WSF 2004: Growing pains

For at least one African activist who attended the just-concluded World Social Forum (WSF) in Mumbai, India, enough is enough. After attending the last four WSF meetings, Mohau Pheko, a gender and economic activist from South Africa, says she will not be attending the next event. Speaking to Terraviva (http://www.ipsnews.net/focus/tv_mumbai/viewstory.asp?idn=232) , the official newspaper of the World Social Forum, Pheko said: “Until and unless more grassroots people, especially from Africa, become part of this process I don’t honestly see the need to come and mix with the same people and say the same things to each other.” She makes a valid point, questioning how the neo-liberal order is supposed to be replaced by people-centred, people-oriented development when the “people” are absent from the forum that is supposed to shape that very development. "Besides as NGOs we have been delegitimised by our own governments and it will not only be strategic but logical that we stop analyzing on behalf of other people and bring the voices and make visible those who live the experiences we want changed on board,” she says.

War dominated WSF, with strong statements against the United States, such as when Indian author Arundhati Roy (http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=129&fArticleId=331358) said: "For the first time in history, a single empire with an arsenal of weapons that could obliterate the world in an afternoon, has complete, unipolar, economic and military hegemony…It uses different weapons to break open different markets. There isn't a country on God's earth that is not caught in the cross hairs of the American cruise missile and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) cheque book." From an African point of view, poverty, massive external debt, HIV/AIDS and corruption were some of the key issues placed on the Agenda at the WSF. Although estimates of African attendance at the forum ranged from between 300 and 500 - a small amount out of the total 100 000 delegates and up from only 30 two years ago - WSF organisers say they will examine the possibility of holding the event in Africa in 2006, a decision that will greatly advance Africa's cause within the forum.

The WSF is seen as an important event to enable civil society to form common ground and strategise over common problems related to the global policies that act to the detriment of citizens in the south. But as John Moru - Policy and Research Advocacy Officer with ActionAid, a nongovernmental organisation based in Nigeria's capital city, Abuja, told Terraviva (http://www.ipsnews.net/focus/tv_mumbai/viewstory.asp?idn=269 ): "Recognising the fact that poverty, corruption and ineffective public enterprises pervade the regions that have produced this large Mumbai gathering, it is so sad that going home after this historic event will bring me back to the stark realities of the enormous work to be done towards effecting the various recommendations of this Forum with scanty civil voices that need great amplification.”

Outside of the concerns of the African delegation, debate over the future shape of the World Social Forum is raging. Already, who controls the WSF and how has become a hot topic, as well as what is seen by some as a top-down approach to decision-making and a lack of transparency. This includes a questioning of exactly how open the WSF actually is. As Jai Sen has argued (http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/1417.html), instead of being the “open space” that the marketing hype proclaims it to be, it is actually a highly structured and in some cases exclusive gathering, limited to those broadly classified as the 'left'. “In short, we are already witnessing the crystallisation and rise not only of corporatism but also of orthodoxy and dogma, which I suggest constitutes a fundamental challenge to the future of the WSF.”

In an essay on the WSF (http://www.choike.org/documentos/wsf_s502_albert.pdf), Michael Albert points out that in contrast to the localized forums worldwide, the WSF has yet to attain the same level of transparency and accountability. This is not to take away from the value of the WSF, he says, but “there are often sharp and even destructive differences between the WSF's layers of participants”. Albert puts forward eleven thoughts for the future of the WSF, which include emphasizing local forums as the foundation of the worldwide process; Mandating that the decision-making leadership at every level should be at least 50 per cent women; Having the Forums from wealthier parts of the world charge delegates and organisations and attendees a tax on their fees to apply to helping finance the Forums in poorer parts of the world; Feature grassroots activists from movements around the world much more prominently in major events and throughout all Forums to strengthen the WSF and local Forums as vehicles for their activity and counter tendencies toward elitism; Mandating that Forums at every level, including the WSF, welcome people from diverse constituencies.

It is clear from these and other articles written about the WSF, that the rapid growth of the WSF has in itself presented real challenges along the lines of governance and representivity that the WSF will have to overcome if it is to avoid being seen in the same light as the exclusive World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the business only meet that the WSF was first set up to counter. In the meantime, and problems aside, as one activist writes “Participatory? I don't think the WSF processes are really participatory in a democratic sense, but it is open, and it is full of mutual respect (almost everywhere), and that is so valuable you forgive all the other problems.”

* Compiled by Patrick Burnett, Fahamu. Please send comments to [email protected]

* See the Women and Gender, Development, HIV/AIDS and Social Welfare sections of Pambazuka News for more stories from the WSF. Visit http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/eventos/1.html for more Up-to-date information on the WSF.