Women’s openSummit

by Jessica Reed

To close this blog I will post about openDemocracy’s poDcast # 22, in which Solana Larsen talks to oD columnist and blogger Patricia Daniel, Ricken Patel from Avaaz.org in New York, German journalist Jan Hendrik Becker. Together they discuss the different ways world citizens have been getting involved in the G8 summit - and the alternative one as well. You can listen to the poDcast here.

As Patricia Daniel summarised in yesterday’s blog entry, only a few of the points our bloggers have made are on the G8 agenda. And if the help does come, it will be too little. Any grassroot development within the micro-economics and climate change fields are likely not to be considered. One hopeful note: the pledge to provide more funding to combat HIV/AIDS is encouraging, and even surprised Patricia.

This blog has gathered the voice of academics, journalists and activists worldwide for more than 20 days. A lot has been explained and advocated for with great enthusiasm; 40 entries, 20 bloggers and dozens of e-mails later, we hope that openDemocracy has provided a much-needed platform for debating the advancement of gender equity.

In addition there are 2 other articles published last week:

Tina Wallace  G8: the aid gap

Susan Fried  Women won’t wait

We welcome any comments regarding the blog: please post your thoughts here, or e-mail any feedback at jessica.reed@opendemocracy.net.

by Patricia Daniel

You can access all the summit declarations on the official website and download them as pdf documents. But I advise you not to bother. They mainly contain bland statements which commit the G8 to nothing. In general they say: “we note that this is an important issue and we agree to talk about it again at a later date.” And as far as women specifically are concerned, I have already been through the documents with my gender lens and pulled the relevant paragraphs out for you. There aren’t many and they’re all from the declaration on Africa.

So, here’s my immediate review of what came out of the G8 summit for women, based on the five key concerns we identified in the open letter. We invite our bloggers to comment in more detail.

Combat structural economic exclusion

More of the same on the global economy - in fact possibly a lot more if the emerging economies go into G8 partnership agreements. One very bland reference to women:

“The G8 emphasize the importance of the political and economic empowerment of women as a contribution to sustainable growth and responsible government. We are promoting the World Bank’s Gender Action Plan and welcome this and further initiatives supporting our African partners’ efforts to foster the economic empowerment of women such as those taken by the United Nations.”Paragraph 29, Growth and Responsibility for Africa

Reverse the marginalisation of women

This is really all I could find:

“Education is a fundamental driver for national development and economic growth, providing a skilled labour force, and promoting equity, enterprise, and prosperity. Education also promotes good health, empowers girls and women, and leads to healthier families. We are committed to working with partner governments and the private sector to expand opportunities for disadvantaged girls and boys, including beyond the classrooms, to learn 21st century skills and increase their participation in society. We reaffirm that no country seriously committed to “Education for All” will be thwarted in their achievement of this goal by lack of resources.”

Paragraph 37, Growth and Responsibility for Africa

Climate change – sustainable development

A lot of hot air and no reference to women - or any new approach to grassroots development.

Health, HIV/AIDS and women’s rights

I’m surprised. There’s some detailed analysis here, a shift in discourse and a concrete pledge to provide more funding. But $60 billion over four years is to be shared between the whole African continent and Eastern European countries, so it’s not terribly generous. And we still need to see if the money materialises. Nevertheless I see this as a real success for women’s campaigning and a personal success for Bundesministerin Heidemarie Wiezcorek-Zeul who has championed these issues in Germany these past six months.

“50. Recognizing the growing feminization of the AIDS epidemic, the G8 in cooperation with partner governments support a gender-sensitive response by the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) with the goal of ensuring that greater attention and appropriate resources are allocated by the Fund to HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care that addresses the needs of women and girls. Coverage of prevention of mother to child transmission programs (PMTCT) currently stands at only 11%. In the overall context of scaling up towards the goal of universal access and strengthening of health systems we will contribute substantially with other donors to work towards the goal of providing universal coverage of PMTCT programs by 2010. The cost to reach this target, as estimated by UNICEF, is US$ 1,5 billion. The G8 together with other donors will work towards meeting the needed re-sources for paediatric treatments in the context of universal access, at a cost of US$ 1,8 billion till 2010, estimated by UNICEF. We will also scale up efforts to reduce the gaps, in the area of maternal and child health care and voluntary family planning, an estimated US$ 1,5 billion.51. By achieving the MDG on education, 700,000 new HIV-infections could be pre-vented every year. Education not only improves the understanding for infectious dis-eases but also improves women’s and girls’ economic prospects and empowers them. The G8 will take concrete steps to support education programs especially for girls, to promote knowledge about sexuality and reproductive health and the prevention of sexually transmitted infections. The G8 will support the nationwide inclusion of appropriate HIV/AIDS-related information and life-skills information in school curricula, in the context of nationally owned sector plans as well as prevention information with regard to malaria and other relevant health topics.

52. The G8 will emphasize the importance of programs to promote and protect human rights of women and girls as well as the prevention of sexual violence and coercion especially in the context of preventing HIV/AIDS infections. We welcome the commitment expressed by African partners aiming at promoting the rights and role of women and girls. We will also work to support additional concerted efforts to stop sexual exploitation and gender-based violence. 53. The G8 will take concrete steps to work toward improving the link between HIV/AIDS activities and sexual and reproductive health and voluntary family planning programs, to improve access to health care, including preventing mother-to-child transmission, and to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by adopting a multi-sectoral approach and by fostering community involvement and participation.”

From Growth and Responsibility in Africa

Education for gender equality and women’s rights

See above. As regards our suggestion that men take responsibility for the every day challenges faced by women: I’m tempted to say that the seven male G8 leaders showed some quaint old-fashioned gallantry vis-à-vis Angela Merkel’s tough presidency role and came to unexpectedly amicable agreements in order to see her attractively perky smile when she gets her own way reflected in all the summit photographs. After all, why not? They don’t really have any intention of following through anyway.

Peace and security

We didn’t include this in our open letter, but subsequent bloggers have raised a number of issues. Absolutely no reference to women or the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 in any of the relevant documents (for example, on Darfur). No, wait, I’m wrong, here it is:

“At the 8th African Partnership Forum in Berlin, we have jointly with our African partners discussed important recommendations regarding climate change, investment, peace and security as well as gender equality.”

Final paragraph, G8 Africa Partnership, Summary of G8 Africa Personal Representatives’ Joint Progress Report (Annex to Growth and Responsibility in Africa)

Conclusion

The most interesting and constructive discussions about the future took place outside the fence round Heiligendamm, at the alternative summit in Rostock, at the Nobel Women’s Initiative gathering in Galway, in women’s social movements on different continents, at the World Social Forum in Nairobi - and here in the women’s openSummit blog.

Who needs the G8 anyway to tell us how to run the world?

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

The alternative G8 summit ended with some inspirational speeches about the way forward. Ana Esther Ceceña from Mexico City University talked about:

The development of new communities without borders (for example, via the internet) so that we can develop a shared history - and a shared future. We shouldn’t just be talking about the struggle against the US, against the G8, against transnational corporations. It’s bigger than that. It’s about our own emancipation: what we are fighting for. What are we constructing? What new types of relationships? What new ways of living in the world?

In the words of one of Latin America’s great philosophers, Bob Marley - “only yourself can set you free.”

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

Vandana Shiva, winner of the Alternative Nobel Prize in 1993, wears her sari instead of cheap blue jeans from China.

In her closing speech, she spoke about the Indian cotton farmers now committing suicide: because of GM they have no seeds left.

“Those using resources beyond their needs constitutes theft, because it takes away resources from those who have a right to them. This theft must be stopped. Consumerism has brought in economies of genocide. The first right of humanity is to produce, to construct, to create - not to consume. The G8 won’t give that to us: we have to do it for ourselves.”

by Maura Stephens, journalist and humanitarian, coauthor of “Collateral Damage: The Iraqi People”

The world’s only incarcerated Nobel Laureate, the democracy leader of Burma, sits imprisoned in her own home. She has, this time, been kept from the world since May 2003. Aung San Suu Kyi was not present at last week’s Nobel Women’s Initiative, founded in 2006 by the other six living female Nobel Peace Prize laureates.

It should be no surprise that the plight of this great woman and her country are subjects long paid lip service to by the United States and other nations, and indeed by the United Nations under Kofi Annan. But that’s all there has been, really: lip service. Perhaps new Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon will do better.

The UN Security Council must be the place where meaningful action on Burma is taken. But four of the G8 nations sit on the UN Security Council: France, the UK, the USA, and Russia. (Only China, of the five permanent UNSC members, is not represented on the G8.) China and Russia are unwilling to even allow Burma to be discussed in the UNSC.

But right now there’s the opportunity for the G8 to take an official stand about Burma. All the G8 nations except for Russia are willing (and in some cases, such as the United States, eager) to take action against the brutal military regime in Burma — a regime that routinely, officially, and blatantly practices torture, rape, forced labour (slavery), child conscription, the burning of entire villages, and the proscription of anyone who does not toe the political line of the military.

This is an opportune time for the other seven nations to work to convince Russia that the world must insist on full transparency by the Burmese regime and the admittance of international journalists, the immediate and unconditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners, the establishment of a multinational oversight body with full access to monitor the human rights situation, the immediate cessation of all Burmese regime-sponsored hostilities against the Burmese people, and the beginning of a political dialogue and national reconciliation process.

With Russia’s understanding that Burma’s human rights violations are totally separate from its own human rights situation, perhaps it will be persuaded that it is okay to act against the Burmese regime. And with Russia won over, China may well cave in.

So I urge the G8 nations to discuss Burma immediately, and to begin to work on Russia within this forum, where 7 versus 1 makes for better convincing than 3 versus 2 in the UN Security Council. Aung San Suu Kyi and her suffering people deserve the attention of the world, and the clock is ticking away.

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

There is a team of award-winning African journalists here covering the G8 summit and the alternative summit, in collaboration with the Panos Institute, on their blog AfricaVox 2007 .The aim is to see whether the G8 are really listening to African voices, as the official press service claims Germany is doing.

I spoke to Zinhle Mapumulo, a reporter with the Sowetan in South Africa, who covers health issues and has a weekly women’s page. Zinhle was inspired to go into the media by the one black woman television presenter working during apartheid, Noxolo Grootboom. After finally opting for print journalism, she has previously covered youth issues, lifestyle and women in enterprise as well as spending two years in her native province of Kwazulu Natal as bureau chief for Sowetan news. So, what’s her particular motivation in covering the G8 this year?

“Firstly I wanted the opportunity to experience the whole sandwich – the demos, the debates – and to ask all the questions we don’t get to ask back in South Africa. Then, as a woman, I feel there’s never any in-depth coverage of women: I want to know how do the G8 contributions, how do their pledges benefit me and my 2 year-old daughter – and other African women and their children - how is this process going to help us?”

Zinhle went out on the demo at the airport when Bush arrived Tuesday evening. “I wanted to see the action. We don’t get to see this kind of confrontation now in South Africa – the violence, the police. I wanted to talk to the demonstrators.” But she came away with some concerns. “They say they want attention from the world about Africa’s problems. But when I asked them, they don’t know anything about Africa. I felt it wasn’t genuine, they’re doing it for the hype, just to be a rebel.” She told one of them: “Your struggle is not about us, it’s about you. You should be feeling some kind of spiritual connection with us.”

Nevertheless she has seen some connections herself that she didn’t know about before: for example the stigma around HIV/AIDS. She attended a youth AIDS workshop where one HIV+ male German explained how he felt when he went to see the doctor for a check-up and was told to wait until all the other patients had finished. His HIV+ friend was paying privately for his own ARV treatment because he didn’t want his employer to know his status. “I was shocked that this is normal in Germany. We don’t think things like this happen in developed countries.”

She was disappointed, however, that at the press briefing for the alternative summit, not one word was mentioned about HIV/AIDS. “For us in South Africa this is the number one issue – how much are we getting for ARV treatment? (climate change is not such an urgent concern). This especially touches women - because we are suffering from HIV/AIDS more than men. And there’s still stigma about that, for example, no-one will report the fact that their little daughter has been raped, but that’s one cause of infection.”

Her final comment for the G8: “Women’s empowerment is the key to development in Africa. That’s what I’d like them to focus on. How will their pledges empower us?”

—————–

As climate change is high on the G8 agenda, AfricaVox also brings first-hand accounts from women and men of the effects of drought in Ethiopia (Desert Voices). The project is part of Panos London’s oral testimony programme and involved a number of journalists and community members.

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

Here’s the latest example of police security at the anti-G8 week in Rostock, Wednesday evening.

7.30pm

I’m in a taxi taking me along the harbour road to my hotel when we see the line of police vehicles. You can see clearly in the first video that there is nothing behind them but a few people sitting or strolling in the evening sunshine. I stop filming because the traffic has come to a sudden halt just by a large group of police officers and my intention is not to antagonise anyone.

“What’s going on?” asks the taxi-driver, as bemused as I am. The traffic starts moving again; it is the police vans that go on and on…

8.00pm

I’m in my hotel room (blogging of course) when a big black police helicopter starts circling low over the hotel. It continues circling for half an hour (no, I don’t think they’re after me but it is incredibly noisy).

8.30pm
Alles geht los, as we say in German. Everything starts happening. The open-air music concert begins down by the harbour. Sounds like nice music. People march up and down a bit and then go to sleep in orderly fashion under the stars. And that’s it. That’s the start of the 24 hour blockade. Using the methods of civil disobedience, a range of groups (church, youth, environment, radical left) aim to block the summit’s access roads and in so doing ‘will not allow the police to create an escalation.’

Glad I’m not a German police officer.

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

This is one of those depressing stories that the G8 leaders ought to be considering, especially, in this case, Germany and Russia. This is where trade liberalisation intersects with man-made environmental damage at the crossroads of woman as the ultimate commodity.

I attended a workshop organised by Terre des Femmes on the links between free trade and the so-called sex trade (I think the term sanitises the activity). I learned a few statistics: 400,000 prostitutes in Germany, 35% of them trafficked. More than one million German men go to prostitutes daily. Migrant women are more popular. For German prostitutes, the stigma means they can’t talk about their work and so can’t get support and get out of it. For migrant women, the choices are even more limited. Terre des Femmes campaigns on their behalf and also runs an awareness campaign for men (the clients).

But what have Chernobyl children got to do with the sex trade? An inspiring woman from the University of Minsk in Belarus, Dr Irina Gruschewaja, explained. The eastern part of Belarus, which borders on Russia, was contaminated 21 years ago by the Chernobyl disaster. 250,000 children were sent away to be cared for in seven different countries, including Germany, in order to provide a safe environment where they could grow up until the area at home was considered clear.

That benevolence has been turned around. From the end of the 1990s, a lot of those children, now beautiful young women, are being trafficked to Germany as prostitutes. Why does it happen? There’s no work at home. Even if young women get work, they’re earning only 55% of what men earn – and that’s not a lot. Prices of basic food like bread and milk are high in a ratio to wages. In the countryside you’d be lucky to earn 100 euros, compared to 3500 euros in Germany.

Then come nice smart German men with a smile and an offer you can’t refuse.

“How should these girls be suspicious?” asks Irina. “They’ve lived in Germany as children. They were treated with affection and care. Everyone was friendly to them. They still expect the same – and this expectation is being abused.”

Coercion is defined by European law as “abuse of a position of vulnerability; abuse of authority; labour bondage; theft, isolation, deception; illegal holding of money or documents.” It doesn’t have to be use of direct force.

“We don’t want to tell our girls, don’t go to the west,” says Irina. “We know the work – and the money - is there. There’s no chance for them here, even to get work in the city. But we still haven’t developed a situation where a woman is free to make her own decisions and to seek out real prospects for herself.”

Since the Belarus government tightened up controls two years ago, young people have not been able to travel to the west, even to a conference or on holiday. But the border is open with Russia – so that’s where Belarus girls are being trafficked to now.

Irina, who has been running the Malinowka Advice Centre outside Minsk for eight years, still has a good word for some aspects of globalisation:

“If it wasn’t for globalisation we wouldn’t have the network with Terre des Femmes that raises money to help with education and awareness-raising for our girls and young women. In addition, I’ve had the chance to come to the alternative summit! And it’s great to be here with other women. I need their moral support in order to continue our work.”

“China Blue”

The film shows the daily lives of women workers in Chinese sweatshops. Evelyn Bahr also talked about the Campaign for Clean Clothes and possible ways to act.

“Running on Empty”

The film follows the stories of three mothers with children under the age of two – in Ethiopia and the UK – and their daily struggle to feed their children. Save the Children’s research has shown that predictable cash transfers to mothers can make a significant difference in reducing chronic hunger of children. Makes sense, doesn’t it?

by Mohau Pheko

All nations have intellectual property rights essential for protecting innovation, knowledge and creativity. This is essential in the area of medicines, inventions and new technologies. In order to deliver essential services such as healthcare, education, water and other essential services, the state buys services and goods to fulfill their obligations to citizens through a government procurement system. There are key sectors of industry where a government needs to seek investment to either establish or strengthen its industrial development strategy.

If a state trades away its intellectual property rights, allowing more industrialized countries to have more rights in the ownership of a nation’s knowledge, invention and new technologies can we still call it a sovereign state? If it allows foreign corporations to compete with local small companies for tenders in supplying government with goods on an equal footing, what one should pose will happen to efforts to empower women and affirmative action programmes put in place to bridge the inequalities of the past in the economy?

The G8 through many of it’s trade agreements such as the Singapore issues and Economic Partnership Agreements is weakening the African state. If the state allows foreign investors a status equal to that of citizens in the ownership of key sector of the economy, can we still call such a nation economically viable and sovereign?

In reviewing some of the G8’s existing free trade agreement one notes that the architecture can go far beyond trade. Some of them are long on foreign policy objectives and short on substantive trade liberalisation. Kwame Nkrumah in Neo-Colonialism, the Last State of Imperialism, reminds are that the “essence of neo-colonialism is that the State which is subject to it is, in theory, independent and has all the outward trapping of international sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside.”

How sovereign is a nation that has no control or ownership over the key sectors of its economy? How sovereign is a nation that can no longer be a social provider because it has traded away the right to educate, provide healthcare, and affirm potential entrepreneurs in its economy?

The covert action, and hard-nosed attitude of the G8 countries in their trade talks Africa symbolize the neo-colonial or economic colonial era Africa as a whole is faced with. Under the old pretense that if Africa gives the G8 countries concessions in the areas of intellectual property, government procurement and investment, which is important for G8 companies doing business on the African continent, African countries in turn, will enjoy new levels of economic growth. Judging the over 2,300 bilateral free trade agreements that exist in the world today, nothing could be further from the truth.

(more…)

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

The alternative summit got off to a good start with the opening podium yesterday. Held in the lovely Nikolaikirche (St Nicholas Church) it attracted even more participants than the organisers expected, so many that, at one point, there were people literally sitting in the rafters.

The rousing keynote speech was given by Jean Ziegler on the main theme of the summit: Rethinking Globalisation. He was given a standing ovation. As the teenage girls giving out leaflets at the door told me: TINA (there is no alternative) is dead.

The panel consisted of three women, which augurs well for the summit to include a gender perspective.

In their own words:

Thuli Makama, Yonge Nawe Environmental Action Group, Swaziland on development in Africa:

It’s important to remember that the resources are there in Africa but they are being taken over by other countries, for their own comfort. Women even need to compete with transnational companies in order to have access to water. There are alternatives to climate change, they’re in the Kyoto Protocol. But these aren’t accepted by the US. One nation’s needs reign supreme. Now in Africa we are being asked to give up our lands to grow products so they can make bio-fuel to solve their problems. Meanwhile we can’t put food on our own table.

Annelie Buntenbach, DGB, Germany’s Federation of Trade Unions emphasised the fact that:

Although we belong to a rich country, one of the global players, we still have problems, there are also children in need in Germany. Labour conditions are getting worse, there is little job security - and women in particular are vulnerable in the ever-growing informal sector which so far has been ignored by government. Ordinary people are caught – and connected - in the chain of the international economy. We need to develop solidarity between workers through trade unions and with other organsiations.

Madjiguene Cisse, Sans Papiers, Senegal spoke about the link between development and migration.

Our own governments are part of the problem. We have the impression that they’re not there for us. Senegal has treaties with Spain and France, which mean that migrants are sent back home. Meanwhile we have EU frontier police in West Africa. Women’s organisations are now really beginning to mobilise, to establish their own rights in the market. We used the World Social Forum (WSF) this year as an opportunity to get together, to build solidarity and strength – and for the first time to exchange ideas on how can Africa develop.

The alternative summit has followed the format of the WSF - with a list of key themes to be explored through panels and workshops and a final podium where outcomes will be presented. Peter Wahl of WEED described it as an opportunity to use “intellectual power”. Let’s see how it goes. Although the organisers have invited participants from 40 countries worldwide, the majority of people here are German or European, so I’m not quite sure if it’s the way to move the whole world forward.

Diana Fong’s report on Deutsche Welle has a World Bank spokesperson claiming ‘the issue is how we can achieve better globalisation’ but it seems to be more of the same…

by Patricia Daniel at the G8

All is calm at the moment in Rostock, the town is lovely and the townspeople, despite everything, are friendly. They tell me the violence, though inexcusable, was localised. It has given the police the excuse to search people at the station – and police vehicles are in clear presence around the town, at every junction; they even blockaded Monday’s demonstration on migration and refugees. Bush arrived safely last night, I’m not sure if he even saw the 1000 protesters as they were kept so far away, but both police and protesters made an effort to keep the peace.

So the recycled photos of violence in Berlin tabloids - which were calling Rostock “a war zone like Lebanon” – were, as I suspected, a little deceptive. But violence certainly did occur. I spoke to a woman selling copies of Marx 21. “We still don’t know where those young men with shopping trolleys of stones even came from. You can’t help thinking they might be agents provocateurs. In any case, the press got the pictures they were looking for – and the government used the pictures to criminalise the ant-G8 movement, and to deflect attention away from the content of what we have to say.”

by Anasuya Sengupta

My day (and sometimes night) job is working with police officers in India on issues of violence against women and children; I coordinate a UNICEF partnership with the Karnataka State Police. One of the most critical aspects of this work is, as Anindita so succinctly described elsewhere on this blog, analysing the impact of our socially entrenched gender-based norms. The lack of value for our girl children - and if they’re lucky, for the women they grow up to be - has meant that we have lost, in our female population, the size of a small to middling European country.

But this post is not about genderocide. It is about that and more. It is about asking our governments - particularly the all powerful G8 - that in this context of ‘terrorism’, of an almost universal culture of production and consumption around ‘fear’ and ‘mistrust’, they analyse honestly and courageously their own contributions to a growing set of fundamentalisms: economic, religious, cultural, social and sexual. Women (and children) are often hit hardest by these fundamentalisms.

Identities are complex; we acknowledge that readily but seem willing to sacrifice that complexity for simplified categorisations and easy classification. More than ever, our language of ‘us’ and ‘them’ divides us over and over again, in the conversations we have, the advertisements we watch, the TV series we devour. And our politicians, our priests, our ulemas, our leaders - those who claim to represent us in all our complexity - speak the language of divisions, of fissures, best of all.

A young Muslim friend of mine lives in Gujarat, India. She explores, every day, what it means to be a woman, a Muslim, a young person, an artist, in the maelstrom of fundamentalism that is the Gujarat of today. She struggles with what it means to be a citizen: either of this country or of the globalised world. What does citizenship mean if you live constantly in the shadow of fear? Not just the fear of physical abuse, but worse still, the violence attached to labels? For her, wearing the hijaab is both an act of courage and a unintended performance: she is just never quite sure of her audience or its response.

There is complexity in hate-mongering too. In India, as possibly elsewhere, it seems as though the language of ‘empowerment’ for women has been claimed and reconstructed to mean ‘power’ rather than ‘dignity’ or ‘equality’ or ‘pluralism’. Not all our women politicians are feminist, and not all our fundamentalists are male.

These are not only issues of government. But they are issues for governments; our states are contributing, in no small measure, to these voices of fundamentalisms, of alienation. And worse still: sometimes it is they who create the vocabulary.

Anasuya Sengupta works on issues of gender justice in Karnataka, India. She blogs at Gladly Beyond Any Distance.

Picture via FlickR

by Maura Stephens, journalist and humanitarian, coauthor of “Collateral Damage: The Iraqi People”, February 2003

There are many things the G8 should be paying attention to because they matter to the 51 percent or so of us on the Earth who are female. Tops among them, I believe, are global climate change and bringing peace to the Middle East.

I’ll address the first point in this essay. If I recall correctly, the G6 (later G7 with the addition of Canada, and then G8 with the addition of Russia) was initially formed in response to the oil crisis of 1973. But it would be 2005 before this body issued a statement on global climate change, essentially saying that it agreed with the consensus of the International Panel on Climate Change.

That’s really rather a pathetic step. These 8 countries, which control 65 percent of the world’s economy, have got to do more. And do it now, not make proclamations about what they will do in the future once some other factors fall into place. And they must pressure other nations to come along — including the most resistant “developed” countries.

Global climate change is the big bear in the closet, the one looming disaster that will almost certainly bring unplanned class equity to most of the world. Those who now live in wealthy seaside dwellings may well not have homes 10 years from now, and those who live in artificially irrigated desert oases will likely be engaged in wars of a new and different sort: water wars. And those who are already poor, living in fishing villages or huge cities situated on water, will continue to pay high prices. They already have: witness the devastation in numerous countries following the Indian Ocean earthquake that triggered the Asian tsunami of December 26, 2004, and the hurricane-pummeled, poorly maintained infrastructure that flattened mostly poor areas of Louisiana and Mississippi, USA, in 2005. The beautiful islands of Iceland and Ireland (my homeland, that economically booming gem of the EU) will most likely no longer enjoy the temperate climes they have been blessed with, thanks to the changes in the warming North Atlantic currents.

Some of these changes cannot be averted by island nations. Yet many can. All countries must first take responsibility for themselves, and then recognise they have a responsibility to the other countries of their regions and the entire planet Earth.

Ireland, to use an example dear to my heart, will not only be harmed by direct environmental effects of global climate change, according to several studies. The near future brings about many possible threats to Ireland, as an EPA report points out. Yet Ireland is brazenly continuing its rate of economic expansion and has actually increased its greenhouse gas emissions to 25 percent above 1990 levels, nearly twice the increase the government committed to under the Kyoto Protocol. The current head of government, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (who with his Fianna Fail party was re-elected, with a majority in the Dail, or Parliament, in May 2007), turned down requests from environmental organisations to discuss their participation in sociopolitical partnership. The G8 and indeed the EU need to tell Ireland and other would-be scofflaw countries that this cannot be tolerated.

Coastal flooding, availability of fresh water, and food supply are all important factors in a region’s adaptive capacity and resilience, so a population’s income and technological capabilities must be taken into account when forecasting its vulnerability to ill effects of climate change. In societies where women predominate, especially women raising young children—because of war or displacement—fewer strong bodies are available to mount storm buttresses, build wells and sewers and other methods for procuring drinking water and properly channeling waste streams, and to work farms for food production.

We must step up and make real change now. All of us, in rich countries especially, must change our living styles, our consumption habits, our expectations of endless more. Ireland is just one example. Unfortunately, now the people of Ireland and other “later-developed nations,” have caught up and even surpassed the biggest offender, the United States, in gross overconsumption and waste.

To paraphrase a great leader, Mahatma Gandhi, Women must be the change we want to see in the world. And there is no time to lose.

by Jessica Reed

Speaking of peace-making processes which might be evolving at the G8, here is a link of interest: last week openDemocracy had the privilege to be present at the Nobel Women’s initiative conference in Ireland, which we documented.

The Nobel Women’s Initiative was established in 2006 by sister Nobel Peace Laureates Jody Williams, Shirin Ebadi, Wangari Maathai, Rigoberta Menchú Tum, Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan Maguire.

The six women - representing North and South America, Europe, the Middle East and Africa - have decided to bring together our extraordinary experiences in a united effort for peace with justice and equality.

The NWI/openDemocracy blog is a diary of the event written by four rapporteurs, NWI participants and openDemocracy’s program director Jane Gabriel.

   There are different ways of approaching the fence, which has become the symbol for protesters, a source of provocation for those, unfortunately, inclined to violent action and a statement of exclusion to all of civil society. Artists without borders have come together to transcend the fence, the power it stands for – and the violence - with a range of activities from international art installations,  through street theatre and cross-cultural concerts, to unexpected interactions at the fence itself. With the help of giant power puppets  you can get the G8 leaders to say what you want to hear. And the world parliament of clowns  founded by Antoschka aims to bring ‘a wave of wisdom and a smile’ to the proceedings.  I’m hoping this kind of creativity wins out.      

The stile: Francis Zeischegg, Berlin   

Stitching the wound: Bankok Project     

Stories under occupation:Al Kasaba theatre, Ramallah    

Clowns protest at Wittstock   

Guest at the fence:Powerhasi (Superbunny)

by Patricia Daniel

I have official press accreditation to go inside the fence to the G8 summit itself. But I am more interested in the alternative summit outside. As I did when I blogged the World Social Forum in Nairobi 2007, I’d like to focus on the extent to which women are involved in the process and what they are saying. I also want to gauge how well the bridge has been built between Nairobi and Heiligendamm – one of the intentions of the G8NGO Platform – in terms of civil society networking and strategising. But I have mixed feelings setting off from Berlin to Rostock, with the escalation of violence that began on Saturday and continued Monday. I’m not afraid for my own safety but those (yes, at least 99% male) protesters have cast a dark shadow over what should have a positive week for global civil society action – using aggression against the aggressors rather than, like the majority of men and women here, celebrating the collective vision that a different world is possible. I’d welcome other women’s comments on this. Readers who wish to keep up with events in detail can check out the ticker news from Indymedia which gives a rather different account of the proceedings to Germany’s official press website.

by Ancila Adrian-Paul, PhoenixConsulting UK and openDemocracy blogger

It is a pleasure to share space with you again in this Women and the G8 blog.

The G8 represents approximately 65 percent of the world’s economy. The ministerial meetings organized annually in the country of leadership for that year, discuss both global and mutual issues – with topics ranging from health and foreign affairs to justice, terrorism and climate change. Afghanistan should be of priority interest to this forum as all of the governments listed above are involved in its reconstruction in one way or another. Afghan women should be of particular interest since their oppression was cited as one of the overriding reasons why the country was bombed.

As some of you may remember, during the 1325 blog in 2005, I had just gone to Afghanistan to work for the German based non-governmental charity – medica mondiale – a group of women advocating for the human rights of women in conflict and post-conflict scenarios and focusing on sexual violence against women and the attendant psycho-social issues affecting such women. Initially, I was going to be there for 6 months but ended up spending 19 months. I finally left Afghanistan in February this year (2007). In this blog, I want to share with you some of my overriding memories of the country, to give you a flavour of life there and an indication of the situation of women.

Imagine a country with mountains that reach to the sky. I am talking about the Hindu Kush mountains. Imagine a capital city nestles between barren hills, icy and treacherous in the winter. A city that becomes green and fruitful, ripe with pollen, flowers, fruit and a multitude of dust participles in the spring and summer. Afghanistan is a country of extremes – bitterly cold during the long winter months and frighteningly hot and humid during the summer months. Imagine a feudal and tribal society that despite its poverty has a piquant and otherworldly charm and romantic allure that belies the grim reality of women’s unequal status. Afghanistan is a country of many marvels and many riches – the foremost of which are undoubtedly its women.

Women in Afghanistan face significant odds. According to the 2005 annual report of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) headed by its well-known chair Dr Sima Samar, over 90 percent of Afghan women are illiterate. Poverty is chronic and is made worse by continuous drought as well as the deleterious effects of over 25 years of conflict. In this country, the feminization of poverty takes a very brutal face. Women were prevented from working during the Taliban regime and were kept inside the house – unable to attend school, seek gainful employment or at times even to take their children to the hospital. The situation has changed for some, but not for others.

While some women – especially in Kabul (the capital city), Mazar-i-Sharif (the large northern city) and in Herat (the intellectual stronghold to the West) on the border with Iran, are able to work and have a degree of unprecedented freedom, others in cities in the South such as in Kandahar and Helmand are often not so fortunate.

Undoubtedly, since the fall of the Taliban and the signing of the Bonn Agreement in 2002, Afghan women have made significant gains. Some of these include the 25 percent inclusion of women in parliament (in both the Upper and Lower houses) – a higher percentage than found in our own parliament in the United Kingdom! Afghan women are also Provincial Governors. For example, Bamyan in the central region is headed by a former woman minister – Dr Soraya Sarabi. Women are organizing their own village and community councils – which in some areas, have the burden of dealing with the high percentage of violence and brutality perpetrated against women. Unfortunately, these gains are not enough and are mitigated by the tribal, cultural and other customs that lead to many of the estimated 50 000 widowed Afghan women becoming beggars. Add to this, Afghanistan’s place among the countries in the world with the highest maternal mortality rate. In fact the remote and largely inaccessible province of Badakshan, on the border with China is reputed to be the worst affected.

My time there enabled me to visit several provinces and to interact with women at different levels of society and from both rural villages as well as within cities – including the three cities named above. The work in which I was involved, leading the political lobby and advocacy work of medica mondiale, enabled me and the Afghan team working with me to support the Ministry for Women’s Affairs and the Ministry for Public Health in many ways – including by conducting issue based research and targeted recommendations for lobby and advocacy work.

One very important research project that was conducted in 2006 was a three-month project on suicide among Afghan women which includes various forms, the most insidious of which is self-burning (self-immolation) and that occurs mainly among Afghan women and girls between the ages of 12 – 45 years. The research highlighted the fact that approximately 80 percent of these women and girls commit self-immolation due to violence and brutality of various types – including widespread forced and early marriages. The research led to a three-day regional conference bringing together participants from Afghan government and society as well as from neighbouring countries including India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Iraqi Kurdistan.

(more…)

by Patricia Daniel 

As the police crack down on alleged terrorism, Sven Giegold of Attac says: “the world is increasingly terrorised by the economy.”   There’s an ever-wider range of organisations involved in the anti-G8 protests against globalisation. Representatives from forty countries worldwide have been invited to participate in the alternative G8 summit which takes place 5^th to 7^th June in Rostock (I’ll be there to cover it).  Flor Martinez coordinates a rural development project in the north of Nicaragua – a region where one telephone serves 21,000 inhabitants. Due to ‘free’ trade agreements with the US, Central American countries are forced to increase agricultural production for the north American market rather than using their land to grow basic food such as rice and maize for local consumption.  

In an interview to the press this weekend she says: 

It’s not acceptable that a minority should decide the fate of the rest of us. They have the economic power, but we have the social power. The only problem is that we haven’t yet learnt how to use it.

by Patricia Daniel

The first rally of the week-long anti-G8 protests, which began today in Rostock, started off in a light-hearted atmosphere, with balloons, giant puppets, banners and drummers.

Unfortunately it was by marred by violence when a small minority of protesters attacked police vehicles, setting one on fire. The police retaliated with the use of water cannons and physical violence – a ratio of at least six police officers to one protester, as shown widely on German television. It’s a bad start to the week, undermining the work put in by the organisers and the intentions of the vast majority of protesters who are here to demonstrate peacefully.

I’m afraid the violence was predictable, a self-fulfilling prophesy, largely driven by the confrontational behaviour of the police, raids on alleged ‘ terrorists’ and their massive presence around Heiligendamm. Not to mention their increased presence in all major cities where demonstrations have taken place over the past month, leading up to the G8 - and where police, overdressed for the occasion in brand new riot gear, have outnumbered the protesters. The police have also introduced a ‘demonstration-free’ zone of I kilometre around the security fence surrounding the G8 summit venue of Heiligendamm. In addition to that, the government is moving to pass legislation to ban demonstrations altogether - which is due to be decided this coming week.

So in taking away people’s freedom to demonstrate, I can’t help feeling that the police and the government have been responsible for provoking the violence. All I’ve seen is an unnecessary show of macho power. As Bettina Vestring writes in today’s Berliner Zeiting:

“The G8 stand for everything bad in the world. They are powerful, they are arrogant and the walls behind which they come together get higher every year.”

It’s clear there’s no physical threat from most of the protesters. What was the German government afraid of? People asking questions, taking shared responsibility for the future of the world, acting creatively, having fun?

by Patricia Daniel

We know that women tend to be too busy multi-tasking to write at length. But we welcome your comments on the open letter. Did we get it right? What did we leave out? What else is there to say? The blog remains open for another week, until the end of the G8 summit on 8^th June. I’ll be blogging from Germany on how things unfold. There is still time to add your voice…

by Jessica Reed

openDemocracy is publishing an open letter gathering the thoughts and advice that our women bloggers have passed our way during those past two weeks. They have given us their time and expertise on what should be tackled with much more efficiency by our world leaders to finally reach gender equality. This letter, drafted by Patricia Daniel, will be sent to the media, G8 leaders and ambassadors. We urge you to pass this letter along as well, as widely as possible, so the voices of women across the world can be heard.

Open letter to G8: gender at the top of the agenda

by Patricia Daniel

For the first time, gender equality has been on the G8’s agenda this year, under Germany’s presidency. Women’s rights and women’s role in development have been championed by Bundesministerin Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul of the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in collaboration with civil society and in official discussion forums prior to the G8 summit of 6-8 June 2007.
At local, national and international levels, in gatherings and via the internet, women have been coming together to develop one collective voice for greater impact and to create democratic spaces through which their voices can be heard. So openDemocracy invited some of those women to blog in our Women’s openSummit, to discuss matters of concern for women worldwide, and to challenge the G8 leaders to consider a women’s perspective. As the summit itself approaches, this open letter puts their key points to the G8.

1. Tackle structural economic exclusion

Comprising 70% of the world’s poor, women continue to suffer marginalisation and discrimination within the current free market model. Globalisation increases inequalities not only in purely economic terms but also in the social, political and private spheres. The World Bank has put micro-credit on the agenda, as the answer to women’s economic empowerment, but the solution is not so simple. The reality of women’s lives is the intersection between lack of education, poor health, lack of choice, exclusion from decision-making, lack of citizenship, the effects of civil conflict, and enforced migration - all of which contribute to their economic and political exclusion.

2. Fight climate change - support sustainable development

Climate change poses a fundamental threat to the world economy. Its greatest impact is on the poorest and most vulnerable, exacerbating inequalities, increasing women’s workload and placing even more demands on their role as societies’ shock absorbers. As the incidence of natural disasters rises, development money is diverted into emergency relief and humanitarian aid. Conflict is triggered and exacerbated by the increasing scarcity of resources like oil and water (Iraq, Darfur). In the face of such major challenges, we need a holistic approach to development, from the grassroots upwards, which involves self-management by communities themselves. One productive area of focus is renewable sources of energy - locally produced, owned and managed - good for reducing women’s workload and enhancing their involvement in decision-making.

3. Reverse women’s marginalisation

Women are one of the world’s most precious resources, at the heart of family and community resilience. But often they are not valued. Women urge the leaders of the G8 to acknowledge the fact that gender equality is critical to development and that women’s continuing marginalisation must be reversed. The G8 have the power to support equitable economic development in Africa. Evidence from women suggests that including emerging economies such as India and China in three-way partnerships with Africa is not a model leaders should adopt - as economic reforms in those countries have further marginalized women workers in addition to worsening their labour conditions. They demand governance bodies’ commitment to equitable budget disbursement and proper accountability to ensure that international goals set for the improvement of the status of women are achieved. This requires a different approach to development, a different view of the world. Women’s empowerment depends on a web of strategies and support mechanisms, and on collective action. Real democratisation needs to obtain to policy making at all levels, including international trade agreements, so that women’s voices are taken into account.

4. Combat gender-based violence

The devaluing of women reaches an extreme in India, where female foeticide brings the sex ratio to 927 girls to 1000 boys. An estimated 1 billion female human beings worldwide are victims of violence. Gender-based abuse, according to the UN definition, includes rape, female genital mutilation, sexual exploitation, forced marriage, and sexual harassment at work. Immigrant women living within G8 countries can be particularly vulnerable - isolated, not speaking the language and unaware of their rights. Laws in G8 countries against female genital mutilation need to be mirrored by ratification and implementation of the same laws in African countries. Gender-based violence is a form of discrimination and a gross human rights violation, which undermines women’s struggle for economic and social empowerment, and is also exacerbated by conflict. Violence and the denial of rights are key factors in the spread of HIV/Aids: without recognising this, G8-led strategies to combat the pandemic, especially in Africa, will continue to be unsuccessful. The fight against gender-based discrimination and violence must also take in sexual orientation. Homosexuals continue to be subject to violence and intimidation, often forcing them to lead lives of fear and secrecy. In Zimbabwe (unbelievably just selected to chair the United Nations commission on sustainable development) Mugabe has said that homosexuals have no rights at all.

5. Educate populations about women’s and gender rights

Serious investment needs to be made in education about women’s and gender rights, both for women and men. An increase in women’s status enhances community well-being, and can give women an equal role in tackling commonly held problems. Men’s groups in different continents have taken responsibility themselves for raising awareness about violence against women and the everyday challenges faced by women - why not the G8 leaders (or at least seven of them)?

Call to action

Women have waited long enough, and the world itself is running out of time. On behalf of our openSummit participants, we urge the G8 to take up this challenge. The 2007 summit in Heiligendamm provides an opportunity to make a real commitment to addressing gender inequality: in other words, to make a real difference to our shared future.

by Aurelie Placais - journalism student in China

Being a foreign student in China where 70% of the international students are South Korean, I have learnt some very interesting details about South Korea ; especially concerning sexual and reproductive rights in this developed country.

The first questions I asked were really simple to me, but the answers I got were quite surprising. Amongst the topics that come on the table, the conception of the wedding came first.

For the majority of the older generation, the arranged marriage was the norm. No matter if the married couple loved each other, they had to come from the same social background and it was usually chosen when they were only children. “My husband’s mother got married at 18 years old, she didn’t choose her husband and didn’t know if they would like each other; they never did and she has suffered a lot”; told me Jin Ya, a married woman in her 30’s with two children.

For the new generation things have changed, but not incredibly so: tradition is still a very heavy burden where marriage is controlled by the parents. If they don’t agree with their children’s choice, the wedding won’t happen. They also consider that there should be no sexual relation before marriage, let alone unmarried couple living together or having children. When I pop up the question, Han sounded so astonished: “of course your parents won’t agree if you live together before getting married! Maybe some people do so now, but it is a secret, they wouldn’t tell anyone.” She is 22 and has been with her boyfriend for two years now. He came to China with her and they want to get married but even thousand miles away from their parents, they don’t dare living together.

When it comes to sexual relations, things are a bit different. Although their parents would not tolerate it, most young students already had experienced it. Most of them already had several boyfriends and had sex with some of them. According to Han this evolution was made possible by the television that broadcasts series showing examples of young unmarried couple having sex: “it is very easy to know that you can do it and how to do it”.

I then asked for the contraception they usually use and this is where I was surprised: condoms are not easy to ask for in the pharmacy, birth control pills are “dangerous for the health” and they don’t trust them and last but not least they did not know if abortion was legal or not. Of course they cannot ask this kind of questions to their parents: “it’s very difficult to talk about this problem, we can only talk with our closest friends, and the information is so hard to get” told me Kim and Yu. Even at school, they don’t have any any available information.

Officially, abortion is legally permitted but only up to the eighth week of gestation, and only in cases of transmitted or genetically diseases, incest, rape or when the health of the mother is at great risk. However, abortion is routinely used as a form of contraception. Between 1.5 and 2 million abortions are performed annually; it is the second highest number of abortions in the world. That may explains why the women I asked didn’t know if it was legal or not. Legislation is disconnected from reality.

It is true that the other means of contraception are not as well spread as they should be, and some efforts to teach women about safe sex, condoms, pills and other birth control methods have to be made - especially since information on sexually transmitted diseases is lacking.

But more importantly, eighty percent of abortions are done for gender-selection purposes - to abort female fetuses:

Many women in South Korea are torn between demands of age-old social tradition that obligates them to bear sons and growing appreciation of females in Korean Society; approximately one of every 12 fetuses is aborted each year because of its sex (NY Times, reg. req).

South Korea indeed shares the same catastrophe as India and China: according to their tradition, women are better off giving birth to boys, and abortion is a very discrete way to get rid of unwanted female foetus. Currently being the opposite of what it is supposed to be, abortion is not a way to emancipate women and to give them the choice to decide by themselves wether or not they want to give birth; it is a way to perpetuate masculine domination