mission, reducing it from 2500 to 270.

10. After the deaths of 18 American soldiers in Somalia in October 1993, the United States decided to participate in no more UN military missions. The Clinton administration further decided that no significant UN missions were to be allowed at all, even if American troops would not be involved. Thanks mostly to the delaying tactics of the US, after 100 days of the genocide not a single reinforcement of UN troops or military supplies had reached Rwanda.

11. Bill Clinton later apologized for not doing more to stop the genocide. However, his claim that his administration had not been aware of the real situation was a lie.

12. French officials were senior advisers to both the Rwandan government and military in the years leading to the genocide, with unparalleled influence on both. Virtually until the moment the genocide began, they gave unconditional support as well as considerable arms to the Hutu elite. Throughout the 100 days and long after, French officials and officers remained hostile to the “anglo-saxon” RPF, whose victory ended the genocide. To this day the French have never acknowledged their role nor apologized for it.

13. After 6 weeks of genocide, France, which offered no troops to the UN mission, suddenly decided to intervene in Rwanda. Within a week of the decision, Operation Turquoise was able to deploy 2500 men with 100 armored personnel carriers, 10 helicopters, a battery of 120 mm mortars, 4 Jaguar fighter bombers, and 8 Mirage fighters and reconnaissance planes---all for an ostensibly humanitarian operation. The French forces created a safe haven in the south-west of the country which provided sanctuary not only to fortunate Tutsi but also to many leading Rwandan government and military officials as well as large numbers of soldiers and militia---the very Hutu Power militants who had organized and carried out the genocide. Not a single person was arrested by France for crimes against humanity. All were allowed to escape across the border into then-Zaire, entirely unrepentant and often still armed. Predictably, these genocidaires were soon launching murderous excursions back into Rwanda, beginning a cycle that led to the subsequent bloody conflict that destabilizes central Africa still.

14. France long remained hostile to the post-genocide government in Rwanda and sympathetic to the previous French-speaking Hutu regime. Many of the leaders of the new government were from English-speaking Uganda and were considered the “anglo-saxon” enemy by the French government. In November 1994, barely four months after the end of the genocide, Rwanda was deliberately excluded from the annual Franco-African summit hosted by France. Zaire's President Mobutu, who had been ostracized by the French government in recent years, was invited, as was Robert Mugabe, the anglophone president of anglophone Zimbabwe.

15. The Roman Catholic Church in Rwanda was the largest and most influential denomination in the country, with intimate ties to the government at all levels. It failed to denounce the government's explicit ethnic foundations, failed to denounce its increasing use of violence against Tutsi, failed to denounce or even name the genocide, failed to apologize for the many clergy who aided and abetted the genocidaires, and to this day has never apologized for its overall role. The Pope has refused to apologize on behalf of the Church as a whole.

16. Within months of the end of the genocide, relief workers and representatives of the international community in Rwanda were telling Rwandans they must “Quit dwelling on the past and concentrate on rebuilding for the future” and insisting that “Yes, the genocide happened, but it's time to get over it and move on.”

17. George W. Bush, during the campaign for the 2000 Republican presidential nomination, was asked by a TV interviewer what he would do as president if, “God forbid, another Rwanda” should take place. He replied: “We should not send our troops to stop ethnic cleansing and genocide outside our own strategic interest. I would not send US troops into Rwanda.”

18. The new Rwanda Patriotic Front government inherited a debt of close to $1 billion, some of it incurred by the previous government in genocide preparations---expanding its army and militias and buying arms. After the genocide, the RPF was obligated to repay in full the country's debt to its western lenders.

19. Following the genocide, the World Bank was left with a $160 million program of aid to Rwanda that it had extended to the previous government. . Even though the new government was penniless, the Bank refused to activate that sum until the new government paid $9 million in interest incurred by its predecessor. A Bank official told a UN representative: “After all, we are a commercial enterprise and have to adhere to our regulations. “ The sum was eventually paid by some donors.

20. In the first nine months after the genocide, the donor community provided $1.4 billion in aid to the Hutu refugee camps in eastern Zaire and Tanzania. Since, as was universally known, genocidaires had taken over the camps, a good part of these funds went to feed and shelter them and to fund their re-training and re-arming as they planned cross-border raids back into Rwanda. For Rwanda itself, while donor funds for reconstruction were generously pledged, in the first year after the genocide only $68 million was actually disbursed. To this day, Rwanda has never received reparations remotely commensurate with the damage that the international community had failed to prevent.

21. Once the genocide ended, the UN military mission was finally expanded. As UNAMIR II, it remained in Rwanda for almost two more years as a peacekeeping force, costing the UN $15 million a month. But the main challenge had become less one of peacekeeping and more one of peace-building--- the reconstruction of a totally devastated country. UNAMIR had the equipment, the skills and the will to play a major role in reviving the country's shattered structures. What it lacked was the mandate and modest funding from the Security Council to perform such a role. But UN headquarters never sought such authorization from the Security Council, nor did the Council ever initiate such a move.

22. When a UN mission leaves a country, it follows a formula to determine how much of its equipment should be left behind. UNAMIR owned much desperately needed equipment, from computers to vehicles to furniture. When the mission wrapped up in April 1996, both UN officials in Kigali and members of the Security Council urged UN headquarters to interpret the formula with maximum generosity and flexibility; they believed that 80% of all non-lethal equipment should remain in Rwanda. UN headquarters announced that 93% of all equipment was to be transported out of the country for storage or use elsewhere . After much pressure was applied, the UN bureaucracy decreed finally that 62% of all equipment be removed.

23. So far as is known, not a single person in any government or in the UN has ever been fired or held accountable for failing to intervene in the genocide. In fact, the opposite is true. Some careers flourished in the aftermath. Several of the main actors were actually promoted. We can consider this the globalization of impunity.

24. Despite the unanimity of every major study undertaken and in the face of the testimonies of survivors and the first-hand accounts of international humanitarian workers in Rwanda at the time, denial of the genocide persists. Deniers include Hutu Power advocates, many of them still active in western countries, as well as lawyers and investigators working for Hutu clients at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Denying the Rwandan genocide is the moral equivalent of denying the Holocaust.

* Gerald Caplan is the author of Rwanda: The Preventable Genocide (2000), the report of the International Panel of Eminent Personalities appointed by the Organization of African Unity to investigate the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, and the founder of "Remembering Rwanda: The Rwanda Genocide 10th Anniversary Memorial Project".

* Send comments on this editorial - and other events in Africa - to editor@pambazuka.org

NOTE FROM PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORS: This year is the 10th Anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda, an event that, as Gerald Caplan so succinctly summarises, was marked by the failure of the international community, complacency, neglect and, in some cases, outright collusion. An international campaign is underway to mobilise to mark this anniversary - "REMEMBERING RWANDA". As our contribution to this campaign, we will be featuring a section called Remembering Rwanda (see below). We also plan to publish a special issue on Rwanda in April 2004. Get involved! Organise an event in your institution, town, village or city. Send us information about what you are doing to commemorate the anniversary and to provide solidarity to the rebuilding of Rwanda."

* NOTE FOR EDITORS: Please note that this editorial was commissioned from the author for Pambazuka News. While we are pleased that several print publications have used our editorials, we ask editors to note that if they use this article, they do so on the understanding that they are expected to provide the following credit: "This article first appeared in Pambazuka News, an electronic newsletter for social justice in Africa, www.pambazuka.org" Editors are also encouraged to make a donation.

Monsanto pushes GM wheat to secure future access to lucrative African markets

Mariam Mayet

2004-02-05

On the 19th January 2004, Monsanto SA (Pty) Ltd stunned South Africans when it announced that it was seeking a food and feed safety clearance for its genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready wheat to expedite future imports. This application must be seen against the backdrop to the fact that GM wheat is not grown commercially in any part of the world and is years away from regulatory approval in Canada and the United States of America (US) where research and experiments are still continuing and no approval has yet been granted.

Once Monsanto obtains such approval, the legislative weakness in the South African biosafety law expressly excludes future importers of Roundup Ready wheat from the need to obtain import permits. Biosafety oversight will in that event, effectively cease to exist. Such future importers of the Roundup Ready wheat would then have carte blanche to import the Roundup Ready wheat into South Africa, and thereby not have to comply with the biosafety oversight procedures in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (Biosafety Protocol). Crucially, approval from the South African authorities will provide Monsanto with an enormous political coup to convince other African countries that its Roundup Ready GM wheat is “safe”. It will also go a long way towards laying the groundwork for control over the very lucrative wheat market in Africa.

In this context it is worth noting that Africa imports approximately 30 million tons of wheat per year. The US government has targeted Africa as a major market for its wheat, especially since competition from the European Union (EU) and Russia is not as fierce owing to dwindling wheat exports from these countries. The US expects its exports to climb to 30 million tons during 2004, an 8-year high, and “sales to Africa will be a major reason.”

Monsanto's Difficulties with obtaining approval in Canada and the US

Monsanto Canada and Monsanto Corporate have applied for regulatory approval for its Roundup Ready GM wheat in both the USA and Canada. However, to date, neither the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, nor Health Canada, have granted approvals for general cultivation and human safety respectively. Monsanto Canada's failure to obtain such approval is partly due to the groundswell of resistance from farmers and farmer organisations in Canada. Two years ago, the organic farmers of Saskatchewan filed a class action lawsuit to stop Roundup Ready wheat. On 27th May 2003, the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), a farmer-controlled grain marketing agency called on Monsanto Canada to withdraw its environmental safety assessment. Recently, Agriculture Canada announced that it was abandoning its long running project involving GM wheat it had been developing in partnership with Monsanto. Jim Bole from the government Department of Agriculture Canada said that this decision reflected the concerns of Canada's wheat customers.

In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is still in the throes of conducting a voluntary safety review of Monsanto Corporation's Roundup Ready wheat for human and animal consumption. Monsanto Corporation is still awaiting approval from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA.) The FDA, USDA and EPA share regulatory oversight for GM crops in the US where there is no overarching comprehensive biosafety legislation.

Paying Lip Service to Biosafety

The central question that the South African government must answer, is what data exactly, will it use to consider, assess and evaluate Monsanto's application, particularly since the field trials and safety evaluations are still taking place in the US and Canada? Why is it that Monsanto is so confident so as to seek a food and feed safety clearance from the South African government? South Africa's bias in favour of GMOs is well documented. Its biosafety laws pays lip service to the notion public biosafety concerns. It has long since been described by environmental and development lawyers as showing “a cynical disregard for contemporary international and national environmental principles, as well as for the development imperatives of South Africa”. Monsanto's application also has implications for the integrity of the Biosafety Protocol. The First Meeting of the Parties to the Protocol will take place in Malaysia from 23rd to 27th February, a momentous event in global genetic engineering regulation since the Protocol entered into force only on 11th September 2003.

South Africa is a Party to the Biosafety Protocol but it has not yet revised its GMO Act, to give effect to the Biosafety Protocol. South Africa's Constitution does, however, make it clear that the Biosafety Protocol is binding on South Africa.

However, the safety approval sought by Monsanto is in respect of non-existent GM wheat, whereas the Biosafety Protocol applies to real situations of cross border trade in genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and not to speculative trade in respect of non existent GMOs. An early decision now in favour of the import of Monsanto's GM wheat, relieves South Africa of the obligation later, to abide by the regulatory requirements of the Biosafety Protocol, including its critically important Precautionary Principle. Such a pre-emptive move by Monsanto is clearly calculated to undermine the spirit, intention, principles and objectives of the Biosafety Protocol.

Pre-emptive Bid For Control Over Lucrative African Wheat Market

Monsanto Corporation needs the lucrative African wheat market. Its loss widened to $97 million it its fiscal first quarter in 2003, and this excludes its $69 million goodwill write off related to its global wheat business. North Africa imports approximately 18 million tons of wheat per year, and Sub-Saharan Africa approximately 10 million tons. South Africa itself is a net wheat importer, having imported 1.2 million tons of wheat during 2003, owing to the worst crop in a decade. The provision of wheat as food aid is also an important factor for the push for the African wheat market. For instance, Ethiopia, the centre of diversity of wheat, imported 600, 000 of wheat last year as food aid from the US and EU.

Safety clearance will greatly assist Monsanto to convince key African importers who have already voiced concern over GM wheat, to accept it as being safe. Consider for example the following statements:

“On January 5, Algeria, which imports large amounts of durum wheat from the United States, announced that it would not import any genetically modified wheat. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are taking a similar tack with respect to wheat”

“If you have just one grain in a thousand which is genetically modified, the consumer is going to refuse it.”

Thus, it is evident from the above that the granting of the application sought by Monsanto will greatly assist it to capture the African wheat market. South Africa is hence, the entry point for the export of GE wheat into the rest of Africa that will be forced to succumb in a domino effect.

* Mariam Mayet is an environmental lawyer, with a BA, LLB, LLM (Wits) and heads the African Centre for Biosafety.

* Send comments on this editorial - and other events in Africa - to editor@pambazuka.org

WSF: In search of a deeper dialogue beyond Addis and Bamako

Thomas DEVE

2004-02-05

The African Social Forum has grown in stature and can now meet IC criteria required for an entity to be seriously considered to play a leading role in the convening of the annual global meeting that parallels the Davos World Economic Forum. In my opinion, the main one was the ASF role in strengthening and mobilising social movements in Africa to participate in WSF as part of the process leading to consolidation of the world social movement. Its processes saw the building of an African space for the formulation of concerted alternatives to neo-liberal globalisation, based on a diagnosis of the latter's social, economic and political effects. The Forum helped define social, economic and political reconstruction strategies, including a redefinition of the role of the State, the market and citizens' organisations.

Armed with two basic documents crafted in Bamako (Mali) in 2002, and Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) in 2003, those pursuing anti-capitalist struggles within the framework of WSF will acknowledge that ASF has opened new avenues to define citizen control procedures to ensure that political change promotes the expression and implementation of alternative, credible and viable responses to corporate-led globalisation. The Mumbai Africa meeting failed to consolidate this foundation and found itself bogged down in process issues that should have been addressed before all proceedings. In my reading of the programme, some of the concerns should have been captured in the first session. We would have been briefed of developments in the IC and what issues Africa was chasing in the context of Mumbai.

This would have been the moment to emphasise that after Addis, the ASF recommendations, placed emphasis on the following working themes and strategies: promoting national, sub-regional and thematic forums and making sure that these spaces, initiated in a decentralised and autonomous way, are organised by national and sub-regional social and grassroots movements. Secondly, it would have been prudent to reiterate that emphasis was now being placed on promoting the participation of organisations of the African social movement in the World Social Forum through activities, alliances and a marked presence, and finally, encouraging alliances between components of the African social movement and international social movements, especially those in the south. Thirdly, we should also have been told that the African social forum activities being held in the context of Mumbai 2004 have resulted from a number of processes on the continent and scenarios had emerged after organising two Forums in Africa, that our context (distance, local priorities of the movements, multiplicity of agendas both at continental and international levels, poverty) compels us to define a more appropriate pace to link up with the global movement without competing with continental and regional priorities. Fourthly, the organising committee of the African Social Forum should have outlined how it had come to the conclusion that it was preferable for the global forum to serve as a space for the convergence of decentralised and autonomous initiatives rather than a repetition of continental events.

* Read the rest of this article by clicking on the link below. Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org
Africa in search of a deeper dialogue beyond Addis and Bamako

Reflections on Africa and the Mumbai 2004 World Social Forum

By Thomas DEVE*

Introduction
The African presence at the World Social Forum (WSF) in India remarkably
improved the continent's chances of becoming a leading and formidable bloc
in the global justice movement mobilising under the slogan "Another world is
possible".

Armed with two big banners "Africa is not for sale" and "solutions to
Africa's problems are in Africa" the African Social Forum (ASF), which is
the prime mobilizing entity for African participation in WSF, joined
thousands of other activists who thronged Mumbai to register their protests
against neo-liberalism and proudly proclaim that the World Social Forum is
not an organisation, not a united front platform, but "...an open meeting
place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of
proposals, free exchange of experiences and inter-linking for effective
action, by groups and movements of civil society that are opposed to
neo-liberalism and to domination of the world by capital and any form of
imperialism, and are committed to building a society centred on the human
person". (From the WSF Charter of Principles).

This must be viewed against the background that next to the WSF venue,
another group known as Mumbai Resistance (MR) was organising a parallel
forum in the Bhagat Singh veterinary college, and had announced
"...Critiques of the World Social Forum and its antiglobalisation conference
have taken an organisational form."

Calling for more militant resistance, as part of their strategy to sharpen
the anti-imperialist struggle worldwide, the group reduced WSF to a puppet
of the bourgeois state and big business, simply because its charter excludes
representatives of national liberation movements.

Most major roads to Nesco grounds, the venue of mainstream WSF activities
and all bridges in Goregoan were visibly endowed with MR graffiti and the
most appealing of these writings on the wall was "Debate alone cannot change
this world".

This expose was an interesting entry into Mumbai and will definitely affect
our debates in Africa on the future and role of the Social Forum.

Having been energised and nourished by anti-capitalist sentiments and
resolutely positioned to fight neo-liberalism, most popular forces and
progressive organisations under the auspices of the African Social Forum who
managed to come to Mumbai will have a lot to discuss and write on, given the
two tendencies they confronted in India.

But most importantly, they have to put in place concrete programmes of
action and instigate debate on what is required for Africa to bid for
hosting the World Social Forum in the near future regardless of the fact
that MR 2004 now caricatures the global forum as W$F.

Reviewing the Agenda
The challenges for Africa became clear during the African seminar which was
occasionally punctuated by heated debates and fireworks in which delegates
sought for a deeper dialogue beyond Addis and Bamako declarations.
The first of these challenges arose when Oupa Lehulere from South Africa's
Khanya College requested that the agenda be amended so that the meeting
concentrates on how Africa could turn its perspectives against
neo-liberalism into practical programmes of action to mobilize and build
movements on the ground.
The circulated agenda covered the following:
Overview and objectives of the African seminar by Taoufik Ben Abdallah.
1) NEPAD and the African Union (Mohau Pheko and Yash Tandon)
2) Cancun and beyond (Dot Keet)
3) Debt and International Financial Institutions' policies (Demba
Moussa Dembele)
4) The farming issue (Ibrahima Coulibaly)
5) Peace and conflicts (Bakary Fofana)
6) Culture (Aminata Traore)
7) The gender issue (Sara Longwe & Elizabeth Eilor)
8) Activities of ASF membership (overview of national and sub-regional
initiatives undertaken in 2003 or planned for 2004)
9) Seminar on the relationships between social movements in Africa,
Asia and Latin America with Samir Amin, Mohau Pheko, Aminata Traoré, Walden
Bello, Vandana Shiva and Roberto Bissio billed to be some of the speakers.
10) And finally, an exchange of views on "the African social movement
and the WSF" where WSF organising committee members from India and Brazil
would interact with the ASF.
Lehulere argued that this programme should create room for a special
discussion of exactly how Africa organises itself, its networks and give
each other support in-between the international meetings, World and African
Social Forum meetings.
Efforts to debate the issue in the 300-seater hall which was packed to
capacity were thwarted by trade unionist Hassan Sunmonu who argued that an
agenda presented before him provided the basis for approaching the Mumbai
seminar and any other issues people were raising should be restricted to an
"African" audience only, adding that preferably, such matters have to be
discussed on the African soil.
But some delegates were not satisfied with this response and indicated that
Mumbai had attracted a big number of Africans and no such opportunity was
available in the near future on the continent, an argument that forced some
Steering Committee members to caucus and establish if a venue could be found
in Mumbai for such a meeting.
Before this exercise was completed, George Dor from Jubilee South Africa,
sought clarification on the matter, but was ruled out of order by Sunmonu,
who in turn attracted the wrath of some delegates who felt that he was being
too harsh.
Arguing that a chair could not be ruled out of order by the public led to a
temporary disruption of the meeting's proceedings, as there was some
heckling and walkouts.
"If we cannot be heard here in an open forum, where else do you want us to
speak?" murmured some delegates.
One delegate from Kenya jumped to the podium and bawled out "African issues
cannot be discussed in Mumbai!!!"
His sentiment resonated with those of the chair and was not ruled out of
order despite the agreement that all issues to be raised from the floor were
now directed at the ongoing discussion on NEPAD and the African Union.
Mondli Hlatshwayo another delegate from South Africa who had been noted as a
contributor to the NEPAD debate by the chair never got round to speak,
leaving many wondering whether the chair was panicking over the enthusiasm
of South Africans to intervene.
Ironically, the lead resource persons, Mohau Pheko and Yash Tandon on the
NEPAD panel were from Southern Africa.
Their presentations and barrages on NEPAD not only exposed weaknesses of the
development paradigm the programme is rooted in, but also proceeded to state
what should be done.
Solutions offered and action they proposed, ranged from slowing down
Africa's integration into the global economy to reorienting economies of the
continent so that they satisfy basic needs of the people before placing
emphasis on linking economic growth to export performance.
The controversial NEPAD is closely associated with South African President
Thabo Mbeki.
"What is wrong with you South Africans?" quizzed one journalist from Kenya.
Efforts to influence the agenda of Mumbai had started well before getting to
India.
It has been learnt that Trevor Ngwane from South Africa had written to the
African Social Forum Secretariat suggesting that the Mumbai Africa seminar
considers some of the main issues that came about during the campaign
against the World Summit on Sustainable Development that was held in
Johannesburg, South Africa in August 2002.
In addition to his request, he endorsed the strategic proposals made in
Maputo, Mozambique binding the African Social Forum to hold a meeting that
could deliberate on some of the thorny issues related to mobilising Africa.
" We fully endorse the decision of the Maputo meeting (held in December
2003) that the ASF should, in addition to the seminar, have a meeting to
discuss organizational and programmatic issues, namely, the structure and
function of the ASF, the role of regions, the role of the Secretariat,
programmes to build and support social movements, etc.
"We suggest that this meeting is very important and should be
well-advertised to the relevant comrades and be given enough time to deal
with ASF matters. This is especially so in the light of the failure of the
annual ASF meeting to sit in 2004. We feel that it is very important to
discuss how we will practically build the struggle to defend the African
masses from neo-liberal attacks in between the international meetings we
attend," the letter noted.

A response from the Secretariat noted the concerns, but highlighted that it
was too late to make any amendments because this was an agenda that would be
reflected on the registered events and printed version of WSF programme.

Part of the note read, "Regarding the Seminar, as you know, the agenda was
discussed in Maputo. We ask speakers to focus on activities that took place
on the ground.
As for a discussion on the future of the ASF, it was decided in Maputo to
have a special meeting on it next April. I agree that these are important
issues that we should discuss."

It is interesting to note that the framework document for the Mumbai meeting
spells out clearly that the purpose of the African seminar was "to enable
African participants to express their opinions on issues of concern to the
continent and exchange their views and experiences. It also aims to make
African issues more visible to the media and other components of the world
movement."

The above pronouncement and call to Africa sounded fine before the "washing
of dirty linen in public" doctrine was invoked as a way of defending the
programme.

Inside the seminar, the presentations proceeded as outlined in the programme
and the African seminar was once again running as a "festival of good
intentions" which Outtara Diakalia, a delegate from Cote d' Ivoire, felt was
stuck in some routine discourse that seemed not to be changing.

"We seem to be having the same discourse. What happened to our action
programme and resolutions?" he noted.

If one constantly attends some of these meetings and is exposed to the same
speakers all the time, there is need to listen to them much more closely.

When something new comes out, one might miss it because you think you have
heard it all before.

As much as the presentations sounded like another round of Addis and Bamako
and even the 2003 African seminar in Porto Allegre, they recognised the new
issues and challenges coming out of the struggles versus neo-liberalism, the
latest triumph being the resistance in Cancun.

There were open calls to set up democratic institutions, challenge
dictatorships and most importantly, resist imperialist manipulation of
Africa's political leaderships through processes like the African Peer
Review mechanism in NEPAD.

For the latter intervention, South Africa was cited as being manipulated by
the British and Americans in its handling of the political crisis in
Zimbabwe.

Beyond the Issues
The second day of the African seminar proceeded without any incidents.

The seminar focussed peace and conflicts, culture and gender. There was not
enough time to deal with report backs which were deferred to day three.

In terms of developing correct and compelling analysis on global trends and
neo-liberalism, the ASF has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that it is
a powerhouse and has the resources that can be competently deployed to any
space in WSF.

The big challenge it has to confront relates to the leadership issues,
mandates and representation of its various entities. This becomes an urgent
matter when one considers the fact that it has been accepted that social
movements in their diversity should be mobilized with the view of making
them a significant player in the process of building "Another world."

The ASF must now demonstrate its willingness and capacity to mobilise mass,
people's and social organisations to articulate and work for vibrant
progressive political processes through nurturing worker, peasant, youth,
cultural, women's movements and dialogue about these ideas with people from
across the world.

This process has started and the Secretariat has something to boast of in
this respect, but it will always be confronted by representatives of social
movements who have openly voiced their disapproval of NGOs playing a leading
in the WSF process.

In the few instances that I have witnessed activists discussing this
question, one was left in no doubt that Taoufik Ben Abdallah who has offered
to house the Secretariat in Enda, Senegal will be subjected to sniper-type
attacks and plots until such a time that the ASF is decentralised to an
extent that he will no longer be the sole reference point for the
pan-African processes.

This explains why a plethora of documents and analysis on ASF will float
around and attract no response from the Secretariat because they will have
been read as consisting "personal attacks", a myth which we now seek to
debunk as we challenge each other to come out in the open and voice our
concerns without fear or favour.

Related to this, it is anticipated that the Secretariat will be mandated and
empowered to have enough personnel that can power communication,
systematically collect and organise material from various national forums,
disseminate alternative analysis, proposals and strategies of resistance to
neo-liberalism that have come out of the forums.

The above will be difficult to achieve if our emphasis is placed on fussing
and fighting with each other. We need to spend less time on agonising and
start to organise. This will be a major challenge to my compatriots in
Southern Africa who have remained outside the ASF process, but are always
present in the annual WSF.

Hosting WSF in Africa
Inspired by the presence of more than three hundred delegates in Mumbai,
brutally frank and explosive exchanges on Africa's position in the global
struggle, some members of the India organising committee and World Social
Forum International Council (IC) found it appropriate to declare their
readiness to support the continent in the event that its delegates seek to
bid for hosting the world event in the near future.

These commitments were made against the background that Mumbai, the venue
for WSF 2004, is a cradle of the Dalit (Untouchables) and left movement in
India growing out of the bustling streets of the city that have for long
provided a platform for democratic ideas, not withstanding the fact that the
same city has experienced attempts by fundamentalist parties to erode the
social fabric.

In the words of Brazilian activist, Candido Grzybowski, the world needs a
world social forum with an African face, guided by democratic processes and
free from governments and other forces that might seek to manipulate the
exercise.

Grzybowski had the opportunity to seat in a session where African delegates
were receiving reports on continental activities inspired by the spirit of
the Addis Ababa consensus document which is closely linked the Bamako
declarations, embodying the spirit of Africa's anti-globalisation activism
and foundations for launching a struggle versus neo-liberalism.

For a number of activists who have been closely associated with the world
and continental Forum processes, the issue of bidding should not be raised
within our ranks. They argue that our social movements have not developed
the requisite linkages and vibrancy that would match the energy often
associated with Porto Alegre and now Mumbai.

Some even fear that Africa's organisational weaknesses will be exposed and
cripple the growth of the process in Africa.

Entertaining these fears would have made sense before going to Mumbai, but
now it is too late because some social movements and anti-globalisation
activists see Africa as another bloc that can move and shake the imperial
forts now being spawned the world over.

Why?

The issue had been discussed in the mid-December 2003 Maputo meeting where
it was resolved that Profs.Edward Oyugi and Yash Tandon, Sara Longwe and
Taoufik Ben Abdallah initiate the discourse in Africa. While some felt that
it was too early to take firm positions on the matter, others retorted that
the continent must have some direction on how to tackle the subject in case
it is raised in Mumbai.

As an initial step to review Africa's capacity, the Secretariat advised that
it was working tirelessly to strengthen the continent's representation in
the IC. All present agreed with this approach and recommended that many
organisations as possible should familiarise themselves with the principles
guiding the IC and participate in its meetings so that Africa's voice is
strengthened.

It was noted that while a number of people in the ASF steering committee
were expected to serve in the IC, many had not attended the organ's planning
meetings consistently.

Recognising this weakness, the Secretariat decided to develop south-south
linkages whose labour bore fruits when Candido Grzybowski decided to jostle
Africa into the hosting bid.

The same concern was addressed in Maputo with specific reference to Africa's
social movements representation in the European Social Forum for example.

It was anticipated that further dialogue on this issue was going to be held
in Mumbai and iron out some of the problems the Secretariat had identified.

Missing links in the African Seminar

In the presentation, "Overview and objectives of the African seminar",
Taoufik Ben Abdallah rushed through his notes and missed the opportunity to
present on behalf of the Secretariat "The state of the African Social Forum"
and why it was not possible to hold a continental meeting as has been the
case during the last two preparations for WSF.

The information was there. Some of the arguments were put in the document
outlining the logic of the African seminar in Mumbai. In practical terms,
this was what formed the basis for organising the seminar on the third day
and explains to a large extent why the issues that were thrown out on the
first day found their way back.

Unfortunately for day one of the African seminar, most of the "matters
arising" were often sneaked into panel discussions as either "points of
order" or "process issues". In the end, it appeared like most session chairs
did not have the capacity to manage the divergences because they resorted to
technicalities to dismiss "dissenting voices" when in fact this was a well
orchestrated political programme as was demonstrated on day three.

This gave an initial impression that ASF was heavily divided and a certain
group of people were in Mumbai to create chaos and confusion.

Subsequently, those who felt they were being shut out, sought to organise
politically against the technical knockouts resulting in a more spirited
engagement on day three.

Logistical challenges and space for Africa

Other important things to note at this stage were the logistical challenges
encountered by the ASF Secretariat in India.

Despite the fact that there was an advance party in Mumbai to deal with
logistics, the hosts left some ends too loose to the extent that at the last
minute, Taoufik Ben Abdallah found himself running round like a headless
chicken in his efforts to sort out issues like equipment for simultaneous
translation which the organisers had promised would be put in place at the
earmarked venues.

Absence of translation facilities disrupted the set time schedules and gave
the impression that time management was poor.

On two occasions, proceedings had to stop abruptly because the ASF had
overshoot its time limit and other groups were demanding to use the same
venue.

At the media centre where the Secretariat had secured space to house the
editorial team that produced Flamme d' Afrique, the ASF daily newspaper,
everything was again loaded onto Taoufik's shoulders and all efforts to
offload some of these responsibilities proved futile as the organisers
insisted that they needed his physical presence in order for some of the
team's requests to be met.

In future, Africa should just secure its own space and make sure that all
facilities are specified and secured well in advance to suit their
requirements.

Similar challenges were encountered in Brazil in 2002 where proceedings took
longer when we failed to secure simultaneous translation for the three
working languages, English, French and Portuguese.

The Action Aid team from Africa had warned us in December during the Maputo
strategic planning meeting and insisted that Africa must have its own tent
and guaranteed spaces.

And even in Mumbai, they were still asking, " where is the Africa solidarity
tent?"

But now with the benefit of hindsight, one does not hesitate to recommend
that in future, we must secure our own space for the duration of the Forum
in addition to the display stand, which by the way served as a very
important reference point for Africa in Mumbai.

What should have been done?
Since we had many people from Africa attending WSF for the first time in
Mumbai who were not sponsored by ASF, it would have been prudent to give
them a brief history and organisational structure of the ASF on the first
day of the seminar.

And for those who were not privileged enough to have a continental picture
of ASF activities but were involved since Bamako or Addis, early
interventions in this area would have helped those present to appreciate the
context in which one section of the Forum was demanding a change in the
programme and requesting that the meeting deals with ways of enhancing
accountability on the part of the Secretariat and the Steering Committee.

These are not new issues in the history of the Forum.

If we look back to the July 2002 Report of the Steering Committee of the
African Social Forum meeting held in Port Shepstone, South Africa, some of
these issues were raised and an action-oriented programming guideline was
spelt out.

The meeting spelt out criteria and governance issues the ASF is supposed to
deal with and how the thematic representatives are expected to feed back to
their respective constituencies.

In the hosting of the pan African meeting before going to any World Social
Forum, several criteria were outlined for the selection of the organising
country and these were stated as:
- "The existence of an organised and dynamic local civil society
- Possibilities for the African Social Forum to interact with the
local social movement and strengthen it.
- The existence of good quality logistic conditions
- Access facility by air and affordable transport costs
- And favourable political context that will facilitate, in
particular, the organisation of peaceful public events."

On financing the Forum and participating in World Social Forum: the
Secretariat will continue to deploy efforts to mobilise the resources
necessary for the organisation of the African Social Forum and support
participation to the World Social Forum. However, sub-regional and thematic
representatives should take the responsibility of mobilising most of the
funds required for that purpose.

Those serving in the organising committee should report on the state of
mobilisation and use of funds before rank and file members, their
organisation and their financial partners. They should also provide the same
information to the Committee.

On organisation of the Forum, it was reiterated that this should be highly
decentralised at the level of sub-regions and networks. The sub-regional and
thematic heads within the Committee should take their responsibility in the
organisation of the next Forum. At the same time, the local social movement
should be largely associated with the various preparatory phases.

On mobilising participants to the Forum, this should be done on the basis of
an enhanced balance between actors of social movements, sub-regions, and the
various thematic networks.

The parameters spelt out here set the foundation for the positions that
sealed the 2003 Addis Ababa consensus document where it is acknowledged,
"the Charter of Principles and Values ...will be the philosophical and moral
basis of our movement. It (The Addis Forum) has also proposed a number of
organisational mechanisms with the view to building a more democratic
African social movement."

It is on the basis of these vague "organisational mechanisms" that the
Southern African Social Forum almost failed to resolve how to deal with the
"delinquent" Addis Ababa six who were nominated to serve on the continental
steering committee as the engine of mobilising the region.

The Addis meeting deliberated on a document entitled "African Social Forum -
draft operational framework" which was meant to stimulate broad discussions
on the frequency of the Forum, governance through a regional committee,
which in turn would be serviced by an organising committee backed by a
Secretariat.

Among other things, it was proposed that the African Social Forum would
consist of:
-Conferences: to be organised by ASF structures
-Thematic workshops and seminars: to be organised by stakeholders
-Cultural events
-Events for specific groups: e.g. youth, women etc.

It would be greatly appreciated if the Secretariat could circulate a full
report from Addis or at least portions of it relating to this discussion
because this will help us root our post-Mumbai Africa-focussed discussions
to articulate what we deem constitutes "organisational mechanisms" referred
to in the Addis Ababa declaration.

Unfinished Debates
It should be recalled that in 2003, Mondli Hlatshwayo circulated his
reflections on ASF in a piece entitled "The African Social Forum-A tale of
two forces" wherein he concluded that:
"...The ASF has two distinct forces. There are those forces that are radical
in character. These forces are largely from Southern Africa. They have
attracted very few individuals and organizations in Kenya and Ethiopia. It
has to be said that these progressive forces were the minority in the ASF.

"Therefore there is a need to strengthen these forces in other regions of
Africa particularly in Francophone countries. The other forces are led by
NGOs that are not articulating the interests of the toiling masses. These
forces were in the majority in the ASF and they often used undemocratic
maneuvers to influence the political direction of the ASF. They want to
orientate the ASF towards the AU and other government type structures."

Guess who dared to challenge this?

It was Oupa Lehulere.

And it is instructive to note that he is the one who was perceived to be
"pelting" Taoufik Ben Abdallah in Mumbai and very few people knew that he
had issues with the ASF Secretariat arising from the way the Addis discourse
was handled.

He had sounded the warning shots long back, but unfortunately, his
sentiments were wished away and it never occurred to many that he would live
to resume the dialogue.

Oupa had this to say early last year,


"Let us not label each other and call each other names. Our mission is
clear. It is for the development of African peoples. There are many ways of
doing that and so there will always be people from different perspectives.

"To believe that the African Social Forum will be full of grassroots people,
only anti-globalization people, only anti-capitalists is to misunderstand
the complexity of Africa. So, Let us focus on ideas and how we can move the
ideas forward. Yes, of course it is a tale of two forces. Who will win and
why? Let us sharpen the discussions from each side and move towards a
consensus as in the Calabash African style and not in the roman winner take
all!
Let us plan well for the next regional ASF focusing on ideas, issues and
consensus on discussions between the different forces (or whatever you want
to call them)."

It is clear that he and other like-minded activists would be aggrieved
parties if Africans fail to hold the ASF as this is the Forum where they had
mobilized their forces to use as a battle ground for winning hearts and
minds around political choices and action they are articulating.

As Southern Africans prepared for the Zambia-hosted regional Social Forum
which was subsequently held in November 2003, they found themselves
confronting the politics of organizing the ASF and indirectly reviving the
unfinished business from ASF 2003.

Davie Malungisa from the Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development
cautioned stakeholders to plan within the context of WSF principles and
noted what he thought was wrong with ASF.

"We need to give due attention to the issue of defining the agenda. It is my
belief that the Zambian team only constitute the hosting country and there
is need for their decisions to be take in the context of policy definition
through the team that was chosen in Addis and ensure that we are not
starting an entirely new process divorced from the World and Africa Social
Forums. ...I also hope that the Southern Africa Social Forum is not a
proposal about hosting a Conference, like what the Africa Social Forum has
been doing in the past two years. Let's have a real PEOPLE-BASED regional
Social Forum that might one day form the basis of a World Social Forum
hosting."

He argued further that "The Forum, of necessity, must be openly planned for
and avoid the cheap and narrow politicking that we are seeing at the Africa
Social Forum; we need a sound process that will address our agenda for the
NEPAD/AU debate and how we inform and engage our solidarity partners on the
way forward. The counting that we need to do is; how many thousands will
attend the Forum; mass mobilization, creativity and ideological clarity must
define the nature of our forum and its uniqueness will be defined by how we
make it a truly Southern Africa Social Forum with some clear messages to the
SADC leaders and tell them that never again are we going to sleep whilst
they peer review each other and legitimizing human butchery in the region. I
will throw in some issues and contradictions in the movement. Solidarity,
mobilization and principles is our only way forward. Thanks to Thomas and
EPP for introducing this debate, it is better to debate and fail to resolve
an issue than resolving an issue without debate; we leave the latter to
Mafia and Bushmasters.

"Comrades, let us be brutally honest to offer clear class issues so that we
polish contentious points, avoid experimenting while the people we purport
to represent are dying from preventable diseases!" concluded Malungisa.

These are very tough and mean words, but ironically coming from people and
forces that were to drive serious processes that saw Southern Africa
becoming the only region which hosted a regional forum in Africa. It is also
interesting to note that their forum broadly identified the Addis Ababa
recommended governance structures as inadequate when it comes to responding
to the need to build another Africa within another world order. Hence the
deviation from "Another Africa is possible" to "This is our time. Another
Africa is in the making!!! in their Forum communiqué.

Back to the African Seminar

Reports on the final day of the African seminar in Mumbai were meant to
reflect on social forum experiences of Southern Africa, Niger, Morocco,
Cameroon, Zimbabwe, Guinea Conakry, Kenya, Mozambique, Mauritius, Senegal,
Sudan and Egypt.

The session was intended to get a sense of how Africa was organising its
social forces, relating with the African Social Forum Secretariat processes,
mobilisation strategies, and framework of ideas versus those in the World
Social Forum charter.

These issues were all going to dovetail into matters related to
organisational space and lessons learnt.

Not everybody managed to present.

Realising that time was not on his side, the chair Prof. Edward Oyugi from
Kenya, sought guidance from the floor on how best the programme could be
changed in order to accommodate guest speakers from India and Brazil who
could not stay for long as they had commitments elsewhere.

The good intention backfired.

Others wanted all reports to be made first while others felt that a pattern
had emerged from earlier interventions and any other reporting was not going
to change the issues, a situation that created chaos.

Finally, the chair managed to create space for the guests to speak.

It was at this point that Grzybowski dropped the bombshell for Africa "Are
you ready to host the WSF in 2006?"

After his departure, the subsequent debate on process issues pitted the
"South African voice" and their allies against a visibly defined West
Africa, but predominantly Francophone bloc.

They accused the Secretariat of being undemocratic and alleged that its
programme for Mumbai had veered from the positions and recommendations
developed during a consultative process that was held during December in
Maputo, Mozambique.

An intervention on the Maputo issues by Thomas Deve helped chart a way
forward as he noted that the Maputo process had deliberated on strengthening
the African Social Forum and recommended that a post-Mumbai meeting be held
specifically for the steering committee, strategic partners and any other
stakeholder in the forum process. This is where issues of ASF frequency,
Secretariat and other processes were to be scrutinized.

Dubbed the Africa-wide consultation meeting, the proceedings in Maputo
covered "The African Social Forum in the context of Mumbai", Country and
Regional Social Forum Reports (Mozambique, Southern Africa, East Africa,
West Africa, North Africa, Central Africa),
"Challenges of organising social movements, CSOs and social mobilisation
within the African Social Forum", review of the Bamako Declaration by
Charles Mutasa, Addis Ababa Consensus Document by Trevor Ngwane and "Life
after Cancun" with special reference to issues arising from the Africa Trade
Network 6th Annual Review and Strategy meeting held in Accra, Ghana; Views
from India by Pik Murthy,
"Collaborative Framework for African CSOs, Social Movements and cooperating
partners in Mumbai" and finally, Logistics for the World Social Forum.

Some semblance of order emerged when it was announced that the ASF
Secretariat will organise a special meeting in Africa to address these
issues some time in April. On a related note, a Mozambique-based association
of farmers, UNAC offered to host a southern-Africa review meeting to deal
with the same issues in early March.

Whither Africa?
The African Social Forum has grown in stature and can now meet IC criteria
required for an entity to be seriously considered to play a leading role in
the convening of the annual global meeting that parallels the Davos World
Economic Forum.

In my opinion, the main one was the ASF role in strengthening and mobilising
social movements in Africa to participate in WSF as part of the process
leading to consolidation of the world social movement.

Its processes saw the building of an African space for the formulation of
concerted alternatives to neo-liberal globalisation, based on a diagnosis of
the latter's social, economic and political effects.

The Forum helped define social, economic and political reconstruction
strategies, including a redefinition of the role of the State, the market
and citizens' organisations.

Armed with two basic documents crafted in Bamako (Mali) in 2002, and Addis
Ababa (Ethiopia) in 2003, those pursuing anti-capitalist struggles within
the framework of WSF will acknowledge that ASF has opened new avenues to
define citizen control procedures to ensure that political change promotes
the expression and implementation of alternative, credible and viable
responses to corporate-led globalisation.

The Mumbai Africa meeting failed to consolidate this foundation and found
itself bogged down in process issues that should have been addressed before
all proceedings. In my reading of the programme, some of the concerns should
have been captured in the first session. We would have been briefed of
developments in the IC and what issues Africa was chasing in the context of
Mumbai.

This would have been the moment to emphasise that after Addis, the ASF
recommendations, placed emphasis on the following working themes and
strategies: promoting national, sub-regional and thematic forums and making
sure that these spaces, initiated in a decentralised and autonomous way, are
organised by national and sub-regional social and grassroots movements.

Secondly, it would have been prudent to reiterate that emphasis was now
being placed on promoting the participation of organisations of the African
social movement in the World Social Forum through activities, alliances and
a marked presence, and finally, encouraging alliances between components of
the African social movement and international social movements, especially
those in the south.

Thirdly, we should also have been told that the African social forum
activities being held in the context of Mumbai 2004 have resulted from a
number of processes on the continent and scenarios had emerged after
organising two Forums in Africa, that our context (distance, local
priorities of the movements, multiplicity of agendas both at continental and
international levels, poverty) compels us to define a more appropriate pace
to link up with the global movement without competing with continental and
regional priorities.

Fourthly, the organising committee of the African Social Forum should have
outlined how it had come to the conclusion that it was preferable for the
global forum to serve as a space for the convergence of decentralised and
autonomous initiatives rather than a repetition of continental events.

Good arguments existed to back their decision for not holding the annual
meeting, but were not communicated to the rank and file, raising serious
questions about how members of the Steering Committee relate with their
various constituencies in terms of sharing information and finalising
strategies.

While it makes sense to argue that meeting at the global forum in Mumbai
minus the continental meeting would meet the goal of strengthening national
forums and reflect better the wealth of the social movements of the
continent, the Secretariat should have anticipated that others might
interpret that to mean that governance structures of ASF must be reviewed to
establish whether they were still relevant for the above task.

For those who did not read or see the Secretariat position with regard to
mobilising for India, it was outlined that: "Like the 2002 and 2003
editions, African Social Forum activities in Mumbai are intended to
consolidate the African expression in the World Forum and give greater
visibility to African organisations and movements."

Further, it was hoped that Mumbai will see African visions and perceptions
of another world being integrated in discussions on alternatives to
neo-liberalism and this also entailed strengthening alliances built with
Brazilians, Latin-American movements and most importantly, give Africa an
opportunity to express solidarity with the Asian people and movements in
their struggle against neo-liberalism.

As the Mumbai WSF demonstrated, these alliances are now essential since the
international context is characterised by the revival of south-south
alliances within the framework of international trade talks for example, and
by a situation in which multi-lateralism is being questioned.

An interesting development worth noting about Mumbai, was the relatively
large presence and role of Africans who were not mobilised under the ASF.
Most of them found politics of how the African Social Forum is being
organised more exciting than what issues Africa sought to mainstream in WSF.

The WSF organised panels recognised the role ASF has played in the fight to
rebuild another world and actively stalling neo-liberal ascendancy.
Literally, every African participating in the WSF panels is closely
associated with the ASF. The big challenge for such comrades, who are now
seen as Africa's ambassadors, is to translate that individual recognition
into organic links with mass movements that are active on the ground.

This will help us shape the discourse on the role of intellectuals, NGOS and
social movements and perhaps reduce the tension arising from fears that some
cooperating partners are now hijacking WSF through sponsoring our
ambassadors and placing less emphasis on social movements who in most cases
are not well structured to secure adequate funding from cooperating partners
or NGOs for that matter.

Finally, in our search for consolidating and entrenching democracy in the
African Social Forum, we must make sure that the latter's operations conform
with the realistic set of procedures that guide for example, the IC whose
work is now organised around six commissions that deal with strategies,
content, methodology, expansion, communication and finances respectively. It
has been recognised that as the WSF process expands, this opens new
opportunities and creates new challenges, which require changes in the
linkages and planning of activities. The ASF should embrace new ways of
organising and adopt a framework that is necessary to guarantee that it
operates and fulfils its responsibility as an open space.
End
(2.2.2004)

*Thomas Deve (Thomas@mwengo.org.zw) coordinates the Economic Policy Project
at MWENGO(www.mwengo.org), an organisation whose mission is to nurture a
community of values by strengthening and mobilising African human resources
in support of organisations fighting for social justice.

More...

WSF: Putting the ASF in order

Charles Mutasa

2004-02-05

The World Social Forum is one of the most significant civil and political initiatives of the past several decades. Since the first World Social Forum (WSF) was held in Porto Alegre in January 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil, as a counterpoint to the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, its call for ‘Another World is Possible!’ has been echoing as an alternative to challenge the neoliberal order. This year’s gathering in Mumbai, India, between 16-21 January was the fourth edition.

Official statistics estimate that about 80 thousand people represented by 2 660 organisations from 132 countries participated. Others put the number of participants at 150 000. The Mumbai gathering was different from the previous WSF meetings. First, Mumbai as a venue was no place to romanticize about poverty, unlike Porto Alegre, where poverty can be hidden. Despite the fact that it is India’s financial capital, two-thirds of Mumbai's people live in indescribably dirty shantytowns, where there are no water, taps or toilets in most homes. Taking a walk through Mumbai, one could not afford to ignore the signs of a sick economy.

Secondly, bringing the WSF to India afforded an opportunity for most poor Asians who could not in the past meet the cost of flying and living in the rather posh Brazilian city of Porto Alegre to have a feel of what happens at such world jamborees. One can safely say the majority of those who attended were from India and its neighbouring countries. Besides the usually refined criticism about the lack of transparency and democracy in the World Trade Organisation, International Monetary Fund and World Bank that characterizes these meetings, this time the majority, mostly Asian delegates, came, spoke, sung, danced, marched and denounced problems associated with the caste system, war, cultural imperialism, deep social and economic injustices and capitalism. They condemned the “Bushes and Blairs” of this world for the allied forces’ presence in Iraq, hailed socialism/communism and condoned Dalitism, as well as denounced the apartheid regime of Israel. Issues about dwelling rights and liveable cities, the caste system and “untouchable” Indians, the unsustainable situation of debt in poor countries of the world, and the coercive use of force by governments, multinational corporations and international financial institutions dominated the discussions.

The third difference was the African Social Forum (ASF) scenario. Of prime importance, Africans made a break-through in terms of their numbers at the WSF. Compared to the past three gatherings I attended, the Mumbai edition recorded the highest attendance of African civil society activists in the history of the WSF. I think around 350 to 400 Africans residing and working in Africa were in Mumbai. This was a big enough group to put the continent’s problems across. The ASF under the leadership of its secretariat in Senegal produced a daily paper, Africa Aflame, that captured and took into consideration Africa’s uniqueness and issues.

* Read the rest of this article by clicking on the link below. Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org
Putting the ASF in order
By Charles Mutasa
The World Social Forum is one of the most significant civil and political initiatives of the past several decades. Since the first World Social Forum (WSF) was held in Porto Alegre in January 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil, as a counterpoint to the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, its call for ‘Another World is Possible!’ has been echoing as an alternative to challenge the neoliberal order. This year’s gathering in Mumbai, India, between 16-21 January was the fourth edition.

Official statistics estimate that about 80 thousand people represented by 2 660 organisations from 132 countries participated. Others put the number of participants at 150 000. The Mumbai gathering was different from the previous WSF meetings. First, Mumbai as a venue was no place to romanticize about poverty, unlike Porto Alegre, where poverty can be hidden. Despite the fact that it is India’s financial capital, two-thirds of Mumbai's people live in indescribably dirty shantytowns, where there are no water, taps or toilets in most homes. Taking a walk through Mumbai, one could not afford to ignore the signs of a sick economy.

Secondly, bringing the WSF to India afforded an opportunity for most poor Asians who could not in the past meet the cost of flying and living in the rather posh Brazilian city of Porto Alegre to have a feel of what happens at such world jamborees. One can safely say the majority of those who attended were from India and its neighbouring countries. Besides the usually refined criticism about the lack of transparency and democracy in the World Trade Organisation, International Monetary Fund and World Bank that characterizes these meetings, this time the majority, mostly Asian delegates, came, spoke, sung, danced, marched and denounced problems associated with the caste system, war, cultural imperialism, deep social and economic injustices and capitalism. They condemned the “Bushes and Blairs” of this world for the allied forces’ presence in Iraq, hailed socialism/communism and condoned Dalitism, as well as denounced the apartheid regime of Israel. Issues about dwelling rights and liveable cities, the caste system and “untouchable” Indians, the unsustainable situation of debt in poor countries of the world, and the coercive use of force by governments, multinational corporations and international financial institutions dominated the discussions.

The third difference was the African Social Forum (ASF) scenario. Of prime importance, Africans made a break-through in terms of their numbers at the WSF. Compared to the past three gatherings I attended, the Mumbai edition recorded the highest attendance of African civil society activists in the history of the WSF. I think around 350 to 400 Africans residing and working in Africa were in Mumbai. This was a big enough group to put the continent’s problems across. The ASF under the leadership of its secretariat in Senegal produced a daily paper, Africa Aflame, that captured and took into consideration Africa’s uniqueness and issues.

The heavy presence of Africans at the WSF in Mumbai was also taken by others to be a time to put the ASF house in order, with a feeling that greater democratisation of the ASF secretariat was needed. What made issues tense for the ASF camp was not the lack of brilliant and contemporary issues to talk about. It was the mere absence of good organisation and recognition of various talents among colleagues. The failure by the secretariat based in Senegal to host a regional ASF meeting prior to Mumbai was in itself a blunder as it left the camp disorganised and exposed the lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the secretariat and the non-functioning of a Steering Committee supposed to check on the secretariat. Although the secretariat managed to send some delegates to Mumbai, there was no transparent and accountable means of selecting the delegates. The workshop speakers have been the same since the first meeting in Bamako, thrice in Porto Alegre and once in Addis Abba.

What was and is still mind-boggling is the pessimism among colleagues that Africans cannot host the WSF in 2006. This of course emanates from some quarters where people feel that there are more cracks within the African camp than necessary. The ASF Steering Committee has also not been very active in mobilising regional and national meetings in the continent, which need to become popularised.

Needless to say that the ASF needs to have its priorities right and needs a more legitimate leadership. There is a lot of opportunity for social movements to push for political and economic changes in Africa that many of us believe will not come on a silver plate. Whoever thinks that he has Africa at heart in the ASF must lead by ensuring that national forums and regional forums are the bases upon which the voice of the voiceless is heard.

* Charles Mutasa is a Research & Policy Analyst with AFRODAD, a research lobby and advocacy regional organisation seeking to secure positive policy changes to redress Africa's Debt and development crisis. Mutasa attended the WSF as a ASF delegate and is a facilitator of the Southern Africa Social Forum(SASF).

More...

Exemplary Advocacy

Rex Chapota, Institute for Advocacy on Children and Youth Affairs (IACYA), Malawi

2004-02-05

This generation has seen a mushrooming of the so called ‘Good Will Ambassadors and Advocates’ on issues of both national and international concern. These people have been people of high standing as regards their offices like Presidents, Ministers, Members of Parliament and indeed are a sort of celebrity.

Malawi has also witnessed this trend and recently UNICEF-Malawi office accorded the current ‘Miss Malawi’ and our great musician from ‘Zembani Band’ to be their advocates for this good cause: a fight against HIV/AIDS to encourage behaviour change among youth.

What is of concern to me is that most, if not all, times these so called celebrities and top officials have ‘good rhetoric babblings’ on the issues BUT needless to say that they do not practice what they preach. If we talk about behaviour change amongst youth it is not just a song but a life that those who are on the platform have to start living like that. Remember people see. Let the youth not be taken for granted!

This has not only affected the HIV/AIDS cause, but even issues of child labour. We hear advocates calling for a halt in employing under aged children on a job, but their estates are full of the same.

The message is let us be exemplary in our advocacy attempts: Advocacy without action is a noise of an empty tin.

Helpful contribution for writers

Mike Butscher, Director, Sierra Leone PEN Centre

2004-02-05

We would like to receive regular editions of your respectable news bulletin. We are a writer’s association and believe your publication will be an invaluable collection to our writers, who include journalists. Please keep us informed also about coming events relating to journalism, development conferences and everything worthy.

Fatal Indifference: The G8, Africa and Global Health

Ronald Labonte and Ted Schrecker; David Sanders and Wilma Meeus

2004-02-05

http://www.spheru.ca/PDF%20Files/Fatal%20Indifference%20flyer1.pdf

The G8 (the United States, England, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Russia, the European Union, and Canada) represents the major political driver of contemporary globalization. It is also the most powerful political force behind the multilateral institutions that are shaping global economic practice and governance. The aid, trade, and investment policies and practices of G8 member nations largely shape the development possibilities of poorer countries around the world. This book provides a “report card” of commitments over the past three G8 summits (1999, 2000, and 2001) with a preliminary assessment of the most recent 2002 summit in Kananaskis, Canada. It presents findings from the G8 Research Centre at the University of Toronto (Canada), which has been tracking compliance on G8 commitments for a number of years. Based on research funded by IDRC, the book extends these assessments of compliance to an examination of how adequate G8 commitments are to global development needs.

Kwani? appeal for book donations

2004-02-05

We at Kwani? kindly request you to donate children's books, particularly by African writers, to the libraries in Mathare North and Eastleigh, run by MYSA (Mathare North Youth Association). Mrs. Anne Moore (bobmoore@africaonline.co.ke) is a librarian and has worked very hard to get these libraries organised. The official opening of the Mathare North MYSA Library will be on Sat 27th Feb and will be presided over by Ms Beverly Naidoo, (beverley.naidoo@btinternet.com), a children's author from the UK, and Yvonne Adhiambo, Winner of the Caine Prize for African Writing, 2003 (www.kwani.org).
Dear Friends,

We at Kwani? kindly request you to donate children's books, particularly by African writers, to the libraries in Mathare North and Eastleigh, run by MYSA (Mathare North Youth Association). Mrs. Anne Moore (bobmoore@africaonline.co.ke) is a librarian and has worked very hard to get these libraries organised.

The official opening of the Mathare North MYSA Library will be on Sat 27th Feb and will be presided over by Ms Beverly Naidoo, (beverley.naidoo@btinternet.com), a children's author from the UK, and Yvonne Adhiambo, Winner of the Caine Prize for African Writing, 2003 (www.kwani.org).

Kwani? visited this library on Wed 17th Dec 2003. We did give them a few of our books (Kwani? and Discovering Home), but felt that they needed books meant for younger children as well. The children's ages range from 3 years to young adults. More importantly, we gave them some pencils and notebooks to write a story on our visit...and I am proud to report that we have some award winning potential writers out there! We are now planning a visit to the Eastleigh library on Sat Feb
7th, so bring on the (literary) goodies.

We will gladly receive your donations at our offices (see address below), but feel free to get in touch with Anne Moore directly for more information on this.

June Wanjiru Marketing Manager Kwani Trust Email: info@kwani.org http://www.kwani.org Phone: +254 20 316719 Cell: +254 733 526358 / +254 721 934807 Rm 9A, 2nd Floor Queensway House Kaunda Street P. O. Box 75240 Nairobi 0200

More...

New book highlights the plight of more than a million Ugandans

2004-02-05

http://www.irinnews.org/webspecials/northernuganda/default.asp

Michael, aged 25, was abducted by Lord's Resistance Army rebels in northern Uganda. His captors beat him on the head with rifle-butts when he was no longer able to carry their loot and left him for dead. Government soldiers found him a week later. "Termites had started eating me alive," he recalls. "They had begun building an anthill on my body." Michael's is one of many personal testimonies published in "When the sun sets, we start to worry...", a book launched by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in conjunction with its Integrated Regional Information Networks.

Poets’ diaries:

Julius Chingono

2004-02-05

http://www.kubatana.net/html/archive/poetpr/031211jc.asp?sector=POETPR

"A small blasting job is required in Bluff Hill, fix and supply: $4 million. I try to get hold of the client, Mrs Shambare, over the phone for a quotation. I spend two hours in the office. Waiting can be trying. I chat with the receptionist. Mr Mukamba, the engineer for CPG, comes to inform me that he can only manage to buy explosives next week. I walk out resignedly." Zimbabwean poet Julius Chingono works as a rock-blasting contractor in daily life to support his family. He is also a Mufundisi – pastor – in the Tsitsi dzaMwari Apostolic Church. This posting on the website of Kubatana.net reproduces the poet's diaries, which give a fascinating insight into life in Zimbabwe.

Review of African political economy

Volume 30 Number 98/December 2003

2004-02-05

http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk

This issue contains:
* Zimbabwe out in the cold? by Ray Bush;
* Military corruption & Ugandan politics since the late 1990s by Roger Tangri, Andrew M Mwenda;
* The Bush administration & African oil: the security implications of US energy policy by Daniel Volman;
* Briefings Liberia: an analysis of post-Taylor politics by Thomas Jaye.

Africa/Global: Anti-Aids measures 'fail women'

2004-02-05

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1137435,00.html

Efforts to fight the HIV/Aids epidemic are failing because they are not reaching women and girls, who are most affected in the poorest countries, according to Peter Piot, Executive Director of the United Nations Aids Programme. Dr Piot was speaking at the launch of a new body called the Global Coalition on Women and Aids, which aims to take up the cause of women in Africa and Asia who do not have status or economic power, and are so subordinate to their man that they cannot negotiate even the use of a condom within marriage.

Africa: More African women being abducted

2004-02-05

http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/2004/02/01/news/news08.asp

The abduction of women and children in African military conflicts is on the rise, according to a United Nations report released last week. "Young girls are being taken hostage and abducted for marriage to military commanders and long-haul truck drivers," said the Economic Commission for Africa , a UN body based in Ethiopia .

Africa: New Report Documents Vast Benefits of Investing in Sexual and Reproductive Health Care

2004-02-05

http://www.planetwire.org/details/4513

Gaps in sexual and reproductive health care account for nearly one-fifth of the worldwide burden of illness and premature death, and one-third of the illness and death among women of reproductive age. These gaps could be closed and millions of lives saved with highly cost-effective investments, according to Adding It Up: The Benefits of Investing in Sexual and Reproductive Health Care, a new report released by The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) and UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund. Policy makers, governments and donor agencies have vastly undervalued the diverse returns - economic and social as well as in health - such investments would bring, the report stresses. It calls for improvements in reproductive and sexual health essential to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals set by world leaders in 2000.

Ethiopia: Fistula makes Social Outcasts of Child Brides

2004-02-05

http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=22242

Meseret, from the Lalibela district in northern Ethiopia, was only 13 when she became pregnant. Married at 12, her underdeveloped body was not ready for the stress of giving birth. After six days of gruelling labour her child was finally born, but it was dead. As a result of the long labour, Meseret suffered crippling injuries.

Ghana: Women Call For Stiffer Female Circumcision Laws

2004-02-05

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=39247&SelectRegion=West_Africa&SelectCountry=GHANA

Ghanaian women's rights groups have called for stronger laws against female genital mutilation (FGM) following two landmark rulings in northern Ghana against the traditional practice.

Horn of Africa: Stop violence campaign to be launched

2004-02-05

Representatives of women’s organisations from Djibouti, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia, met in Djibouti from 22 to 26 January to develop plans for a “Stop Violence against Women” campaign. The workshop, funded by Novib and attended by representatives from Oxfam GB and Amnesty International, provided training to the participants on campaigning. Regional and national plans focusing on different issues related to the main campaign, such as female genital mutilation (FGM), discriminatory laws, conflict-related violence against women and abduction of women and girls, were developed during the workshop and activities will start in February. Amnesty International is launching a global campaign on the same subject on 5 March in New York. The Somali campaign, coordinated by three women networks (COGWO, NAGAD and WAWA), will focus on FGM and be launched on 8 March this year. The activities will include research, a launching event, public awareness and media activities and education, among others. This information comes from the Novib weekly situation report on the Somalia National Reconciliation Conference in Kenya.
NOVIB SOMALIA
SOMALIA NATIONAL RECONCILIATION CONFERENCE
MBAGATHI, KENYA
Supported by:

EC Somalia Unit n (o) vib
Oxfam Netherlands
_____________________________________________________________

Weekly Sitrep. 48 (Covering from 24th to 30th January, 2004)


Contents: Political developments, Security,
IGAD and the International Community, Civil Society,
Core groups and Issues for discussion.

Prepared by: Khalif Hassan Ahmed
Information and Documentation officer


Priority: External

Addressees: Novib, EC Somalia Unit, Local and
International Partners, Media Houses,
Websites, Core groups in Somalia and
Diaspora


Means: By Email

Highlights
· Conference progress and political differences
· Somali Leaders commitment to comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement
· UN condemns abduction of a Staff Member
· Annan appoints monitors for Somali Arms Embargo
· Increased level of involvement garners an agreement
· Kenyan MP’s visit venue of Somali Leaders consultation
· Annan welcomes the Somali Leaders agreement
· British MPs meet Somali groups at the talks
· UNHCR calls for increased support for Somalia
· Representatives of women’s organizations in the region meet in Djibouti

Political Developments
Conference progress
The harmonized position on the charter agreed upon by the Somali leaders was formalised in a ceremony held at State House in Nairobi on January 29 and witnessed by the Kenyan President, H.E Mwai Kibaki. The Kenyan Foreign Minister, the IGAD Facilitation Committee and the IGAD Partners Forum (IPF) held intense consultations with the Somali groups to develop this harmonized position. One of the major issues of contention during these consultations was the inclusion of the National Salvation Council in Article 30 of the harmonized document. The ceremony held at the State House was largely a symbolic gesture and 8 of the 39 Somali leaders signed the text and included Mohamed Abdi Yussuf (TNG prime minister), Abdullahi Yussuf Ahmed (Puntland president), Mohamed Qanyare (USC/G8), Musse Sudi Yalahow (Chairman, USC/SSA/National Salvation Council) Adan Mohamed Nur “Madobe” (RRA/SRRC), Mohamed Dhere (Chairman, Jowhar Administration), Sharif Salah and Asha Haji Elmi (Civil Society).

All of the leaders gave speeches (except for the civil society representatives) and affirmed their commitment to the remaining phase of the process. The leaders embraced and committed themselves to working together. The adoption of the harmonized agreement by the plenary was scheduled for 31 January. The Somali leaders who spoke at the ceremony assured all those involved in the mediation that they would move with speed into phase III - the final leg of the conference. This phase entails, among other issues, the formation of the Transitional Federal Government of the Somali Republic. According to the Kenyan Foreign Minister, it is expected that within a month, all the clans will have submitted the names of their nominees for the Transitional Federal Parliament.

The articles of note in the declaration signed at State House include Article 30, which deals with the selection of the parliament and gives the power of selection to Somali political leaders that were invited to the retreat (TNG, NSC, SRRC, G8, civil society and the regional administrations). The endorsement of these decisions will be left to traditional leaders. The harmonized declaration also committed the leaders to take the document to the plenary for endorsement, followed by an endorsement by the Transitional National Assembly (TNA) in Mogadishu. The leaders also committed themselves to coming up with a comprehensive ceasefire agreement that would be signed shortly.

TNG Delegation left Somalia to ratify the Amended Charter
The TNG delegation led by Abdiqassim Sald Hassan left for Mogadishu on Saturday 31st to finalise ratification of the amended charter by the TNA. The third phase will begin after the amended charter is adopted by the plenary in Mbagathi and ratified by TNA in Mogadishu.

Political differences:
Somali delegates turned down the plenary session to be held in Safari Park
Plans to hold the plenary meeting at the Safari Park Hotel, where the retreat was being held, were rejected by delegates at Mbagathi. The Mbagathi group (leaders) was summoned by the delegates in Mbagathi to discuss the commitment signed both at Safari Park and State House. In what was thought to be a retraction from the agreement signed, the leaders seemed to be distancing themselves from their own actions. According to an observer: “after committing themselves, the leaders are claiming to be unaware of their commitment. For fear of being in the losing end, the leaders seem to be fighting back through the delegates”, added the observer. The Kenyan Foreign Minister met the groups in Mbagathi and after consultations, it was agreed that the plenary would be held at Mbagathi on February 3. Contentious issues include again the number of signatories as well as the level of political leaders’ influence in the selection of the parliament. Consultation among the group is ongoing and the details of their discussions are not yet public.

Security
Somali leaders’ commitment to comprehensive ceasefire agreement
Although nothing was signed at the ceremony, some of the political leaders, including Abdiqassim (TNG) and Abdullahi Yussuf (Puntland), agreed to the importance of upgrading the Eldoret declaration (cessation of hostilities) into a ceasefire agreement to avoid any sort of aggression among the contenders.

UN condemns abduction of staff member
The United Nations strongly condemned the abduction of a UN staff member, Rolf Helmrich (German national) and has called for his immediate and unconditional release. According to a UN report, the staff member was abducted on the outskirts of Kismayo, approximately 45 kilometres north of the seaport. According to the UN Resident Representative/Humanitarian Coordinator for Somalia, Maxwell Gaylard, the UN mandate is to support the Somali people in development and peace building efforts and in executing their duties the staff members’ safety have to be ensured.

Mr. Gaylard also condemned the recent murders of innocent women and children in clan-related conflicts in Southern Somalia. The Humanitarian Coordinator visited the Bakool region and several shocking incidents making women victims of reprisal were confirmed to him. The local human rights organizations also reported cases of abduction and rape of women and children. The UN chief called upon Somali leaders to take all possible steps to end the cycle of violence, in particular to safeguard the security and welfare of unarmed civilians, including women and children and to bring to justice to those who had committed crimes.

Annan appoints monitors for Somali arms embargo
According to the UN News Agency, the United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, responding to a Security Council request, has appointed a panel of four experts to monitor violations of the arms embargo against Somalia for the next six months as a follow up to the second panel of experts which presented its report to the council back in October last year. The panel will be based in Nairobi.

IGAD and the International Community
Increased level of involvement garners an agreement
In an interview with the Novib Discussion Platform, the Kenyan Ambassador to Somalia, Mohamed Abdi Affey stated that Ethiopia was supportive of the peace conference and its outcome. Ambassador Affey said that although Ethiopia was absent from the function physically, it was for logistical reasons but they were with them in spirit. In his visit to Kenya, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister confirmed their support to the Somali peace conference and its outcome to his Kenyan counterpart.

Kenyan Parliamentarians visit the venue of the Somali Leaders Consultation
A group of Kenyan MPs visited the venue of the Somali Leaders retreat to show solidarity with the Somali leaders. In an interview with Novib Discussion Platform, Billow Kerow, a KANU MP, stated that the restoration of peace in Somalia was a priority for them and they would be pleased to take an active role if the management of the conference made such a decision. The MPs were pleased by the agreement reached by the Somali leaders and they advised them to build on this achievement and move forward to the remaining phase of the peace conference.

Annan welcomes the agreement by Somali leaders
In a statement released by his spokesperson, the UN Secretary-General welcomed the agreement reached by the Somali leaders on the transitional charter. He encouraged the Somali leaders to build on the progress achieved and swiftly conclude the Somali National Reconciliation Conference with the establishment of an inclusive government. The Secretary-General warmly commended President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, the other leaders of the Inter Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and international supporters of the Somali National Reconciliation Conference for their perseverance in helping Somalis work towards reaching national reconciliation.

British MPs meet the Somali Groups in the talks
A group of British MPs on a fact-finding mission met with Somali groups to discuss the progress of the peace talks. According to the Somali groups, the British team were on a humanitarian fact-finding mission. The same group visited Somaliland. In a discussion with Novib Discussion Platform, some of the Somali groups who met the team expressed scepticism over the mission and its nature.

UNHCR calls for increased support for Somalia
Senior UNHCR officials called for a drastic increase in support for UN programmes in Somalia as the country entered a critical transition period. A UNHCR team, led by Geneva-based Inspector General Dennis McNamara, concluded a 20-day mission to Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti and Somalia. The mission reviewed UNHCR’s operations in Somalia, with particular focus on refugees and returnees. It will make a number of proposals to the UNHCR headquarters on the future direction and objectives of this programme and how it can work with other agencies to promote sustainable reintegration of refugees. According to their report, there are still approximately 200,000 Somali refugees in the region, including over 130,000 in Kenya and other large groups in Yemen, Djibouti and Ethiopia. The report stressed that there was now an opportunity to return up to 30,000 refugees to Somaliland and Puntland – in particular from these four countries.

Civil Society and Core Groups
Representatives of the women’s organizations in the region meet in Djibouti
Women’s organisations representatives from Djibouti, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia, met in Djibouti from 22 to 26 January to develop plans for a “Stop Violence against Women” campaign. The participants were all members of the regional SIHA network.

The workshop, funded by Novib and attended by representatives from Oxfam GB and Amnesty International, provided training to the participants on campaigning. Regional and national plans focusing on different issues related to the main campaign, such as female genital mutilation (FGM), discriminatory laws, conflict-related violence against women and abduction of women and girls, were developed during the workshop and activities will start in February. Amnesty International is launching a global campaign on the same subject on 5 March in New York. The campaign wants to draw attention to all kinds of violence against women in the world. The Somali campaign, coordinated by three women networks (COGWO, NAGAD and WAWA), will focus on FGM and be launched on 8 March this year. The activities will include research, a launching event, public awareness and media activities and education, among others.

Issues for discussion
Even though they have signed an agreement over the charter, the Somali factions still face challenges. In your opinion, what is the best way of avoiding backtracking among the Somali political leaders?





Please respond to: khalifnur@yahoo.com

More...

Kenya: Rights group, parents clash over missing girls

2004-02-05

http://www.eastandard.net/headlines/news3001200401.htm

Parents of 40 girls who fled from their homes in Marakwet District to escape female genital mutilation (FGM) are locked in a dispute with a human rights organisation. And now the Centre for Human Rights and Democracy (CHRD) is strongly protesting against the alleged harassment of its staff by the girls’ parents, who are demanding their daughters back. The centre’s executive director, Mr Ken Wafula, has told a news conference that his staff had been threatened with unspecified consequences if they do not return the girls to their homes.

Africa/Global: Fireworks Erupt Over US Role at Genocide Conference

2004-02-05

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0130-07.htm

The first intergovernmental conference on genocide to be held since 1948 ended this week in Stockholm with political fireworks when the United States was sharply criticized by an Australian diplomat. Before representatives from 55 nations, former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans said U.S. officials had been using the conference to lobby against the International Criminal Court (ICC), the very body created to try crimes against humanity - like genocide. The United States has withdrawn from the Rome Treaty of 1998 that created the ICC. "I'm distressed to hear that the same old squeeze has been put on the national delegations all over again at this conference," Evans said. "And in the otherwise admirable declaration we have emerging from it there is no mention of the International Criminal Court...this is just indefensible."

Africa: OMCT calls for priority on impunity

2004-02-05

http://www.omct.org/pdf/PP04.pdf

In spite of many recent advances such as the creation of the International Criminal Court, impunity is still one of the most crucial issues facing the international community and national governments in the pursuit of the respect for international human rights and humanitarian law, says the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) in a position paper prepared for the 2004 United Nations Commission on Human Rights 60th session to be held March 15 - April 23 in Geneva. With regards the situation in the DRC, OMCT said that though much progress had been made, grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law had continued, notably in the east of the country. "OMCT remains gravely concerned about support (arms, logistics and human resources) that is being provided to the belligerent groups perpetrating the afore-mentioned violations. This support comes from nearby regional powers, notably from Uganda and Rwanda.&q