Convergence and Diversity at Washington Protests

 
In its material preparing for the September protest activities in Washington, D.C., the US-based Latin American Solidarity Conference (LASC) acknowledges that "many NGOs and think tanks are trying to negotiate for concessions within Free Trade Agreements instead of oppose them." It goes on to encourage solidarity activists "to attend meetings and represent the voice of our Central American counterparts who are actively opposing these agreements."

This statement exemplifies the tone of the 2002 Washington IMF/World Bank protests. The LASC was born as a pacific conference in a Washington church at the original 1999 protests. Its new position represents the more hard-line side of the continuously evolving movement responding to the free trade, corporate-centered policies of the US administration and international financial institutions.

The co-sponsors of another Washington event-Action Aid USA, Bretton Woods Project-Center of Concern, Citizens Network for Essential Services, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Friends of the Earth, Institute for Agriculture, Trade Policy Institute for Policy Studies-International Gender and Trade Network, Oxfam International-Results Educational Fund-are aiming at groups that lobby the negotiation processes. They are coming together on September 28 to present "The World Bank, the IMF and the WTO: IS THERE A WAY TO EXIT THE "IRON CAGE?" It is good to see that advocacy still remains a positive agenda for some groups, as can be seen in the program announcement calling for a strategy session in which participants will be asked to collectively prepare a strategic plan that answers the following questions:

  • What are the key messages that can operate as a common platform between NGOs that are monitoring financial institutions and those that are monitoring rade agreements?
     

  • What key advocacy goals will advance a common alternative agenda on 'coherence'? What are some upcoming opportunities to pursue those goals? How can groups best organize themselves to more systematically propose alternatives?
     

  • What research is already available to support advocacy, and what is still needed?

The run up to the week of meetings and protests in Washington highlights once again the pressures within the development community and other social activist groups. Even mainstream organizations in the United States are showing a bit of schizophrenia. Today, it appears that none of these groups is willing to concede outright that it is working "inside" for change. The last time that this was clearly stated in an international forum was at the Toronto civil society/labor forum in 1999. Rejectionism now is the "correct" posture even while many groups continue to work within the political processes and corridors of national and multilateral power. Many progressive groups display a growing intolerance for those that want to burrow from within while they protest from without. But this double-edged strategy is what brought the social movements their successes at the two People's Forums and Seattle. In Washington, the tolerance for this strategy of inclusiveness will once again be put to the test.

One of the major organizers of the WB/IMF protests includes the following demands in its call to action:

"It's time to show the world that the Global Justice Movement is stronger, smarter and more relevant than ever.

We demand that the World Bank and International Monetary Fund:

  1. Open all World Bank and IMF meetings to the media and the public.
     

  2. Cancel all impoverished country debt to the World Bank and IMF,
    using the institutions' own resources.
      

  3. End all World Bank and IMF policies that hinder people's access to food, clean water, shelter, health care, education, and right to organize. (Such "structural adjustment" policies include user fees, privatization, and economic austerity programs.)

  4. Stop all World Bank support for socially and environmentally destructive projects such as oil, gas, and mining activities, and all support for projects such as dams that include forced relocation of people.
     

  5. We furthermore demand that the United States government, the largest shareholder and most influential government in the World Bank and IMF, adopt the above demands, and work vigorously to compel the World Bank and IMF to implement them."

Schedule of events:

  • Sept 26-29 Convergence of organizers and activists. Trainings, teach-ins, and coordination for the fall and beyond (see www.50years.org)
     

  • Sept. 25-27 CEO Summit, Ritz Carlton Hotel
     

  • Sept. 26th Power for the People/Clean Energy rally (day), interfaith vigil (evening)
      

  • Sept. 27th Anti-Capitalist Convergence Action (see www.abolishthebank.org)
      

  • Sept. 28th-29th IMF & World Bank Group annual meetings
     

  • Sept. 28th Mobilization for global justice rally & march (day), quarantine
    actions (evening)
     

  • Sept. 29th TBA
     

For more information on the Washington protests, see the following web pages: www.globalizethis.org; http://econjustice.net/wbbb and www.50years.org. This latter site is particularly interesting due to its detailed lists of programs and presenters with their organizations. The long list of "End Corporate Rule Presenters" is a Who's Who of the major players in the new/old anti-globalization movement. Coincidentally, these events are taking place at the same time that labor unions, represented by their regional hemispheric organization the ORIT, are participating in the Inter-American Development Bank-sponsored conference on corporate responsibility in Miami. From the web site mentioned above, you will note that there is no union presence in the Washington protests.

Parallel to the protests, the capital will host many constructive meetings and discussions in the coming days. The unions will hold their own forum on the afternoon of September 26, with a keynote address by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. Nevertheless, the image of the opposition to globalization will continue to be the over-simplified and strident protests exemplified above. This is only natural, since the words of the multilateral financial institutions have not been matched with deeds. AmericasNet will continue to cover the positive proponents of alternatives to and engagement with globalization in the hope that these efforts will find echo in the international community.