THESE TWO HISTORIC ARTICLES REFLECT THE VARYING VIEWS OVER YEARS ON A POTENTIAL 5th WORLD CONFERENCE ON WOMEN – TIME WILL TELL!!
ANNE MARIE GOETZ and JOANNE SANDLER - 15 February 2015
The past four World Conferences on Women have galvanized activism and strengthened women's movement building. Now is the time to assess and rethink the decision not to convene a 5th global gathering of women.
An exchange took place last week on Twitter about whether we had more to lose or gain from holding a 5th World Conference on Women. The conversation was sponsored by the international NGO, Gender at Work , and can be seen under the hashtag: #5thwcw. The discussion was triggered by an article that we wrote taht was published on openDemocracy in January, called ‘Women’s rights have no country’.
We argued against a dominant position that it is too risky to hold another UN conference on women because the forces of conservative backlash are currently so significant that women risk losing the normative gains made at the Beijing conference 20 years ago. This caution is evident in the meek approach of the upcoming UN Commission on the Status of Women discussed in an article by Lyric Thompson this week, where there will be no attempt to enrich and deepen the achievements of Beijing. Our point was that transnationalism has always been a crucial resource for feminists at national, regional and international levels. We argued that the mounting backlash against women's rights was all the more reason to find grounds for solidarity, build effective networks, and demonstrate a capability to work across borders to defend women’s rights.
The Twitter discussion was an initial and fairly random foray into a global public debate - that we argue must be held - on the viability and value of holding another UN conference. There were over 1400 tweets and almost 200 individual contributors - a good start, but nothing to compare with the Twitter hysteria engendered by Emma Watson outing herself as a feminist. Still, some interesting points came up: a conviction that young people must be engaged more effectively in the struggle for gender equality; anxiety about intensifying conservative backlash; skepticism about the capacity of states to defend women’s rights, about the likelihood that the most excluded women and girls will participate, about the value of norm development in addressing the unfinished agenda of women’s rights, about the capacity of technology to enable a deepening of the women’s’ rights process,.
One of the most frequently cited pre-occupations was the challenge of creating an inclusive process. From Day 1 of the 5-day Tweet-a-thon there was an over-focus on the conference itself, rather than an insistence on a process of national, regional and global organizing that engages millions in organizing and building a collective vision and agenda.
It is a process, not just an event
In the 140 characters that Twitter allows, it’s hard to capture much nuance in a discussion about what kind of process and conference might advance women’s rights. For those who were involved in the process leading up to, during and following the Beijing conference and its parallel NGO Forum in 1995, it may be apparent that it is not simply a conference of elites talking to elites. It is a unique opportunity for transnational mobilization over a period of years.
But it has been more than a generation since the last one. Many of the “twitterati” on our discussion had no frame of reference for a process that could generate change at local, national, regional and global levels.
We stressed, in response, that the value of these processes is not just in the event itself, but the mobilization and lobbying leading up to it. It affords women’s groups opportunities to develop constituency strength and leverage so as to drive a home-grown progressive agenda. This process builds the size and strength of women’s movements. Analyses of the past four international women’s conferences show that preparation for these, as well as follow up processes, generate momentum and funding for women’s organizations.
One tweet was blunt: “So now there’s a debate about having another ‘Beijing’ to see about the next 20 years for women’s rights. I'm not convinced. At all.” This was followed by tweets expressing skepticism about the UN’s capacity to generate meaningful changes in attitudes and actions from member states, and invoking Gayatri Spivak’s reflection on “’Women’ as ‘theatre’” at the 1995 Beijing conference. An extract is worth citing: ‘We are witnessing the proliferation of feminist apparatchiks who identify conference organizing with activism as such [….] They often assume that altogether salutary debate in the conference will have necessary consequences in the lifeworld of oppressed and super-exploited women.”
Ouch.
The critique of the world of femocrats, and the drive to find consensus language for international agreements is fair enough. But neither Beijing nor the preceding conferences were just about the negotiated outcome document. These international convenings galvanized activism, strengthened women’s mobilizations and movement-building (especially in the countries where the world conferences were held) and provided a reference point against which national progress on women’s rights was measured. It may be true that we have reached the limits of what can be achieved with regard to norm-advancement in international forums. But we surely have much more to achieve through international networking, alliance-building, and joint action.
De-link or re-think?
A number of contributors expressed deep reservations about an international process convened and negotiated by states or governments. That feminists have reached this point of such profound skepticism about the willingness and capacity of governments to engage constructively in building women’s rights is itself an important and disturbing development. It speaks to the extent to which states have either refused to or been rendered incapable of advancing significant social change agendas in an era of economic globalization, where international corporations call the shots on labour rights, environmental protection standards, and social protection.
Said one tweet: “states r out of touch with their people, especially women - this is why a #5thwcw cannot b run by govs”.
Another said: “should we delink global gathering of women (and all the positives that would come from that) from negotiated text by govts?”
A response to this was: “Not de-link, but re-think. Traditional barter in UN process not as useful anymore. How do we move agenda in new ways?”
This is the crucial question. There is a growing impression that governments have no intention whatever of implementing the lofty goals to which they aspire, International agreements on gender equality are pressed into perverse service in providing venal administrations with a gloss of legitimacy. A significant number of contributions stressed the need to avoid the reductive process of bargaining over the lowest common denominator of mutually acceptable standards on gender equality and women’s rights. As one tweeter noted: “but isn't a global resolution the epitome of compromise? Is it possible it will be radical?” The answers are of course ‘yes’ and ‘no’, underscoring the feeling that perhaps it is best to leave governments right out of it.
On the other hand, what would be the point of an international meeting if it did not demand action of governments to accelerate progress in guaranteeing women’s rights? De-linking a fifth world conference on women from government decision-making would provide for a valuable celebration of activism and innovation, but it would not oblige governments to confront the size and determination of global feminist networks.
We do need to re-think the role of governments in these types of meetings - perhaps starting with how delegations are constituted so as to ensure that there is more space for the voice of women’s and feminist organizations. Perhaps the objective of an international conference would not be an encyclopedia of intent, but rather a focused, time-bound implementation plan with targets that can be measured and monitored – linked to the gender goal and specific indicators and targets under the Sustainable Development Goals that will emerge this year from the UN General Assembly.
Young people: what do they want?
Twitter handles do not come with revelations about the age of the tweeter, but participants had the impression that about half of tweeters in this conversation were under 35. From this category of tweeters came an appreciation of the value of international caucusing: “I was 13 when #Beijing happened so I'd quite like a #5thwcw - would be such a highlight for new generations of activists!”
Other tweets suggested that there are substantive reasons to engage youth in re-thinking feminism: “The idea of who's a feminist and what it means has changed radically since 1995. That's another reason that we need a #5thwcw”. Another tweeter noted the need to give voice to new perspectives: “Fight for #genderequality & #womensrights won't be won by waiting & hoping enough has been done, or by ignoring new/unheard voices.” And this same tweeter commented on the defeatism inherent in not calling for a fifth world conference: “Failure to have a #5thwcw is an acceptance that there is nothing more to address, no other vital contributions/perspectives to be heard.”
While many contributors to the tweetchat made lists of the ‘unfinished business’ in women’s’ rights that need international attention, those connecting to a ‘youth’ perspective raised these substantive issues most insistently: LGBTI issues, the role of technology in enabling stronger global networking, issues of faith, fundamentalism, sexual and reproductive rights.
Conservative backlash
One tweeter noted of fundamentalist religious groups: “they are 100 years behind lived realities of people but backlash is huge #5thwcw would support setting new norm”. Several tweeters had a back and forth on the role of the Vatican/Holy See in these international meetings, noting the depressing return of the Vatican’s hostility to what it calls ‘gender ideology’, attacking the idea of the social construction of gender in schools in Italy, and most recently, in the proposed outcome document for the upcoming Commission on the Status of Women. We are back to having to negotiate square brackets off of the word ‘gender’, which does make a parody of international negotiations on women’s rights.
One contributor reminded us not to make light of the serious demonization of feminist activists in a conservative environment: “If you think bold women are trolled on @twitter ? You should see governments troll women activists at these global conferences.”
On the other hand, a lone voice expressed the need to answer back to conservativism and extremism:
“#5thwcw is needed to put Islamic feminism on the map of global feminist movements. Key in fighting radicalism and integrating Muslim women”
It is this spirit of defiance that we would like to highlight. Feminist movements have not in the past caved to conservativism – and as a general principle, a reluctance to confront the tide of conservative backlash might be facilitating its current high-speed flow. In advance of the UN Commission on the Status of Women a cluster of 11 countries have signaled their intention to subordinate women’s rights to the family. For the record, they are called the ‘Friends of the Family’ and include: Belarus, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Turkmenistan, Yemen, Zimbabwe, with the Holy See no doubt as a silent partner. Hardly the most egalitarian or democratic cluster of states. Their intentions to act on a global scale as a ‘spoiler’ on women’s rights is despicable, but it is something that can be protested with international mobilisation.
Elitism and exclusion
Issues of exclusion, bias, elitism were raised in a number of ways - in terms of the role of men and sexual minorities in the international feminist process, but most directly in relation to the sense that international gatherings are the prerogatives of the privileged few. This criticism must be addressed directly via proposals for an inclusive planning and participation process that reaches to all possible levels of societies around the world.
Some of the tweets suggested the need to establish some non-negotiable starting points: e.g.: the bare minimum conditions that must be met to agree to have a process and conference. At the least they include: i) no back-tracking on what has already been agreed; ii) full partnership of women's organizations/movements and networks; iii) commitment to an inclusive process with a focus on the most excluded voices.
Ironies and urgencies
“You do not have to be a woman to be a women rights activist. But you need a #5thWCW to press the point home and to remind the world :).” This tweet highlighted the need to impress upon a global audience the size and determination of - and a new diversity within - national, regional and international feminist constituencies.
Our tweet-a-thon did not lead to any conclusions on the issue that we believe must be answered if we are to move forward: how to design a process and conference that is not a “re-do” of Beijing, how to change the form and tenor of global negotiations in a way that builds on and respects feminist values and principles, and that amplifies the voices and leadership of women on all of the issues that determine the fate of our countries and our planet.
The tweet-a-thon strengthened our belief that the conversation must continue in different venues: at the CSW, at national levels, in different thematic networks, and other spaces. We hope that some of the larger women’s rights networks - from AWID to the World YWCA and new networks at global, regional and national level - will continue to pursue this question. And we would love to see UN Women or other organizations put out a call for innovative ideas for a truly 21st century process and convening that will generate a renewed, refreshed and resounding agenda for women’s rights and gender justice.
There is an ironic historical echo to be heard in discussions about a global conference on women’s’ rights. A hundred years ago the world’s then most extensively networked women’s association, the International Women’s Suffrage Alliance, had been planning its annual Congress for Berlin in the summer of 1915 but had cancelled it because of the outbreak of hostilities in Europe. The Dutch physician Aletta Jacobs appealed for an alternative convening in a neutral country, proposing Holland. She urged: “In these dreadful times in which so much hate has been spread among different nations, the women have to show that we at least retain our solidarity and that we are able to maintain our mutual friendship” (Jus Suffragii, December 1914: 200). The IWSA membership of 26 suffragist societies elected however not to hold their congress at all, reflecting a serious rift in the membership between an internationalist pacifism and decisions to support specific nationalist war efforts. The Scotswoman Chrystal Macmillan forged on, arguing that individual women could meet and build proposals for global governance and peace in Europe. Late in April 1915, 1,200 women met in an International Women’s Congress in The Hague and developed a manifesto for international cooperation and conflict prevention whose terms are just as relevant today as then. After the Congress two delegations of the newly-formed Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom travelled the capitals of Europe urging peace.
One delegate apparently had said, according to the scholar Helen Kay : ‘I hope that the resolutions passed by this international congress be not only words, words, words, but that they be translated into actions’. One hundred and thirty-nine characters. A perfect tweet, and a good reflection of the concern of many of the participants in last week’s tweet-a-thon.
The author would like to thank Gender at Work's Executive Director, Aruna Rao, and Anindita Sengupta, Communications Strategist, for the idea and platform for holding the #5thwcw tweet chat.
NOW WE HAVE MOVED BEYOND THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS TO THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS.
The Proposed Fifth World Conference on Women – A Time to Take Stock and Demand Implementation
27 September 2012
FRIDAY FILE: Discussion about the implications of the proposed United Nations (UN) Fifth World Conference on Women in 2015 reveals diverse opinions on the challenges, opportunities, purpose and conditions for the proposed conference, but with some common threads.
By Susan Tolmay[1]
On March 8 2012, the President of the United Nations General Assembly H.E. Mr. Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser (Qatar) and the Secretary-General H.E. Mr. Ban Ki-moon, jointly proposed a Fifth UN World Conference on Women (5th WCW) in 2015. Following the announcement, AWID produced a Friday Filewith the aim of sharing information on the proposed conference and some of the diverse responses to the proposal, and inviting readers to share their views and broaden the contributions to this important debate. This Friday File provides an overview of the diverse opinions expressed by the approximately 60 readers from all regions of the world who responded to the call for comments.
The overall view shared by readers is that the landmark 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing should be celebrated, but there are calls for innovation and alternatives to the traditional UN conference model and for this process to be linked to the post-2015 development agenda.
Common concerns and challenges
Many readers echoed some of the concerns raised by women’s rights advocates immediately after the announcement of the proposed conference, including limited resources and the possibility of backlash on previously agreed international commitments on women’s rights and gender equality. The current context of rising fundamentalist forces – evident for example during the last Commission on the Status of Women, which failed to adopt agreed conclusions at its 56th session and Rio +20 which saw the omission of women’s sexual and reproductive rights from the final text mean that this is not the time to hold global political negotiations on women's rights.
For many, cost continues to be a barrier to their participation in global UN conference spaces. In a context where women's rights organizations are struggling to survive due to limited funds and with very limited support from their governments, it is difficult for large numbers of women’s rights advocates to reach these conferences and many question the allocation of scarce resources to a conference. As one reader said, “Comparing the costs of the organization of such a conference, with the equivalent use of this money to implement concrete actions on the ground, make me think that a new conference would not be really effective”.
Readers also raised concerns about representation, consultation and participation by women of all identities and called for broad engagement with women at all levels and in all their diversity, saying, “A conference without ensuring the widespread presence of organized women's movements and feminists (could) mean the legitimation of a coup against (women’s) rights” and “…the greatest challenge is lack of inclusion of the women at the grassroot(s) who are the real practitioners of the policies but are never given the opportunities to tell the real truth of what is happening on the ground.”
Other readers questioned how strategic it is to hold a 5th WCW in 2015 when member states will have completed negotiations for a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Ideally any conference on women should happen prior to the process on the Development Agenda Beyond 2015 with the purpose of evaluating the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA). This would provide an opportunity for the outcome of the 5th WCW to inform the development agenda beyond 2015.
Opportunities
For other readers the potential benefits of a 5th world conference outweigh the known risks, and “If governments are trying to roll back women's rights, we need the conference to challenge them”. Some pointed to the success of the Fourth World Conference on Women as one of the most successful of the UN conferences and the impact that the Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA), despite its limitations, had on putting women's rights into the public policy discourse.
“There is a very large gap between the idea, the will, capacity and implementation”. Views were unanimous about the need to move from simply talking to taking action. “What we need is a greater commitment, a renewed vigour to meet the goals established; commitment of resources and efforts to achieve changes on the ground, more than mere reiteration.” Readers felt strongly that it is time to take stock, to celebrate what has been achieved, as well as look at the remaining challenges to the advancement of women's rights nationally, regionally and globally. The purpose of any conference should therefore be to examine the actions taken by member states to achieve commitments made and hold Governments accountable, providing an opportunity to re-strategize on those areas where member states have not yet taken action. The focus should be on implementation, with member states submitting status reports on ratified resolutions and agreements, presenting strengths, challenges and lessons learned to guide discussions and plan a way forward. In order for these processes to be effective and as participatory as possible, some readers suggested pre-conferences or public forums to be organized from grassroots to national, sub-regional or regional levels to strategise on the implementation of BPfA.
Given the changes in the landscape for women and women’s rights in the 20 years since the Fourth conference in 1995 many readers also felt it is important to reflect on the successes and challenges of the women’s movement globally since Beijing, including the voices of grassroots women, LGBTQI persons and youth in particular. “The 5thWCW could give strength to the women's and feminist movements if there's a sustainable process of reflection and dialogue from the local to the global”. It is essential that women's organizations and feminists work to articulate a global agenda for women's rights based in deepening the commitment of States and the international community to this agenda. Others saw the conference as an opportunity to build stronger networks as a way to strengthen our collective voice and to address some of the problems faced by women across the globe, “It makes a statement, builds solidarity, creates new networks among women all over the world, and rekindles old ones.”
The role of the UN should be to give a global view of the progress and challenges in the fulfillment by governments and the UN System of all commitments to women’s rights and gender equality, and not just for Beijing, but other UN Conferences, including Rio, Vienna and Cairo. The UN should utilize the time, energy and money to strengthen implementation of the BPfA and CEDAW and the women's groups working to achieve that goal. It will also be key to strengthen UN Women and its processes so that it can effectively safeguard the interests of the women across the globe.
Conditions for the 5th WCW or other Beijing +20 commemoration
Many of the readers who responded to the call for comments were clear about one thing –feminists and women’s rights advocates should take the leadership role in the proposed 5th WCW and there must be more space for women's organisation to actively participate in this process. Strong views were expressed about the absolute need for inclusiveness and participation of women and girls of all walks of life from all regions, in particular young women and rural women who have historically been left out of these spaces. “The greatest challenge is lack of inclusion of the women at the grass root who are the real practitioners of the policies but are never given the opportunities to tell the real truth of what is happening on the ground. I support the 5WCW but please let it not be an affair of select few otherwise it remains a mere mirage for women and development”.
Readers highlighted the importance of hearing young women’s thoughts on the adequacy and relevance of the BPfA for their generation as well as the need to hear their views on other challenges they face and to make their demands known, “We need to harness the energy of young women who are on the front lines of women's issues, and a 5th WCW is a great way to do this.”
Many expressed the view that a conference must be an opportunity for rural women’s organisations that are working directly with grassroots women, in particular women and girls living in poverty, to participate. By facilitating a process for discussion at local level prior to the conference there could be universal participation in preparation for the conference.
There were calls for an alternative model to the traditional UN Conference, and a proposal that a global campaign to celebrate Beijing+20 would be a better use of resources. Questions were raised about the effectiveness of UN meetings, such as the recent Rio+20 in which more than 40 000 delegates participated, but with questionable and limited results on key women’s rights as well as in other several areas related to environmental sustainability. A few readers suggested the creation of national or regional forums or conferences, whose chosen representative would be funded to participate at the world conference which should be audio-streamed online to ensure broad participation by women from all countries and regions. Another suggestion was to dedicate a specific space to discuss women’s issues in all UN conferences: “Why not insist on having in each international conference, a specific space dedicated to women's issues?”
What is clear from readers’ comments is that the process should begin as soon as possible to ensure that there is universal participation of women and girls .
NGO CSW Geneva position paper - http://www.ngocsw-geneva.ch/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/Position-on-5th-Women-Conference-on-Women-FINAL1.pdf
[1] This Friday File was written by Susan Tolmay but is a summary of the comments received in response to a call by AWID for readers to share their views on the proposed 5th World Conference on Women
Извор: WUNRN – 17.07.2017
