Scholars stand for Palestine: 42 ISS MA Graduates (2022-2023) call for mobilization in support of Palestine

By Posted on 2763 views

On the 20th of December 2023, the MA students of ISS (cohort 2022-2023) celebrated their graduation. For them, the day of joy and pride was overshadowed by world events and a number of students made a statement in support of the Palestinian cause in relation to the current conflict in the region. As the statement was made on behalf of a large number of students, the editorial board of BLISS decided, at the students’ specific request, to publish their statement. We congratulate the students on their graduation and wish them well as they take the next step in their careers. This is the statement the students made:

MA-Graduation 2022-2023

Dear graduates, dear family and friends, dear ISS community,

We are gathered here today to celebrate our success in finishing our degree within the field of development studies. Besides celebrating all we have achieved and the futures that lay before us, we want to use this time and space to share our fears. We feel apprehensive to step out into the world in a hopeful manner. Rather, we feel conflicted.

Above all, at this institute, we have been taught to be critical and use our voices. Given the platform we have been granted here today, and as academics, through our degree, we feel responsible to speak up and no longer remain silent or neutral.

MA-Graduation 2022-2023

As we gather here today, an eliminatory assault is being waged by the state of Israel against the Palestinian people in Gaza. This is not hyperbole. After two months of shelling the strip indiscriminately, including the use of white phosphorus, the bombing of hospitals and schools, calling for millions to evacuate in active war zones, and cutting all access to food, electricity, water and medical supplies, Israel is now in the middle of a ground assault. This is both cynical and brazen. Its 18-year long siege has and continues to strangle the 2.2 million people stuck in 365km². This situation is not just confined to Gaza. Since the start of the war, over 250 Palestinians in the West Bank have been killed by the Israeli military and settler militias. Israel has bombed Syria and Lebanon, and the Middle East region now stands on the edge of war.

At the same time, western governments are beating the drum of war, while pretending not to see what is unfolding in front of our eyes. For decades, these western powers have blindly supported Israel – militarily, diplomatically, and economically and suppressed any actions of solidarity with Palestinians. The current crisis, the death, the destruction, and oppression is as much on their hands as it is on those of the Israeli state.

The first response by universities across the Netherlands, instead of encouraging discussion, debate, and informed analysis, was to call on people to refrain from doing so within their communities. It leaves us feeling confused and hurt if we think back to the response given by universities after the invasion of Ukraine. Mere days after the war had started, universities raised Ukrainian flags and published solidarity statements in support of Ukraine. In the current situation, those same institutes remain silent, or worse, actively suppress protest and concerns by students and staff, hiding behind claims of ‘neutrality’ and ‘careful assessment of the situation’. As Desmond Tutu remarked; ‘If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.’

Right now, we must act. The priority of every single concerned university worker, student, and others is to mobilize in support of Palestine. We can’t watch this genocidal war happen in front of our eyes in silence. We must pressure our governments to withdraw all support for Israel’s massacre in Gaza and call an end to their complicity. Our actions matter in whether or not Israel is allowed to continue to flatten Gaza, expel and murder its inhabitants. 

MA-Graduation 2022-2023

As ISS students who were trained and shaped in a critical manner, it becomes an imperative to demonstrate our solidarity with Palestine. Our education empowers us not only to critique historical injustices but to actively engage in dismantling oppressive structures. Through our solidarity, we contribute to a collective effort that transcends borders, demonstrating that our commitment to justice extends beyond the classroom. There can be no justice under apartheid, no justice under colonial rule, no justice behind the barbed wire of an open air prison. We follow Dutch Scholars for Palestine’s lead in calling everyone to redouble our collective efforts to end the violent realities that Palestinians face, to increase the pressure on our institutions and governments, in order to hold Israel accountable for its crimes, and to end its colonial regime. We call on all of you to join us, and organize.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

  1. Cecilia Begal
  2. Carlie Kinnear
  3. Margaret Arney (Maggie)
  4. Muhammad Azka Fahriza
  5. Sydney Cohee
  6. Roos Saat
  7. Joelle Vetter
  8. Carlos Adams
  9. Dedy Susanto
  10. Marialuisa Borja L
  11. Smriti
  12. Rassela Malinda
  13. Madeleine Walker
  14. Eliana Melhem
  15. Salma Annisa
  16. Yusnita Silsilia Warda
  17. Patience Atanga
  18. María Fernanda Cossío Calderón
  19. Ismi Nabila
  20. Loke Wan-Kit
  21. Harjas Kaur
  22. Maria Caracciolo
  23. Rupankar Dey
  24. Melisa Try Hatmanti
  25. Ejiroghene Andrew Oruarume
  26. Mainak Bhattacarya
  27. Lok Yee Liona Li
  28. Marie Boscher
  29. Laura Mercedes Caicedo Valencia
  30. Ianira Pereira Cipriano
  31. Ting Yi Wu
  32. Haliza Lubis
  33. Catalina Mora Baquero
  34. Johanne Degenhardt
  35. Radha Sivasankaran
  36. Vrinda Poojari
  37. Eman Shaukat
  38. Andrea Catalina Medina Garzón
  39. Sara Asmar Salazar
  40. Hang Nguyen
  41. Catalina González Sarmiento
  42. Syeda Sayema Mayesha

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Food Wars: Conflict, Hunger, & Globalization

By Posted on 2282 views

[vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1592900783478{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;}”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1592900766479{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-left: -10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Conflict is a key driver of hunger crises, and most countries experiencing food wars rely heavily on primary product exports. In this blog, Marc Cohen and Ellen Messer claim that breaking these links among conflict, hunger, and globalization requires a right to food and livelihood security approach, stronger mechanisms to resolve conflicts, and the provision of impartial humanitarian assistance.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_single_image image=”27354″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://pixabay.com/photos/army-conflict-weapon-war-gun-1835299/”%5D%5Bvc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Over the past 30 years, most wars have been what we call “food wars.” In these conflicts, adversaries use food and hunger as weapons, and they intentionally or incidentally damage food supplies and food-related infrastructure. As a result, food insecurity persists long after the fighting stops. In turn, food insecurity is frequently a trigger or underlying cause of conflict.

In 2022 (the last year with complete data), the links between conflict and hunger were all too apparent, as crisis-level acute food insecurity reached the highest level ever recorded, with violent conflict a key driver. The number of forcibly displaced people reached an all-time high of 108.4 million people, with 70% in countries facing hunger crises.

 

Justifying the Link between Conflict and Hunger

We looked at 45 conflict, refugee-hosting, and conflict legacy countries with populations facing hunger crises—living at Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) 3 or higher. Acute food insecurity affected nearly 228 million people, accounting for 90% of the global population at IPC 3+. Conflict was a major cause in all 45 countries, although in some, weather extremes or economic shocks were the principal driver. The daily crude death rates associated with IPC 3 implicate conflict-related food insecurity in 6,400-17,600 daily fatalities. Because IPC does not include sex-disaggregated data, we can’t view these stark numbers with a gender lens.

Humanitarian agencies and academics recognize that conflict causes catastrophic hunger. They point to the humanitarian-development-peace Triple Nexus as essential to bridging silos separating emergency aid and food self-reliance. They also aim to build on local actions with due attention to peacebuilding, conflict-sensitivity, and humanitarian and human-rights norms.

There is another, often overlooked dimension to food wars. These crises generally occur in countries that rely heavily on primary product exports—gold and livestock in Sudan, petroleum in South Sudan and Yemen, cotton and cocoa in West Africa, coffee in Ethiopia, minerals in the DRC, and grain and oilseeds in Ukraine. Narco-crops featured prominently in Afghanistan’s and Colombia’s civil wars.

Paradoxically, most peacebuilding efforts see foreign direct investment and an export-oriented economy as a foundation for peace. But focusing on market liberalization without attention to inclusive and legitimate governance can worsen inequality, put countries into a dependent position in the global economy, and create the potential for renewed violence. For example, in Sierra Leone, large scale foreign investment in land, promoted to create jobs and boost tax revenues, has actually resulted in resentment, as many Sierra Leonians lack access to productive resources.

Across the 45 food wars countries, the average share of merchandise trade in GDP was 52%, compared to 40% for low- and middle-income countries. While these figures do not demonstrate causality, they show the clear correlation between globalization and food wars.

Natural resource abundance and dependence on high-value export crops can contribute to civil war outbreaks. In Sub-Saharan Africa, clearing of forests for commercial agricultural activities, often in violation of local laws and regulations, can deprive communities of livelihoods and foment violence and forced migration. Mining operations often have similar results. Markets for high value primary commodities need more careful vetting and regulation to avoid funding and fuelling conflict.

 

Hunger and Globalization Nexus

Globalization is not just global economic connections and liberalized trade and capital flows. It also includes international norms and institutions promoting humanitarianism, human rights, social justice, and fair trade—what we call “globalization’s bright side.”

Political and policy frameworks have in fact strengthened legal foundations for international interventions in food wars. In 2018, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2417, condemning starvation as a war crime. But enhanced norms have not yet fostered accountabilities for “starvation crimes.”

Key to bridging the gap between principles and practice would be adoption of more holistic national development strategies, including food-systems approaches that protect and promote the right to food and livelihood security. Food and nutrition policy must also consider conflict, globalization, and climate change. All this requires stronger mechanisms to prevent and resolve conflicts, as well as commitment to provide humanitarian assistance without political conditionalities, taking a Triple Nexus approach. Likewise necessary are an understanding of conflict history and context, and inclusive actions that integrate local capacities, perceptions, and humanitarian leadership.

A key question is how to ensure private-sector social responsibility. Voluntary instruments don’t always deliver the desired outcomes. For example, the chocolate industry’s certifications that it is free from child labor have proved inadequate.

Related efforts seek to link export crops to peace, sustainable livelihoods, and environmental restoration. In Colombia, the Cocoa, Forests, and Peace Plan, supported by the Colombian government, international NGOs, and the private sector, seeks to bolster the livelihoods of small-scale cocoa farmers—many of them women—in sustainable production. Scaling up such promising initiatives remains a work in progress.

 

Policy Direction for Addressing the Links between Conflict and Hunger

The simple answer to the question, “Why is it so hard to break the links between conflict and hunger?” is that these situations involve multiple stressors, including climate and economic volatilities, and are embedded in historical and political-geographic structures of violence. Religious, cultural-political, energy, and other natural-resource factors complicate the regional and global alliances that influence food flows and conflict, particularly in places characterized by severe inequalities and suffering. Economic shocks related to the Russia-Ukraine war have reduced availability of fuel and fertilizer, and increased price volatility in export crop markets, exacerbating conflict-hunger links.

Agricultural export commodities are important sources of revenue for smallholder farmers and governments in conflict-affected, food-insecure countries. Understanding the conflict implications of export- and food-crop value chains is essential for sound policies to address food wars. The supportive involvement of private-sector actors, all along the value chains of these products, could be crucial in charting pathways forward that favor peace. To facilitate such involvement, UN agencies and NGOs should vet and critique foreign investment in land and water from a human rights perspective. Greater transparency around such issues as child and slave labor and environmental impacts could help bring more products into line with environmental and human values.

This blog is based on the authors’ presentation at the 7th International Humanitarian Studies Conference in November 2023.

[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1706777642574{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]About the authors:

Marc J. Cohen (marc22102@aol.com) was Lead Researcher, Aid, Development Finance, and Food Security at Oxfam until his retirement in September 2023.

 

 

 

Ellen Messer (messereg@gmail.com) is Visiting Associate Professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. Previously, she was Director of the World Hunger Program at Brown University.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1596795191151{margin-top: 5% !important;}”][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text][newsletter][/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Verdict upheld against former president in Suriname (Part II)

By Posted on 2582 views

On 20 December 2023, Suriname’s highest court of appeal, the Hof van Justitie issued a judgement, confirming the conviction and twenty-year prison sentence of Desiré Delano Bouterse in what has been the longest criminal trial in the history of Suriname. In this article, which forms the second of two parts, Jeff Handmaker explains how the trial has been accompanied by a great deal of political drama and legal manipulations, but also judicial courage and perseverance by the victims of what has been referred to as the 1982 December Murders.

Image by We El at Dutch Wikipedia

Procedural delays

Back in 2012, there were hopes among many colleagues, including myself as a trial observer for the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) who supported the trial observation mission, that the Court would issue a definitive judgement on the constitutionality of the Amnesty Law (or not). This proved to be too optimistic. The process was hampered by further delays, most of which were triggered by the accused’s defence counsel raising procedural obstacles in lieu of substantive arguments, each of which demanded a decision by the Court and hence served to undermine the rule of law.

The ICJ responded by issuing a press release in 2013 outlining concerns over how ‘unacceptable’ the delays were, and in particular how delays caused great uncertainty. Eventually, the Court concluded on 9 June 2016 that the Amnesty Law was unconstitutional and therefore the trial ought to resume. President Bouterse responded shortly afterwards with an Executive Order determining the trial to be a threat against the country’s national security (with specific reference to economic grounds) and ordered the prosecutor to halt their efforts. Rather than stopping the trial entirely, this merely served as a further source of delay. In the meantime, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights expressed its ‘deep concern’ about persistent delays in the resumption of the trial.

After another four years of procedural obstacles, the ICJ eventually issued a second report and statement on 8 May 2017 on the ‘Importance of Resuming the Trial Without Undue Delay’. In this report, the ICJ emphasised how ‘justice delayed is justice denied’. The ICJ did not engage in the substance of the allegations against Bouterse and his co-accused, but instead focussed on two issues. Firstly, the ICJ’s statement focussed on the context in which the trial was taking place, in particular the social and political climate which included statements by Bouterse that those who had opposed the Amnesty Law were ‘enemies of the people’. Secondly, the statement presented arguments drawing on international law that emphasised the need for a fair and speedy trial and an effective remedy for victims of human rights violations.

After a further round of further delays, including illness by one of the judges, the trial eventually resumed on the merits, in other words the substantive nature of the atrocity crimes that Bouterse and others were charged with.

 

Judgement and sentence for atrocity crimes

The Court issued a judgement on 29 November 2019. To the surprise of many, the Court found Bouterse and several of the accused (though not all) to be guilty of atrocity crimes.  Bouterse was sentenced to a prison term of twenty years. However, in a noticeable exception to criminal procedure, the court did not order an arrest warrant to be issued.

Unable to send a follow-up, in-person trial observation mission, the ICJ issued a press statement, both in English and in Dutch, calling ‘on all parties to respect the rule of law and to allow the legal system to run its course, in accordance with international fair trial standards, without further delays, threats or other forms of executive interference’.

Bouterse’s lawyers decided to appeal both the conviction and sentence and a new trial resumed in the country’s appeals court. Six months later, in July 2020, Bouterse stepped down as President of Suriname after his political party lost the election to the opposition party, led by Chandrikapersad Santokhi.

 

Appeal

In October 2020, the ICJ once again expressed its concern and gave new impulse to its trial observation mission by announcing a new trial observer, the former Attorney-General of Belize and senior barrister, Godfrey Smith, SC. Physical attendance was impossible at this stage due to Covid-related lockdown regulations.

Despite his inability his inability to attend in person, Smith continued to monitor the trial from afar, emphasising, in September 2021, how important it was that the trial proceed ‘without delay, ensuring due impartiality, independence and fairness to all concerned in the interests of the victims, the accused and the rule of law’.

 

Historic judgement on 20 December 2023

After 15 years, anticipation that Suriname Appeals Court would issue a final judgement was high. On this occasion, the ICJ decided to again send another, experienced in-person trial observer, Reed Brody, one of the Commissioners of the ICJ and a veteran human rights lawyer who had been involved in cases against previous heads of state, including: Augusto Pinochet of Chile, Hissène Habré of Chad and Jean-Claude Duvalier of Haiti, among others.

The decision of the Appeals Court on 20 December 2023 to confirm the conviction and twenty-year prison sentence of Bouterse was again not accompanied by an arrest warrant.  While in the first instance this was regarded as understandable given the likelihood that Bouterse would appeal (along with his significant public profile). In the second instance, especially the legal justification was less clear, and while Bouterse did not, as a last resort, apply for the final domestic remedy available, which was to seek a pardon from President Santokhi, he did submit a last-ditch appeal to the prosecutor, with new lawyers, to avoid being arrested (which was unsuccessful).

At the time of writing, the Court eventually issued an order that those accused of crimes were expected to report to the prison in Paramaribo. Some of the accused honoured this. Former president Bouterse did not and there remains a great deal of speculation where he may be.

Irrespective of this, the judgement of the Appeals Court in Suriname can be regarded historic. As Brody confirmed:

Today’s decision is a victory for the families of Bouterse’s victims, who never gave up, and for all those around the world seeking to bring powerful abusers to justice. It should serve as another reminder that accountability for the most serious crimes has no expiration date.

Read the first part of the blog: https://wp.me/p9fvbD-76v

Image by We El at Dutch Wikipedia: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Dr. Jeff Handmaker is Associate Professor of Legal Sociology at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam and has published widely on topics concerning Israel’s decades-long impasse with the Palestinians. He conducts research on legal mobilization.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Monitoring an atrocity crimes trial in Suriname (Part I)

By Posted on 2506 views

On 20 December 2023, the Hof van Justitie, Suriname’s highest court of appeal, issued a judgement confirming the conviction and twenty-year prison sentence of Desiré Delano Bouterse in what has been the longest criminal trial in the country’s history. In this article, which forms the first of two parts, Jeff Handmaker explains the background to the trial, and why the International Commission of Jurists started to actively monitor this trial since 2012.

Image by Antonisse, Marcel / Anefo (CC Zero)

The 1982 December Murders

What makes this trial unique and special is not only the severity and nature of the crimes being charged, but the fact that the principal accused is a former head of state. The charges against Bouterse and other accused comprised atrocity crimes, including torture and extra-judicial executions of fifteen men, allegedly committed in 1982 under the leadership of then Sergeant Desi Bouterse during a military coup that allegedly also included the complicity of the Dutch government.

According to Amnesty International, which has been following the case already since 1982, the killings were ‘never properly investigated’. This understanding aligned with other human rights organisations, including the Netherlands Lawyers Committee for Human Rights (NJCM) which released a report on 14 February 1983, and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) which conducted a mission and issued a report on 4 March 1983.

While the opportunities for seeking justice at the time were virtually non-existent, the events of December 1982 have certainly not been forgotten. In particular, the victims’ families of those men who lost their lives have refused to remain silent and remained committed in securing redress. Their advocacy was accompanied by a growing academic scholarship on atrocity crimes, including by Suriname jurist Gaetano Best, who later completed an (unrelated) doctoral thesis in 2016 at the University of Amsterdam on ‘Fair and Accurate Fact-Finding in Dutch Atrocity Crimes Cases‘ and subsequently returned to practice law in Suriname, which later also included frequent commentary on the Bouterse trial.

 

The trial begins

On November 2007, in the midst of advocacy by the victims of those killed in December 1982, a trial was initiated against Bouterse and twenty-four other individuals, including sitting government officials. The court was located on a naval base in Boxel just outside the capital city of Paramaribo, and comprised two chambers: a civilian chamber (criminal court) and a military chamber (court-martial) each with a three-judge panel. Both chambers had the same, highly experienced judge-president, Justice Cynthia Valstein-Montnor.

Three years later, Bouterse was elected as president of Suriname. Remarkably, the trial continued, largely unhindered by these developments. Eventually, the Suriname parliament passed an Amnesty Law in 2012 that aimed to extend immunity for prosecution to Bouterse and other co-accused. Emboldened by this, Bouterse’s lawyers argued that the prosecutor had no authority to purse the charges against him.

After five years of delays, and little tangible progress in the trial on its merits, doubts began to emerge as to whether the Court had the capacity to consider this matter in a free, impartial and objective manner.

 

ICJ trial observation

Confronted with persistent delays as well as some reports of intimidation against journalists, court officials and the public prosecutor, the ICJ, as one of the largest and most established human rights organizations in the world based in Geneva, decided to launch a trial observation mission. This was in anticipation of a judgement that the Court was due to issue in May 2012.

The ICJ’s first, in-person trial observation mission took place from 8 – 12 May 2012. As a British lawyer, with some years of experience teaching post-graduate students in the country and with a knowledge of Dutch (the official language of Suriname), I was asked to lead the mission. This comprised a combination of tasks, set-out in a trial observation manual that the ICJ had produced earlier, which drew on the experiences of earlier ICJ trial observation missions. This included meeting with officials, making clear to all actors that they were under scrutiny, collecting findings about the context in which the trial was being held in order to ensure compliance with international due process requirements, issuing press releases, speaking to the media and of course issuing a report.

 

Court’s first Judgement in 2012

The occasion of an in-person mission in May 2012 was to attend the trial itself and to speak with various key stakeholders to get a sense on whether international standards of due process were being respected. Based on its findings and a comprehensive analysis of both Suriname law and international law, the conclusions that we drew in the report were fourfold. First, while the Government of Suriname had co-operated fully with the trial observation mission and did not hinder the work of the mission, the court had not yet clearly decided on the implications of the Amnesty Law. Second, there appeared to be space for a fair trial in Suriname, although continued procedural delays raised questions about this. Third, the role of a free, professional and independent media was seen to be crucial. And finally, public interest in the trial from diplomatic missions, as well as international organizations, promoted greater visibility of the outcome and integrity of the process.

In other words, while there was no overt effort to subvert the rule of law by force, even by Bouterse, as both the sitting President of the country and the principal accused, the main legal issue at stake had not been conclusively established. This was namely: whether (1) the passing of an Amnesty Law was valid, which implied that the trial ought to be stopped altogether or alternatively, (2) the Amnesty Law was not consistent with the constitution and therefore the trial should proceed.

As discussed in Part II, the next stage in this legal drama proved to be both eventful and for us as trial observers, very frustrating.

Read the Second part of this blog: https://wp.me/p9fvbD-76E

Image by Antonisse, Marcel / Anefo (CC Zero): https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=december+moorden+suriname&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Dr. Jeff Handmaker is Associate Professor of Legal Sociology at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam and has published widely on topics concerning Israel’s decades-long impasse with the Palestinians. He conducts research on legal mobilization.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

When genocide is reduced to a war of emotions: Personal reflections on academic debates and the war in Palestine by Dina Zbeidy

By Posted on 5289 views

Recently, universities and other institutions in the Netherlands have put a lot of focus on emotions of people in Europe when discussing the ongoing war on the Palestinians in Gaza. In this blog, Lecturer and Researcher Dina Zbeidy points out that while it is important to create space for emotions, this focus has the danger of shifting attention away from the actual atrocities happening on the ground, the topic these institutions should mainly talk about.

Photo by Mohammed Abubakr on Pexels

In a meeting about organizing events on the current war on Gaza, I noticed how I flinched and had an almost allergic reaction to the (over)use of the word ‘emotions.’ I have been reflecting on my reaction for the last few days to try and understand what exactly bothered me so much, as it was pointed out to me during that meeting that I myself have been very emotional these last three months.

And that is true. I have been an emotional wreck. How can you not be, when you wake up to the images of grey body parts sticking out of concrete rubble and go to bed with images of screaming burnt children and a more families wiped off the face of the earth.  I have felt it all: anger, sadness, frustration, powerlessness, exhaustion.

 

Reducing talking about war crimes to just emotive discussions

Recently, the Dutch minister of education sat with students and staff of academic institutions to discuss how best to organize and talk about what is happening. He urges academic institutions to keep the discussions open, as “you provide many students with an outlet to express their feelings and emotions”. He continues to say: “keep sharing knowledge, have discussions, and create understanding for each other’s perspective.”

From the first sentence, one can deduce that these events, whether panels, teach-ins, sit-ins or other activities, are mainly important as an outlet for emotions – more so than talking about facts on the ground and educating students in the Netherlands on grave ongoing violations of human rights and international law.

(Another thing one can deduce, that I will not address further here, is that talking about the war is framed as a ‘difference in perspective’).

During our meeting, we all agreed that there should be space for emotions. What I think is harmful, however, is reducing the war to a war of emotions (of some) rather than a war on Palestinians.

One example is the following argument that has been repeated in front of me several times these last months: we should refrain from using the term genocide because it might be hurtful to some people.

The assumption usually being that ‘some people’ refers to Israelis in the Netherlands or Dutch people of Jewish background or with family in Israel.

In other words: talking about an ongoing genocide can be hurtful to the feelings of others. That we should be very careful how we talk about the actual loss of life of children, families, parents, and grandparent, and refrain from naming it by what it is, as the feelings of others might be hurt.

My frustration came largely by realizing that civilians being killed in the thousands have to compete with other people’s emotions, and that in educational and academic institutions, these emotions seem to have the upper hand.

Nevertheless, more than 800 genocide scholars have already warned of the possibility of genocide, and the International Court of Justice will deliver its ruling tomorrow (26 January) on  whether in the legal sense, we can speak of genocide.

 

There is a big difference between creating space for expressing and letting out emotions, and reducing the talk about an unfolding genocide to emotions. 

One great place for me to let out and share my emotions have been protests and demonstrations. How powerful it is to know that what you feel is shared by thousands of others. The aim of such events is to show the public, including politicians, that we, in the thousands and globally in the millions, want this war, and the ongoing colonization and oppression, to stop.

When I participate at events, mainly organized by students and staff at academic institutions, I have found myself several times in tears, unable to finish a sentence because of these overwhelming emotions. And I decided early on during this war that I will not force myself to hide and suppress these emotions, not anymore. I loved that people told me that they understood my emotions, and that I should not apologize for having and showing them.

Nevertheless, the content of my talks and my contributions is not on what the war does to my emotions, or anybody else’s emotions for that matter. The topic at hand is not that of (our – we here, safe in Europe) emotions, but about Palestine and the genocide of a people.

I hope that academics, journalists, researchers, teachers, and students, remain vigilant to this distinction. Don’t let the talk about emotions distract us from what we, as part of society, can and should contribute to: facts, analysis, studies, and academic debates.  And yes, there should always be space for emotions – but they should never be (mis)used to oppose, or be silent on, genocide.

Photo Credit: Mohammed Abubakr: https://www.pexels.com/photo/people-with-palestinian-flags-protesting-on-the-street-19028556/

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

 

Dr. Dina Zbeidy is a Dutch-Palestinian anthropologist. She is a social science lecturer and researcher at the Leiden University of Applied Sciences. Having conducted research on various topics including  Zionism, settler colonialism, displacement, human rights and development work, mainly in the Middle East, her current research focuses on human rights education in the Netherlands.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Mind the Queer Gap: Bisexual Invisibility in the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda

By Posted on 3378 views

With several ongoing conflicts, researcher Isabella Cordua considers how Bisexual invisibility in general has contributed to a lack of attention paid to Bisexual people in conflict, and calls for more focus to be placed on LGBTQI+ people, and Bisexual people in particular in the WPS Agenda. [

Image by Adobe Stock

The LGBTQ+ community worldwide continues to grapple with violence, discrimination, and marginalisation, all of which are intensified during conflicts. Reports of violence are all too common – last year, a store owner in the United States was killed following a dispute over displaying a rainbow Pride flag outside her business. Meanwhile, in Uganda, a 20-year-old man faces “aggravated homosexuality” charges, punishable by death under recent homophobic legislation. In Australia, a new report shows that one in two transgender Australians have experienced online and offline anti-trans hate this year, intensified by the proliferation of unchecked anti-trans rhetoric.

However, there is a significant lack of efforts targeted at addressing violence against the queer community, especially during conflict. Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS), adopted by the Security Council in 2000, largely neglects LGBTQ+ experiences. This oversight persists even though the hatred directed at members of the LGBTQ+ community is fundamentally rooted in the same harmful gender norms and heteronormative female/male binary that create a permissive space for violence against women and girls.

Obtaining LGBTQ+ statistics, especially in countries that criminalise identities outside of the heteropatriarchal binary, can be difficult. However, a study in the US, Canada, Australia, and Norway found that bisexuals make up the majority of the LGBTQ+ community. Paradoxically, they remain under-researched and overlooked by the peace and security community, even when we consider the lack of focus around LGBTQ+ people as a whole.

 

Bisexual Invisibility in Society as a whole

Bisexual people often receive limited support and representation within the LGBTQ+ community, leading to minimal dedicated efforts and funding, of which bisexual women, for example, receive less than 1%. Bisexual men face even greater invisibility due to social stigma, and programming for bisexual genderqueer individuals is virtually non-existent.

The term bisexuality has long been the subject of debate. While it is assumed that the prefix “bi” refers to attraction to only two genders, bisexuality is better understood as homosexual and heterosexual attraction. Thus, bisexuality is a radical critique of heteronormative patriarchal morals and monosexual identity.

 

Compounded Vulnerabilities of Queer and Bisexual Individuals in Conflict

Bisexual individuals tend to be excluded from both heteronormative culture and the LGBTQ+ community, especially when they are in heterosexual relationships. They are labelled as “confused” or merely going through a “phase”. Exclusion thus occurs twice: deemed “too gay” and “too straight” at once, they are pressured to conform to monosexual norms and often feel “alienated” and emotionally “homeless.”

The pressure to conform to hegemonic masculine norms can endanger bisexual men, whose sexuality may be seen as conflicting with societal expectations of the “real man”. Top of FormBottom of Form Meanwhile, bisexual women may face comparable discrimination and abuse to lesbians when they are in same-sex relationships or express same-sex desires, betraying patriarchal assumptions around women’s perceived dependence on men.

Bisexuals often feel compelled to conceal their sexual orientation, particularly during conflicts, to conform to societal norms. While the ability to “pass” as heterosexual may be seen as a privilege, the necessity to do so to avoid harm constitutes a form of violence in itself.

Bisexuals’ nonconformity can see them stereotyped as promiscuous and untrustworthy. These harmful perceptions make them more vulnerable to sexual and gender-based violence, particularly “corrective” rape perpetrated in an effort to “cure” them. In sexually repressive communities, these stereotypes heighten risks, driven by the urge to control bodies, particularly female bodies, and sexuality against heteropatriarchal norms.

Since violence and targeting of those who do not conform to hegemonic masculinity intensify amid conflict, bisexual people’s challenge to binary expressions of sexual orientation deserves greater attention from peace and conflict specialists. To start with, the WPS agenda needs to be reframed to better accommodate intersectional gender perspectives that address the multiple ways that gendered discrimination is experienced. This approach can provide better insights for addressing violence in both times of peace and war.

 

Expanding Gender Inclusion in the WPS Agenda

Resolution 1325 marked a shift in recognising women in conflict beyond victimhood, yet embraced an essentialist interpretation of their role. Critics argue that the WPS agenda conflates ‘women’ and ‘gender,’ promoting a binary view and limiting its focus to cisgender, heteronormative women, ignoring broader gender perspectives in conflict.

This binary and essentialist approach limits the scope and effect of the WPS agenda, which fails to address any departure from the ideal of the “asexual good woman.” Expressions of sexuality challenging this norm are seen as barriers to women’s participation in peace efforts. Indeed, the WPS agenda overlooks lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women, leaving their unique experiences of conflict-related violence unaddressed.

As is, the WPS agenda fails to recognise that all forms of gender-based violence stem from harmful gender norms that perpetuate the subordination of women and devalue femininity in favour of a specific hegemonic masculinity. This omission alienates gay and bisexual men and transgender and non-binary individuals, who face violence due to their identities and sexual orientation. It also hinders conflict resolution efforts and perpetuates the invisibility of queer experiences.

To truly address gendered violence in conflict and promote lasting peace, the WPS agenda must evolve to include the experiences of LGBTQ+ individuals. Queerness can be a major factor that makes individuals vulnerable to violence in conflict settings and needs to be better understood.

The bisexual community navigate unique challenges due to their defiance of heteropatriarchal norms and monosexual morals. Yet, their experiences remain invisible also because they are often grouped within the broader LGBTQ+ framework, which is itself overlooked.

Image Credit: https://stock.adobe.com/ie/images/a-rainbow-flag-standing-tall-amid-the-destruction-of-war-lgbtq-pride-flag/631638932

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Isabella Cordua is a Rotary Peace Fellow at the University of Queensland. Before receiving the fellowship, Isabella worked as Research Coordinator at the Network for Empowered Aid Response (NEAR). She has previously led research and advocacy for other renowned organisations, including Global Insight, the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice, AdvocAid, and Defence for Children Sierra Leone.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Pros and cons of a women-friendly rideshare app

By Posted on 3750 views

As ride-sharing booms in Asia, women’s mobility is crucial. But it faces challenges like harassment due to the introduction of gendered strategies.

Photo by Hua Ling (Unsplash)

Ride-sharing platforms in Asia are thriving but their impact on women’s safety and mobility remains largely unexplored. This is concerning, given the prevalence of gender-based violence in conventional transport, particularly in South Asia where women face greater restrictions on independent mobility.

Enter Tootle. Research conducted in Kathmandu, Nepal, shows that the issue of gender has featured centrally in the business strategy of the Nepali-owned ride share company.

Co-founder and CEO Sixit Bhatta describes Tootle, which launched in 2017, consistently as “not just a ride-sharing company, the whole idea revolves around encouraging freedom of movement“. Tootle seeks to expand the freedom of movement, especially as Kathmandu’s public transport has been unfriendly towards differently-abled people and women.

Without questioning Tootle’s social justice concerns, the focus on women was recognised as a business strategy as women comprise at least half of the potential passenger population and constitute a dormant pool of potential riders.

Women are also underrepresented in paid work. In Ethiopia, for example, these observations have contributed to the launch of a ride-sharing platform (Seregela) which worked with women drivers exclusively.

Recruiting more women as drivers is probably the most effective strategy to increase the share of women passengers. Women drivers convey a sense of safety and security to women passengers. Tootle has built this factor into its ride-sharing app by allowing passengers to ‘choose‘ between men and women drivers.

However, attracting more women drivers is a challenge. The ride-sharing platforms seek to address this by championing women as drivers in their advertisements and by depicting ride-sharing as a women’s practice, involving women drivers and women passengers.

The platforms also publish success stories about women drivers that carefully weave together the benefits of being a driver with aspects of women’s conventional gender roles. Tootle also sought to attract women drivers by not charging them a commission (initially it charged men drivers a 4 percent commission).

Tootle not only creates its supply of drivers in gendered ways, following the theoretical premise that platform companies are ‘in the business of making markets’ it does the same for demand. For the public this is less visible; yet, probably more impactful. In its driver’s interface, Tootle represents demand for ride-shares in hetero-normative ways: customers are presented as either female or male.

Research in 2019 suggests that drivers (who are mostly men), indeed, use this to give preference to women passengers. For example, women passengers rarely complained about long waits. One woman customer who mostly used Tootle said: “I never had to wait more than 10 minutes for a ride-request sent.” In contrast, men frequently complained. One said: “It will be a pleasant surprise if I ever get a ride without waiting for more than 30 minutes.”

Allowing drivers to give preference to women passengers can be argued to make ride-sharing more women-friendly because it reduces waiting times for women.

Unfortunately, it also facilitates sexism.

A male customer interviewed referred to a response he got when he complained to a (male) Tootle driver who picked him up after a long wait: “You should feel lucky, because you are my first male customer [today]. I never give rides to males but only to females. Why would I become a driver otherwise — it’s fun having a female on the back of my bike.”

While in this specific case no woman was negatively affected, the driver’s attitude mirrors those collected online from women passengers reporting harassment by male drivers both during and after the ride-share.

These incidents happen despite compulsory onboarding of new drivers in which ride-sharing platforms instruct newly recruited drivers about avoiding unwanted behaviour.

New drivers are told to not tease women customers, to refrain from comments that could be interpreted as sexual innuendos and to refrain from asking women customers to sit closer to the driver, or to brake in such a manner that the body of the woman passenger touches the driver.

Across Asia ride-sharing platforms have significantly transformed urban transportation, including in gendered ways. The expanded choice and availability of transport options is good news, especially for those women looking for and able to afford alternatives to existing gender-insecure forms of transport.

Recruitment efforts targeting women as drivers has not only created new opportunities for paid (part-time) work for women, it also contributed to further shifts in gender norms in urban transport.

However, the gender justice argument put forth by Nepal’s ride-sharing platforms must be recognised as a business strategy. When platforms make markets in gendered ways, this creates gendered tensions.

Most notably, allowing driver selection based on the passenger’s gender seems beneficial to women initially but it encourages sexist attitudes and creates the potential for gender-based violence.

Over recent years, Nepal’s ride-sharing platforms have improved complaint and tracking mechanisms to combat sexism. Yet, the failure to increase the share of women as drivers delimits the inclusiveness of ride-sharing platforms. Improving women’s riders working conditions may be the surest way to address this.

This article is part of a Special Report on the Asian Gig Economy, produced in collaboration with the Asian Research Centre – University of Indonesia

This article was originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

Roy Huijsmans is an associate professor of childhood and youth studies. His research focuses on young people in processes of social development, which includes the emerging platform economy.

Pritee Hamal is an independent researcher based in Kathmandu, Nepal. She holds an MA in Development Studies and Gender Studies.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Decolonial Paradoxes in India’s LGBTQ+ Rights: A Political Landscape

By Posted on 2513 views

This article explores a noticeable change in the BJP’s (the right-wing party presently ruling India) stance on LGBTQ+ rights in India. It questions whether this shift is due to a change in their beliefs or if there are other reasons behind it. The summary highlights the conflicts within India’s political landscape regarding LGBTQ+ rights and examines the complexities and contradictions within the so-called decolonial narrative. The author Rupankar Dey aims to uncover the paradox between political motives and authentic decolonial aspirations in the discussion on LGBTQ+ rights in India.

The decriminalization of homosexuality in 2018 marked a pivotal shift in India’s social approach to LGBTQ+ rights. Despite the celebration of this milestone, the sudden embrace of LGBTQ+ rights by India’s ruling conservative Hindu nationalist party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP, led by Indian PM Narendra Modhi), comes as quite a surprise. Historically known for taking a markedly different stance, this major political shift appears to signal a progressive, inclusive approach from the largest party in Indian politics. That the BJP has made this shift to a seemingly progressive stance (by a conservative-nationalist party) poses quite the decolonial paradox. To understand this paradox, the underlying motives, entangled in the broader political narrative, prompt a deeper inquiry.

At the core of this transformation is the BJP’s attempt to establish an image of a more progressive India, ostensibly shedding the colonial vestiges and reinstating an era of pre-colonial glory. As homosexuality was initially outlawed in India by the colonial British administration in 1861, this movement to create a ‘new India’ diverges from historical positions that were notably less accepting of LGBTQ+ rights.

The BJP’s political strategy aligns this liberal stance with the idea of a neoliberal Hindu nation, aiming to include or co-opt the queer community to further the party’s agenda. This political move is meant for saffron washing of Indian ancient history which seeks to bolster the Hindu community’s perception as inherently liberal and open-minded (Nation, 2022), while simultaneously dismissing the existence and influence of other cultures. The root of the issue stems from an attempt to rewrite historical narratives and recapture the purity of an imagined pre-colonial era. In doing so, this portrayal conveniently overlooks India’s rich cultural tapestry and the existence of various societal groups that form the country’s essence.

 

Changing historical narratives for political gain

This transformation seems to be a calculated political strategy that contrasts the diverse historical narrative of India. The BJP leverages religious texts and myths to manipulate the country’s tolerant past and ignore its pluralistic societal fabric. This narrative obfuscates the essence of India’s past and fails to acknowledge its inclusivity and diversity. This is done within the context of Hindu nationalism, with BJP administrations across India being responsible for (amongst other things), redeveloping historical Indian Muslim sites, downgrading the status of regional languages, and adopting laws that privilege Hindu dietary practices.

The political rhetoric deployed by the BJP attempts to decolonize India’s history and reclaim lost traditions, while disregarding the country’s heterogeneity and diversity. It’s a distortion of decolonial ideals through selective interpretation, crafting a new narrative that serves political interests more than genuine societal inclusivity – a decolonial paradox.

This discrepancy highlights the paradoxical nature of India’s changing LGBTQ+ rights within decolonial discourse. The narrative’s reshaping leans more towards political motives than genuine decolonial initiatives, catering to specific agendas while overlooking the broader picture of India’s cultural and social tapestry. Indeed, it could be claimed that the BJP’s embrace of decolonial narratives to further its own rule is, in itself, a colonial act.

In essence, the crux of the matter is an acknowledgment of the uniqueness of Indian society, accepting the diversity and individualities within its pluralistic framework. Within the context of India’s LGBTQ+ rights, genuine decoloniality should focus on embracing the intricate amalgamation of cultures and traditions, ensuring inclusivity without undermining the authenticity of each societal segment. Co-opting and operationalising selective historical narratives to paint a mono-cultural picture of a truly diverse country is anathema to the qualities that support decoloniality.

Reference:

Nation, L. (2022). What is pinkwashing? [online] LGBTQ Nation. Available at: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/07/what-is-pinkwashing/ [Accessed 19 Dec. 2023].

Image Credit: Google Pictures.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Rupankar Dey, a gender advocate and researcher, holds a master’s degree from ISS and has dedicated his efforts to advancing reproductive health and sexualities for marginalized groups. His work with Lilliane Fonds in Uganda focused on enhancing accessibility to sexual and reproductive health for women with disabilities in the region.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

How upgrading the roles of Trade Unions can help to redress power imbalances – and not just between the worker and management

By Posted on 2679 views

In this blog, Nandini Ramamurthy looks into how different worker empowerment techniques and organisations can benefit and redress power imbalances. Not only through the traditional power imbalances between an owner and worker, but also gender imbalances. Digital initiatives, in particular, can be used to counter gender-based discrimination and violence at work, including in the case of garment factory workers in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, India.

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio

Capital and labour are in antagonistic relationship because of the nature of the power embodied in them. For workers, the power comes from their sheer numbers, integral role in the production process, and participating in trade union and collective bargaining activities. Companies and the people that run them, on the other hand, derive their power from owning the means of production (whether in technology and fixed asset terms, or through employment contracts). A recent development that seeks to further empower companies and owners is dismantling trade unions and removing their power of collective bargaining, and replacing it with workers committees – which are non-binding and do not have official power. In the era of economic globalisation, these practices are becoming more and more common.

The main argument of this blog is to highlight how workers are addressing their precarious situation in the digital realm (online). Airing grievances and highlighting injustices online means that a worker can be anonymous: so they do not need to fear reprisals from management. Digitalisation is particularly useful in supporting victims of sexual and verbal abuses, especially women. Therefore, this blog aims to further highlight how upgrading trade unions roles and expanding collective bargaining is relevant for gender studies in understanding inequalities and power imbalances.

The gendered perspective of trade unions is understood by examining union bargaining agendas for gender, and looking into the women’s roles and their leadership. Co-operative and self-help groups are described as alternate forms of trade unions (Sundar 2007). In this model, the purpose of trade unionism is about building on social unionism. A report by the Indian Committee of the Netherlands (ICN) highlights that the state of Karnataka has about 1,200 factories, employing about 5,00,000 workers and that 80 percent of them are women. The Tiruppur Export Association (TEA) suggest that there are 8,300 factories employing more than 1,500,000 workers, of which about85 percent are women. Typically, women’s wages, working conditions, including in trade unions and use of collective bargaining are inferior. It is apparent that the traditional approaches of trade union and collective bargaining are not bringing any significant changes in integrating women workers into the mainstream labour market institutions.  One way to ameliorate the situation could be using more digital tools.

To write this blog, I have used a digital ethnography as the research method. Gram Vanni and 90.4 Radio Active are the two radio stations used as sources. The 90.4 Radio Active station uses Behind the Label program, while Gram Vanni engages through Namma Kural, Tholilalargalin Kural, Urimai Kural and Vandu Murugan. These shows/podcasts are popular amongst and aimed towards garment workers.

Looking more closely at the cases of Tiruppur and Bengaluru, it is clear that the range of people taking part in labour markets in the two states (migrant workers, local workers, male and female workers, child labour, and workers with varying shades of socio-economic and demographic features), makes it difficult to make generalised statements. So, given this context, this blog narrates the experiences of workers that are exposed to digital methods for raising grievances, taking part in collective bargaining, and getting representation from a union. This is the voice of a female garment worker Geeta Bhonsle from Bengaluru. The worker deliberated on supervisor’s behaviour when asked for a 5 minutes break “…. the supervisor said this is workplace and not Dharmashala”. Vasantha, a garment worker from Bengaluru discussed about the dourjanya (forceful) working conditions. Latha and Vijaya complained about disrespecting women bodies within and outside the factory site and on safety issues during night duty. Savithriamma discussed the problems she faced despite having an ESI (insurance) facility “… it resulted in loss of workdays and ended up paying more money on diagnosis and medical treatments”. Muddu Raj a male garment worker elucidated his discontent when management applied discriminatory practices at workplaces.

In the case of Tiruppur, Vijayalakshmi explained that through using digital platforms, workers do not get into unnecessary saitchchavaravu (controversy) “…. the management has no idea which worker is on the other side”. Even though there is suspicion the workers are free from allegation of participating in trade union activities. Deepa said that on a digital faceless platform she has the courage to speak about kattupadu illatha kodimiyana thakudhal (atrocities). Moreover, the workers can freely discuss ‘forbidden’ subjects such as mental health, work pressure, sexual favours, maternity issues and mensuration related problems. Another innovative digital technique comes from the Gram Vanni podcast, which hosts Vandu Murugan: a drama show on labour welfare issues. At the end of the show, the presenter asks questions on labour-related issues, and rewards workers for correct answers. Workers also call IVR to record violations and grievances, and Gram Vanni then helps them to connect with trade unions or legal assistance. Sathya, a female worker, benefited from such interactions.

Digitalisation and using digital tools and techniques increases the rate of mobilisation and solidarity among workers because it can minimise discrimination and provide a place for people to express their grievances. Furthermore, digital spaces can transcend borders, break cultural barriers, and build collective strength and network. With the help of the digital realm,  we can collect information globally, and use it to challenge the powers held by buyers and suppliers in the global production system. It provides opportunity for workers with repressed voices especially when trade union and collective bargaining is beyond their reach. From the discussions mentioned above, it is evident that digital tools and spaces have rekindled the interest of solidarity.

Reference 
Sundar, Shyam K.R. (2007). Trade Unions And Civil Society: Issues and Strategies. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 42(4), pp. 713-734.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Nandini Ramamurthy holds a PhD degree from Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS). Her doctoral work focused on understanding governance, work and value share of local clusters in global production system, Tamil Nadu, India. Currently, she is working on ‘Odisha Migration Study’ project as a Senior Research Associate at Indian Institute of Technology, Hyderabad. Some of her research interests are migration and development, work and employment, trade union and role of digital tools in bringing solidarity among garment and textile workers. She has more than 10 years of industry experience in Micro Finance and MSME sectors, and specializes in digital financing.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Fallout from Gaza: An academic community’s responses to the situation in Palestine

By Posted on 2673 views

Few regional conflicts have had as much of a global impact as the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Outbursts of violence, like the terrorist Hamas attacks and taking of hostages of October 7 and Israel’s massive retaliatory attacks since then, have sparked strong responses everywhere, including in our academic community at the International Institute of Social Studies. Having experienced those dynamics for two months now, it is time for some reflections. I offer mine, as rector of ISS, but obviously also as one human being among all.

Feeling

The first layer of responses in our academic community post-October 7 were emotional in nature. A number of students, PhD-candidates, and staff were not simply shocked or “uncomfortable” about what they saw. They were enraged by the sheer magnitude of the Israeli military response and the enormous humanitarian consequences for the Gazan population, including for so many children. This sense of rage stays on until today, fueled by what they regard as a lack of responsibility by other countries, by international organizations, and also by universities, including the ISS. ‘Why’, they asked, ‘do universities not explicitly condemn Israel’s actions that punish the whole Palestinian population in response to a terrorist act, speak out against genocide and apartheid, join the BDS-movement (boycott, disinvest, sanction Israël), and choose the side of the Palestinian victims of oppression?’

For me, this emotional layer is an important one, because it deals with our gut feelings, our moral intuitions, our fundamental stance when human dignity is trampled upon. It cannot be dismissed as ‘mere feelings’. It is also important because it signifies that we are all affected as human beings. To a degree we are experiencing a form of indirect and collective traumatization, which means that we don’t respond only rationally, but also from our fundamental instincts. Just like we cannot expect people in Gaza and Israel to respond in a purely rational manner to a life-threatening situation, we cannot expect those within our academic community to be fully rational when the foundations of morality and security are shocked.

Hence, the first thing we needed at the outset, to process this rage, was care and safety, not debates and fights. This holds true for those who have been personally affected because they have family and friends who have been living in Israel and Palestine. As university leaders, we immediately reached out to our staff, PhD candidates and students who we knew had a direct connection with the region. For example, we learned that one member of our academic community has lost more than 45 members of their family in Gaza in the past two months. We obviously missed a few people, because we didn’t always know each other’s connections, and this is something for us to reflect on for the future.

 

Thinking

Offering care for these feelings is not enough. As an academic institution, we are called to bring our knowledge and insight to a troubled and complex world. We have supported our scholars who have engaged in public appearances, for example on humanitarian issues and international rights and who have published opinion pieces. We organized a Teach-In just two weeks after 7 October at both our Hague (ISS) and Rotterdam (Woudestein) campuses, in which lecturers shared their insights on trauma, human rights, the position of children, the political economy and also the role of media in filtering information. These Teach-Ins, held at Erasmus University and other academic institutions, in which our faculty members also participated, helped not only to share knowledge. They also helped to transform a primarily emotion-driven response into one that also incorporated an academic and analytical attitude. By engaging with psychological, legal, humanitarian, historical, developmental and economic insights, we moved to a second layer of responses in which we asked ourselves how academics can contribute to thinking about a meaningful way of coping with the tragedies and cruelties we witness in the world.

The Teach-Ins were valuable, but not easy. The process of challenging each other to reflect, academically was not self-evident. Emotions still played a major role in framing peoples’ responses within our community, but also triggered a plea for institutional action. Here we faced a dilemma in that many of those participating in these and similar events shared a particular perspective on the situation in Gaza; this made the opportunities for dialogue less diverse and inclusive than they could have been. Students and staff who might be inclined to sympathize with Israeli population or to critique Palestine leadership were less visible. Some students approached me at different moments asking why we showed less interest in other conflicts, oppressions, and human rights violations in the world. They felt excluded that events focused only on Gaza, especially when accompanied by strong moral messaging. This remains a dilemma: how to accommodate and support, on the one hand, our community members who feel that we should speak out and act, and on the other hand, respond to members who feel that attention should also be given to Yemen, Sudan, Azerbaijan, Ethiopia or Myanmar.

 

Acting

That brings me to a third layer of responses: action. This took shape already in the early days of the post-October 7 surge of violence when students protested on our doorstep and remained visible in posters and messages distributed among our community. It was presented to the ISS leadership in the form of a request to issue explicit statements and break ties with Israeli institutions. Anything less than that would be understood by a substantial part of our community as neglecting our moral responsibility as an institution devoted to social justice. At the same time, we had to look critically at the role of academics and institutions in the midst of massive disinformation that sometimes also limits our potential to reach conclusions about what is happening.

Navigating these demands, it was clear for me and colleagues  in university leadership positions that we indeed needed to act. Neutrality in the face of violence is not an option. But we were also very clear that our role had to be knowledge-based and that our primary task was and remains to preserve academic freedom and to facilitate our scholars – from students to professors – to contribute their academic insights to society. We are grateful for the courage of all our scholars to do so and for the wisdom they bring to the world. We have witnessed how they have condemned the Hamas atrocities and also addressed Israeli atrocities, including violations of humanitarian law, and especially the cruelty of punishing an entire population with – as they argued – genocidal intent.

As an academic institute, we exercise restraint in speaking out by way of performative statements, especially because the protection of academic freedom is necessary to safeguard the space for our scholars to speak the truth. When the university itself defines what counts as true, just, and right, that immediately restricts the freedom of other academics. We do not remain neutral because we are afraid to take a stand. It is absolutely clear that as an institution committed to researching Global Development and Social Justice, we stand for the protection of human rights, for the assertion of humanitarian responsibilities, and for the need to ensure peace, justice and accountability. However, the Institute refrains from speaking out beyond these general principles. This will always remain a balancing act between saying too much and saying too little.

The fallout from the present tragedy in Gaza will continue to affect us. It leaves us with dilemmas on how to act. We will continue to organize care for the members of our community who are suffering. We will facilitate learning and nurture critical thinking. We will build our networks internationally and stimulate joint academic contributions towards a just world. We will not be unaffected. Indeed, we feel there should be more done than what we are capable of doing as academics. And when we operate as an institution with this kind of restraint, we are aware it will not be enough in the eyes of a substantial part of our community. But, we may be most effective if we contribute what suits our role: universities protecting academic freedom, so that scholars can share their knowledge and insights with the world, and scholar-activists take the firmer stand. The dialogue between those roles can hold us together in working toward a peaceful future.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Prof. dr. (Ruard) RR Ganzevoort is the rector of the International Institute of Social Studies in Den Haag (part of Erasmus University Rotterdam) as well as professor of Lived Religion and Development.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Contested Spaces and Narratives at COP28: A Reflection Piece

By Posted on 1999 views

In this blog, ISS MA student Manju von Rospatt reflects on her experiences at the UN Climate Change conference (COP28) held in Dubai from December 6 to December 13. Manju attended COP28 representing Eutopya and interviewed stakeholders and attendees at COP and contrasts the approach of indigenous, youth, and Global South representatives with the glitz of lobbyists from industry, and representing some of the biggest countries attending.

Image by Author.

From December 6th – December 13th, I took a short break from my regular academic routine at ISS to enter a very different world of high-stakes negotiations around climate change: the controversial and consequential 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in the United Arab Emirates. Attending COP28, the largest climate conference to date, in Dubai was a dizzying experience. Like many participants, I entered the conference with ambivalence, unsure what the week would have in store both for me and the final statement. The news coverage that we read about COP28 in the mainstream media tends to be dominated by the progression of the formal (and closed door) negotiations processes taking place between the 200 member states of the UNFCCC. Yet, attending COP28 was so much more than following the official negotiations and drafting of the agreement text.

 

Clashing narratives and crossing paths

Together with the international youth media group Eutopya, I interviewed a host of people across countries and roles at the conference, from indigenous and youth leaders, environmental justice activists, and civil society leaders to researchers, negotiators, and politicians. If you’re interested in these interviews, please look out for updates from our podcast in the following weeks. Speaking to a cross-section of people across age, ethnicity, gender, sectors, roles, and regions, gave me a sense of how COP28 is a contested space, rife with contradictions between various factions campaigning with different methods and interests. Each constituency proposed different solutions: technological, market-based, political, social, or spiritual. Cognitive dissonance permeated my time at COP28, as I jumped between conversations and events with climate justice advocates calling for people-centred just transitions and with organizations focused on energy transitions alone. I found fewer spaces than I had hoped at COP28 that brought these disparate perspectives together into a holistic approach. I found that people tended to stay within their constituency bubbles through self-selection whilst at COP28. Several interviewees also commented that the spatial distribution of pavilions across the Expo City venue further facilitated the segregation of interest groups. Even within buildings at the conference, pavilions were juxtaposed in glaring ways. For example, to visit the climate justice and indigenous youth pavilions, one needed to walk past two floors of pavilions of large energy companies and organizations, including OPEC.

The national pavilions, with multi-million dollar price tags, featured carefully curated narratives of national sustainability. These were further presented and performed by country representatives at side-events. Clearly, green-diplomacy has become an opportunity for many countries to green-wash, exercise soft-power, and legitimize state activities.

The corporate presence at COP was also striking, particularly in the open and commercialized Green Zone,  has been likened to a trade fair.

Single-Person Electric Helicopter featured in the Green Zone

Alongside COP28, I attended the private-sector event World Climate Summit, hosted in a glitzy hotel by the World Trade Center. I heard mining executives explicitly discuss how to maintain and enlarge profit margins, by including corporate social responsibility and sustainability as a flashy ‘side initiative’.

Luxury Electric Car Shows in the Green Zone at COP28

At an event hosted by Chilean mining corporation SQM on “sustainable lithium mining,” an audience member, a mining executive from Nigeria, explicitly initiate a business deal mid-Q&A to expand mining operations together with SQM. Their explicit concerns about expanding profit with the transition towards renewables and disregard to rhetoric around sustainability could not differ more from the ones I heard from civil society.

 

Separate spaces for differing ‘solutions’

Coming from a social justice perspective, I was particularly interested in how indigenous leaders, youth groups, and Global South environmental justice advocates would position themselves at the conference, which was bound to focus mostly on the energy transition. I was curious as to what kinds of tension would emerge between the mainstream narratives and voices at the margins of the conference. According to Asad Rehman, Executive Director of War on Want, this was the first year in which civil society and climate justice organizers were able to secure an official pavilion. At past COPs, organizers would gather at the margins of the venues, hosting meetings on the lawn, benches, and cafes. Across interviews with civil society members, I heard that protests at COPs were increasingly prone to UN securitization and oversight. At the same time, formalized channels for CSO constituencies and youth representative negotiators are incrementally included in the formal COP negotiation process. Despite this progress, corporate and national interests glaringly dominate the COP process.

During the six days I spent at COP, I witnessed and participated in several protests in the UN-designated blue zone of the Expo City (the Green Zone lies within UAE’s jurisdiction and has a zero tolerance policy for protests). The protests called for everything from calling for negotiators to add the phrase “phase out of fossil fuels” to the final text, climate reparations through sovereign debt cancellation for African countries, ceasefire in Palestine, and centering indigenous voices. Among smaller daily protests, a large protest organized by the COP28 coalition of CSOs on December 9th made history; activists marched through the conference venue, demanding their voices to be heard.

Farooq Tariq, General Secretary Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee (PKRC) and president Haqooq Khalq Party, speaking to protestors about climate justice

On December 11, the COP28 coalition organized another historic event, the “People’s Plenary”, in counter-response to the market-based, technocratic and Eurocentric approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Historic People’s Plenary on December 11th featuring climate justice speakers

Many activists I spoke with were particularly concerned about the location of COP28 in the authoritarian UAE as well as COP29 which will be held in Azerbaijan. Following UNFCCC regulations, all slogans, posters, and routes had to be planned with and approved days in advance by executive members of the UNFCCC secretariat, upon risk of being ‘debadged’ (having your access to the Conference taken away) and deported if the agreements were not upheld. Following the UN’s rules, organizers needed to refrain from phrases directly mentioning Israel or the US and avoid “Free Palestine” calls, though the more neutral “Ceasefire Now” was permitted.  I also heard multiple stories from interviewees of intimidation and debadging against climate activists from the UN security officers.

Final protest on the evening of December 12th as negotiators finalize the wording of the text

A final agreement written to serve corporate interests

As I write this now, the final COP28 document has passed, hailing “the beginning of the end to fossil fuel” due to the unanimous acknowledgment of the need to transition away from oil, coal, and gas. Yet, the final product of the non-binding agreement is full of frustratingly vague and softened language which will allow for many loopholes without clear targets or timing. Language such as “phasing-down unabated coal power” and “phasing out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” clearly reflect the lack of scientists present at the conference (estimated at 0.5% of overall attendees) and high influence of fossil fuel lobbyists (with some 2,456 lobbyists present) and the political influence of OPEC. OPEC’s strategy was to have member states reject any language on phasing out fossil fuel production and rather push for language on reducing fossil fuel emissions, enabling further extraction and profit with promises of dubious carbon capture and storage technology.

Civil Society forms an unauthorized chain of solidarity, whispering “please support the phase out” to negotiators, in front of the entrance of the room in which final negotiations take place.

Though the outcome of COP28 has been a deep disappointment for many, it is a start: a beginning of the end to fossil fuels. I feel inspired by the fierce energy and tireless conviction with which civil society and activists, especially youth, have campaigned to build their coalition-based collective power. Without the pressure and demands of civil society, processes like COP would be even more susceptible to corporate and elite capture. I feel honored to have been present and witnessed history in action and know that the climate justice movement will only expand from here.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1702979927530{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]About the author:

Manju von Rospatt is an MA student at ISS in the Social Policy for Development Major and producer for Eutopya, an international youth media group. She is also an intern at the African Diaspora Policy Center. Manju’s interests center on issues of climate justice, labor migration, transnational networks, gender equality, rural development, and social protection, especially within the South and Southeast Asian context. Manju attended COP28 this year with Eutopya, interviewing various stakeholders, from climate justice activists and civil society groups to politicians and COP negotiators.  Please follow along with the podcast on Spotify!

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Book review – We Belong to the Earth: Towards a Decolonial Feminist Pedagogy Rooted in Uhuru and Ubuntu (Nadira Omarjee)

By Posted on 1691 views

In this blog post, ISS PhD researcher Xander Creed offers a book review on Nadira Omarjee’s “We Belong to the Earth: Towards a Decolonial Feminist Pedagogy Rooted in Uhuru and Ubuntu”, drawing out the relevance for educators interested in emancipatory pedagogies. Engaging with the auto-ethnography of Nadira Omarjee, which outlines African philosophies of Ubuntu and Uhuru and colonial logics of hierarchization, this blog highlights the need for mutual recognition to be included on the syllabus, particularly for migration studies, in order to tackle oppression in and from the classroom.

Image by Author.

To put the end first, “We belong to the Earth and we belong to each other.” (Omarjee 2023: 149). Nadira Omarjee’s book We Belong to the Earth: Towards a Decolonial Feminist Pedagogy Rooted in Uhuru and Ubuntu  offers an exciting approach towards the classroom, bridging the tension between self and other. Reflecting on the work of ISS’s very own Prof. Dr. Rosalba Icaza  in discussing the diological format of auto-ethnography centering on lived/felt experience-knowledge, Omarjee conducts an attentive psychoanalysis of her own existence under structures of domination (for instance, gender and race as a Black womxn), as well as teaching in the neo-liberal university. Here, Icaza raises the conversational or dialogue dimensions of the auto-ethnographic format, particularly as it emerges “from the embodied experience of the vulnerability that carries the un-learning and/or refusal to reproduce epistemic privileges of a ‘subject’ that interprets and represents reality”. Omarjee argues that from this view – her view -we can begin to see “the ways in which coloniality together with patriarchy have designed the academy, serves the system and further marginalizes and affects the mental health of vulnerable communities through othering” (Omarjee 2023: 104).

The diagnosis? The narcissism of coloniality and skewed recognition; a worldview so entangled in itself that it is unable to recognize any others. The treatment? Jouissance; the reaffirmation, actualization of and coming into self (uhuru) in tandem with the mutual recognition of the other through collective (ubuntu). This treatment plan applies for both narcissists and those entangled with them – jouissance allows for us to lose ourselves in the pleasure of being together as equals, without hierarchy or domination. Indeed, this applies within the classroom, but far beyond the confines of the academy, as it relates to interactions with nature and the more-than-human, encompassing “all sentient beings, challenging notions of supremacy of being by displacing the hu/man without losing the ‘hu/man being’ in the notion of being” (Omarjee 2023: 94).

In this way, the narcissism of coloniality comes to signify the “the perception of superiority, entitlement and privilege” (8), but like perceptions, it can be broken. More centrally, it can be broken together. The classroom offers an opportunity for this transformation, wherein all present might be empowered to come into themselves (uhuru), liberating themselves and their peers (ubuntu). This entails the conscientization of students across the spectrum of (dis)advantage– becoming aware of their own situations as well as that of their peers. All can participate in their own liberation (uhuru) and look beyond their blindspots (privilege) through solidarity (ubuntu). While both uhuru and ubuntu originate from African philosophy, Omarjee identifies these two concepts within the basic psychoanalytical drives of “self-enhancement” and “contact and union with the other” (2023: 1). “[W]e need uhuru and ubuntu – a profound respect for life, implying a profound respect for ourselves and for others” (Omarjee 2023: 3).

Through putting her own wounds and healing journey on full display, the work calls back to the message of Audre Lorde, in The Transformation of Silence into Language and Action: “Perhaps for some of you here today, I am the face of one of your fears. Because I am a woman, because I am black, because I am myself, a black woman warrior poet doing my work, come to ask you, are you doing yours?”.

Perhaps, for some, the intra-psychic and psychoanalytical approach (reflecting on her own mental health and cognition) included alongside a vulnerable auto-ethnography might not be ‘the work’ they imagine doing in the academy or their classrooms. This includes (re)visiting deep psychic wounds within intimate relationships, as well as personal failures, admitting her own inability and shortcomings as an educator. It very well might scare them, those who have built empires in the academy and would hate to see their privilege challenged (or worse, have to challenge it themselves!), and that might very well be their narcissistic right.

However, for those who can bask in this radical presence in-text, it is less off-putting – those who can give into jouissance, la petite mort, to walk the path – who took the advice of Hélène Cixous more than 40 years ago to imagine what a feminine language could be outside of phallologocentrism (privileging masculinity in cognition and meaning making) – “You only have to look at the Medusa straight on to see her. And she’s not deadly. She’s beautiful and she’s laughing”. To reinterpret this advice – face your fears as an instructor, looking at Medusa will make you into a real (vulnerable) human in the classroom rather than turning to a stoic statue behind the podium. Regardless of whether you have looked at Medusa or not, “The system traps us all: therefore, we all reproduce the system” (Omarjee 2023: 146). Neutrality is not an option, especially not in the classroom, and we might be teaching things that are not included in the lesson plan.

Exemplary of this potential, Omarjee shares the perspective of participants in her decolonial feminist pedagogy, one scholar reflecting that, “As opposed to feeling like merely students in a classroom, we felt like human beings in conversation with mutual recognition at its core” (111), and another sharing that “Personally, I have never been in an academic environment where I could speak a little bit more about my life and experiences. It felt a little unusual but only because I had been so used to the more Draconian (‘repeat after me’) sort of approach. But this class made me realize how traumatic that approach had actually been. However, while this class became a way for me to unpack and heal from it, I felt I also had to be reflexive and see where I could be reinforcing that traumatic approach around me (i.e. other peers)” (110-111). Through these reflections, Omarjee affirms the potential for the classroom to be a space-and-time for radical transformation. “Group projects further explored ubuntu as praxis, extending care to the other in the form of holding space, encouraging safety and healing” (Omarjee 2023: 115), while processes of conscientization allow for students to come into themselves and their experience (uhuru).

Returning to my own experience in the classroom, as a migration studies scholar and instructor, as well as a student, who attended the Decolonizing Scholarship CERES Research School course, the book reminded me of my learned/lived experiences of the violent regime of citizenship and integration. I remember sitting in classrooms as a student learning about migration and feeling an unease or misalignment with my own experience. In this way, Omarjee’s book has allowed me to revisit that memory, and think about who’s knowledge was being shared/suppressed. Likewise, her work has helped me reframe as an instructor, when moderating a heated discussion about the possibility of a global institution or its employees to be racist or not. I have been able to approach the discussion in terms of supporting students coming to themselves (uhuru) as well as coming together (ubuntu), even if they disagree. This is certainly a different classroom than one where students seek to ‘be right’. Certainly, a decolonial feminist pedagogy offers opportunities to transform the classroom while exploring topics within migration studies such as identity, challenging the divide between migrant/citizen:

(B)earth-right Citizenship

We belong to the earth, not to borders, to each other

            to the earth we will return

            from the earth we will rise

Birth, life and death are matters of both

            blood and soil

            jus sanguinis and jus soli

matters of which

            I / you becomes we

            where citizen and non-citizen meet

For we cannot live nor die

                        without us-you-me;

                        without earth

(Xander Creed, July 2023 in response to Nadira Omarjee).

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.About the author:

Xander Creed is a PhD researcher at the ISS. Their work explores migration and asylum governance with a particular focus on the human dimension of (im)mobility, for instance through the lens of human security and feminisms.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

A JOURNEY OF FLUIDITY THROUGH (IM)MOBILITY

By Posted on 2035 views

Justice and mobility are intertwined elements of our civilization and affect all of us significantly. Through two blog posts, we discuss affective justice and mobility, drawing on our individual experiences and perceptions. This post reflects on our daily experiences of mobility and how those affect our identity.

Image by Freepik.

Mobility, both physical and social, is a fundamental aspect of our daily lives. Mobility is not only about physical movement but also about freedom and opportunities (Castle et. al, 2020). Mobility has a personal dimension, as it is connected to the individual experiences and aspirations that drive people to move. Its nuances lie in the different demographics seeking what is (imagined for them to be) a better life. Mobility justice, as Mimi Sheller argues in her book Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes, is crucial in  recognizing the disparities amongst communities in their effort to become mobile, and understanding how to solve them. Mobility justice relates to the vision of a world where social justice prevails. A world where people are entitled to move freely in physical and intellectual spaces, unobstructed by their race, religion, personal background or physical ability. Our unique experiences make us connect to mobility through different lenses related to race, citizenship, education and many others.

‘Race has historically been a factor that has extensively shaped mobility,’ enabling the advantaged and restricting whichever group happens to be  marginalized within a historical social-cultural context (Sheller, 2018). Throughout our personal experiences, we have always felt that white skin has enabled people to move much more freely in social spaces compared to people of  colour. For instance, Yannis does not think twice about walking in the predominantly white neighbourhood of Kralingen. However, a friend of his who is of African descent recently confided in him the exact opposite; he feels uncomfortable strolling in the same area because bystanders often give him weird looks that scare him, thereby making the space uncomfortable for him to occupy, even in transit. Being extremely disturbed by the immobility imposed on his friend, Yannis attempted to initiate discussion around the topic in offline and online networks such as the Open Discussion Forum with the hope that some change in our paradigms would be enacted.

‘I always took for granted that I have an EU passport.’ Cassandra didn’t think twice about the fact that she was allowed to easily travel, work and live in any EU country. However, a few months ago, a friend of hers was going through a phase of desperately trying to find a job in the Netherlands, which was a challenge despite her expertise and experiences. Her friend is originally from India and lived most of her life in the UAE, so the practicalities of her being able to work and live in the Netherlands are quite different and more complicated than Cassandra’s. Through this, Cassandra realized how much effect one’s birthplace has on their international mobility, and the opportunities available within a set of borders different than the one they grew up in. We constructed nations, borders, and all concepts that constitute citizenship, even though none of them have any intrinsic value to us. We find it odd, not to mention unjust, to demobilize certain populations based on mere contingency, such as citizenship.

‘As an international student, the pursuit of education has been both a goal and a challenge.’ Kaitlan has always known that being able to study in the West requires a certain level of privilege, which comes with barriers regarding economic, linguistic and credential factors. Migrating to the West is a huge financial burden that highlights the disparity in educational access. The inherent nature of passport rankings has made her right to work here more difficult, given that she needs a work permit as a non-EU citizen. Despite these barriers, she is still here, mainly because of the global rankings of Erasmus University Rotterdam. With this in mind, we believe that the West has  monopolized educational resources for economic gain. Quality education should not be a privilege, but a fundamental right. Kaitlan’s experience as a non-EU student underscores the need for a more equitable system in order to achieve quality education. Given that many of us lack adequate access to it, we need to ask ourselves; what kind of global society are we living in?

‘Mobility is not a value-neutral noun,’ or a verb simply referring to physical movement. When we talk about mobility, we are essentially discussing justice in environmental, economic and social spaces. Whether it is nationality, race or educational background, our inherent personal characteristics act as enabling or restricting factors concerning how we navigate all kinds of spaces. However, our discussion shows that several questions are yet to be answered before true mobility justice is achieved. We need to understand how enabling or restricting factors are  internalized and, hence, still affect our behaviour even though “formal” equality before the law might already exist. We need to comprehend how to break down systems that control and regulate the movement of  marginalized groups in order to achieve true mobility justice; a situation where socioeconomic and personal mobility does not necessitate physical reallocation.

Image by Freepik.

Bibliography

de Haas, H, Castles, S. and Miller, M. J. (2020). ‘Introduction’ in H. de Haas, S. Castles, M.J.     Miller, The age of migration: international population movements in the modern world. Sixth edn. London: Red Globe Press., p. 1-19

Sheller, M. (2018). Introduction. Mobility justice: The politics of movement in the age of extremes. Verso.

“SIMPS: Using Sociology for Personal Mobility.” Ieeexplore.ieee.org,                                          ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/4637903. Accessed 31 Oct. 2023.

“Talking about Race | Open Discussion Forum.” Hello.naeyc.org,        hello.naeyc.org/communities/community      home/digestviewer/viewthread?MessageKey=e7032bb1-24b7-4bf4-8f59-  16b88b563636&CommunityKey=f51f9fd4-47c9-4bfd-aca7-23e9f31b601e&tab=digestviewer. Accessed 31 Oct. 2023.

 

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

Kaitlan Adams is a third year Bachelor’s student in Erasmus University College. Majoring in Political Science and International Relations, with a double-minor in International Human Rights Law, as well as Arts, Culture, and Society, Kaitlan has interests in working with NGOs that fight for human-rights and has a background in teaching English to underprivileged Youth.

Cassandra Kamberi is a third year bachelor student majoring in Psychology and Philosophy at EUR. She is a board member of Positive Impact Society Erasmus (PISE), aiming to help students identify how they can have the most positive impact they can with their career and resources. Some of her projects include running a committee alongside other students for Improving Institutional Decision Making,  and writing her philosophy thesis on the mental health crisis. Perhaps her biggest interest lies in understanding what drives suffering in human beings even when all their basic needs are met, and how we can potentially alleviate this suffering through both cultural reform and individual practices.

Yannis Diakantonis is a third year Bachelor’s student and Research Assistant in Erasmus University Rotterdam. Some of his current research projects relate to candidate selection and electoral systems in the context of developing countries. He has worked in several NGOs which, among others, promote Climate Neutrality, Green Finance and Sustainable Digitalization.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Indonesia’s Ascent to OECD Membership: A step closer toward gender-responsive climate change solutions?

By Posted on 2450 views

Indonesia’s interest in approaching developed country status is reflected in President Joko Widodo’s plan to join the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) instead of the (Brazil, Russia, India, China) alliance. The historical relationship between Indonesia and the OECD has become stronger since 2007, promoting initiatives for growth and information sharing. Access to information, materials, and money for gender-inclusive climate programmes would be easier with the OECD’s support, improving transparency and accountability and allowing adaptive management to handle gender and power dynamics effectively. In this blog, a PhD researcher at the International Institute of Social Studies Irma Nugrahanti poses questions on the potential of the membership.

Image by Ahmad Syahrir on Pexels.

Recently, President Joko Widodo has expressed an interest in joining the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as a member instead of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) coalition. During his G20 visit to India, he started to seek support from OECD countries such as France.

 

Indonesia is already a familiar face to the OECD

Indonesia is not new to OECD partnership having been a critical partner of the OECD since 2007, where the nation’s relationship with the Organization has greatly deepened. For example, in order to participate in knowledge exchange on creative ideas to accelerate development, Indonesia joined the OECD Development Centre in 2009. In 2012, Indonesia became the first Key Partner of the OECD to sign a Framework of Cooperation Agreement (FCA), and a Privileges and Immunities Agreement in 2013. Furthermore, Indonesia opened the OECD’s first Southeast Asian regional office in Jakarta in 2015. Additionally, Indonesia helped establish the OECD Southeast Asia Regional Programme in 2014 and held one of its initial co-chair positions from that year to 2017.

This application comes with an expectation to increase Indonesia’s per capita income. The average annual per capita income of OECD members is over $10,000 USD. According to a World Bank report, Indonesia’s current gross national income (GNI) per capita is $4,500, and it is categorized as an upper-middle-income country. The goal is for this GNI to increase to $5,500 in 2024.

If Indonesia’s application is successful, this means Indonesia will move closer to becoming an ‘economically developed’ country. Indonesia can use the OECD standards as a benchmark and as best practices and will also receive support for its development initiatives. Indonesia will be the third Asian country (after Japan and South Korea) to become an OECD member. With a GDP that ranks 16th internationally based on market prices and 7th based on purchasing power parity (PPP), Indonesia has one of the most significant economies in the world. Only three other OECD nations have economies that are larger than Indonesia on a PPP basis: the United States, Japan, and Germany.

 

What does this mean to climate change and gender inequality issues in Indonesia?

Since 2014, Indonesia has been using climate change budget tagging to differentiate between climate-relevant and development expenditures based on the intended impact of the activity. This practice followed the objective-based definitions of climate-relevant activities and expenditures from OECD Rio Markers. The adoption of Indonesia’s climate budgeting, which is also responsive towards gender, has the potential to move significantly with Indonesia’s membership in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

First, this participation can make it easier for the country to have access to crucial knowledge and best practices, such as technical help and policy guidance, improving the government’s capacity to incorporate gender issues into climate budgeting successfully. Additionally, better data collecting and research assistance would help Indonesia detect and rectify gender inequities in climate policies. Indonesia could benefit from studying how OECD members incorporate gender-responsive budgeting into their policies to address environmental and climate concerns. For instance, examining the practices of OECD countries such as Ireland, where the development of a tagging system has been instrumental in linking budget allocation line items to key dimensions such as equality, green initiatives, well-being, and alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Additionally,  Austria has demonstrated the efficacy of gender budgeting methods, extending their implementation to the city level since 2006. The budgeting method played a crucial role in shaping sustainable practices, as seen in the development of green cities. Third, by fostering peer review and accountability systems, the OECD would encourage transparency and accountability in the allocation of funds for gender-inclusive climate programs. Indonesia can have better access to climate finance sources that give priority to projects that take gender equality into account, enhancing its ability to address the unique climate-related difficulties faced by both men and women.

Lastly, Indonesia can generate accurate performance measurements for its climate policies, particularly those pertaining to gender equality, by using OECD markers and indicative lists. This makes it possible to monitor development more effectively and spot potential problem areas. On the basis of OECD principles, regular monitoring and evaluation can help with adaptive management, enabling Indonesia to modify its climate policies and projects in response to gender dynamics and power relations.

Even though Indonesia has to go through a rigorous process to become an OECD member, Indonesia could benefit a lot from the OECD to achieve a stronger economic and inclusive governance system. The ongoing endeavour of the Indonesian government entails the implementation of a budget tagging system, designed to identify and monitor expenditures in accordance with the nation’s climate objectives while placing gender sensitivity first. By incorporating gender and climate change considerations into government budgeting and planning, this procedure aims to increase the efficiency, accountability, and fairness of resource allocation. Indonesia can further enhance its approach by linking budget allocations to various equality dimensions and Sustainable Development Goals, in accordance with OECD principles. Complemented by the knowledge-sharing initiatives with OECD members, this will ensure that a gender-responsive climate budget adheres to global standards. Overall, Indonesia’s membership in the OECD presents a significant opportunity for it to improve its gender-responsive climate budgeting procedures and, as a result, contribute to more just and efficient climate action.

References:

Antara (2023) Indonesia’s OECD Bid: Jokowi Requests for Support from France, Tempo. Edited by P.G. Bhwana. Available at: https://en.tempo.co/read/1770317/indonesias-oecd-bid-jokowi-requests-for-support-from-france (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

Muthiariny, D.E. (2023) Indonesia Seeks OECD Membership, to Be First in ASEAN, Tempo. Available at: https://en.tempo.co/read/1758337/indonesia-seeks-oecd-membership-to-be-first-in-asean (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

The OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) (no date) OECD DAC Rio Markers for Climate, OECD DAC. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/dac/environment-development/Revised%20climate%20marker%20handbook_FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

OECD (no date) Key Partner Indonesia – OECD & Southeast Asia, The OECD and Southeast Asia. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/southeast-asia/countries/indonesia/ (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

OECD (no date a) Accession to the Organisation – OECD, OECD Legal Affairs. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/legal/accession-process.htm (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

World Data (no date) The 50 largest economies in the world (no date) Worlddata.info. Available at: https://www.worlddata.info/largest-economies.php (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

World Bank (2022) GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$) – Indonesia, World Bank Open Data. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD?locations=ID (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

World Bank (2023) Gross domestic product 2022, PPP – World Bank, World Development Indicators database. Available at: https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/GDP_PPP.pdf (Accessed: 19 September 2023).

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

 

About the author:

Irma Nugrahanti is a Ph.D. researcher at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam. She is a six-time scholarship recipient and a gender equality and inclusive governance enthusiast. Her doctoral research focuses on the link between gender-responsive climate budgeting and climate change policies in Indonesia. Combining her years of experience in finance and policy advocacy with her research project, she aspires to fill the knowledge gap in understanding the intersectional gender-responsive budgeting practice to ensure the promotion and implementation of equity-responsive policies for climate change adaptation and mitigation responses in Indonesia.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Adapting codes of conduct for humanitarian workers to the DRC context can prevent and combat sexual abuse

By Posted on 2594 views
The Democratic Republic of Congo, particularly in its eastern side, has become a theatre of recurrent humanitarian cases of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse ‘SEA’. There have been reports of sexual violence and abuse from communities during the Ebola response and from internally displaced people as a result of waves of wars and conflicts. In a previous blog resulting from the discussions in the humanitarian observatory, Patrick Milabyo Kyamusugulwa and Delu Lusambya Mwenebyake argued that the fight against sexual abuse should be more embedded in the context of DRC. Here, they focus on how this could be achieved.
Photo by Authors
On 15 May 2023, participants in the Humanitarian Observatory in the Democratic Republic of Congo (OH-DRC) met to shed light on how to adapt good conduct codes in humanitarian assistance, especially related to sexual conduct, to the local context of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This blog is the result of two group discussions on the topic. Reports have mentioned cases of abuse by local, international, and national staff operating on the ground, while delivering aid in areas dominated by different armed group operations and fighting, most recently in July 2023. There are different codes of conduct in the humanitarian sector, but the question is how they can become part of the lived realities of humanitarian actors and affected communities in the context. These rules play out and are differently interpreted where women and girls are exposed to a range of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) in Humanitarian actions in DRC. This blog argues that good conduct codes for humanitarian workers that prohibit all forms of sexual abuse, harassment and exploitation should be translated to local mechanisms and in ways that are appropriate to the social norms of the context.   Recognize the reality of a multilingual context: Translate formal codes of conduct in different local and national languages: i.e., in Kiswahili in eastern DRC, in Tshiluba in the Kasai regions, in Lingala in the capital city Kinshasa, in Kikongo in western DRC and sometimes in local dialects; for instance in Kinande in the Beni and Butembo regions.   Involve different actors including state officials: Allocate a budget line in each project dedicated to social mobilization for SEA prevention. Other activities could include organizing sketches and broadcasting programmes in local languages on radio and television about SEA and its consequences. Earlier involvement of state local actors (Mayors of cities, Territory Administrators, chiefdom representatives and alike) is needed in following up and acting severely against the abuse as specified in Congolese law. Justice actors such as public prosecutors need to be at maximum alert, while holding public audiences against documented sexual abuse cases. Civil society actors must denounce, advocate and lobby in favour of victims, be instrumental in promoting positive masculinity, and accompany victims in terms of socio-psycho-judiciary. At the same time, they must also reinforce the frame and space of influence and information sharing on sexual abuse, harassment, and rape for more reflection, follow up, advocacy and lobby, networking and connecting with local gender-based thematic groups. Finally, hotel managers should be involved in actions to prevent and combat any forms of sexual abuse, harassment and alike, and receive training on detecting and reporting signs of abuse.   Adapt humanitarian codes of conduct mechanisms to the context of the DRC There are two possible solutions in this area. One is internal to each humanitarian agency that requires regular awareness-raising of staff members on the one hand, and a clear sanctioning system on the other. This should include different training sessions, suggestion boxes, regular follow-up and evaluation, and creating a space for internal talks on this. To fight abuses, there needs to be denunciation, judicial sanctions and termination of contracts. Another way to change behaviours is through external mechanisms of awareness raising that refer to existing laws with and for affected community members. Also, family education and Christian message education against rape and abuses along with women’s empowerment would be beneficial. Lastly, schooling and mentorship for children, as well as awareness raising on the topic towards girls at schools and universities by promoting positive masculinity. Here too, fighting abuses can go through denunciation, judicial accompaniment, and criminalizing perpetrators of sexual abuses.   Reinforce local and existing norms There is a need to enforce the 2006 Law on sexual violence in DRC and the 2009 Law of children’s protection. Again, promoting women’s empowerment, children’s schooling and evangelization based on Christian beliefs to protect women and girls against any form of abuses, harassment and rape are all routes towards improving the situation. Applying all social norms that play on prevention, repression, discouragement, sanctioning any form of influence and structures of impunity; and instead promoting victim’s interest and damage repair. Value traditional and religious norms that prohibit and sanction sexual abuse, harassment and rape by promoting positive values of customs and religions. At the same time mobilizing influential church and traditional leaders along with creating a space of family education on the topic. In addition, messaging on positive masculinity and Christian positive values need to target both youth, couples, and women. Consideration of sexual abuse and the like as a transgression of the Christian faith, and sufficient reason for excommunication and community sanctioning. Religious and traditional songs that promote local values on positive masculinity such as else’s woman is a poison. Only locally driven actions have the potential to bring about changes when humanitarian codes of conduct are translated into long lasting and existing social norms. There is a need to allocate a budget line to social mobilization on the topic, strengthen capacities of local actors to the task and promote social norms based on formal laws, religious and traditional beliefs for positive masculinity.
Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1702372762559{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]About the authors: Patrick Milabyo Kyamusugulwa is Professor at the Institut Supérieur des Techniques Médicales de Bukavu, in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). He is member of the DRC Humanitrian Observatory and member of the Social Science Centre for African Development-KUTAFITI. Delu Lusambya Mwenebyake is a PhD researcher at the International Institute of Social Studies (Erasmus University Rotterdam), Delu is working on humanitarian governance in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Community-driven, accountability, and advocacy in Humanitarian Actions.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

This blog is part of the  Humanitarian Governance: Accountability, Advocacy, Alternatives’ project. This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 884139

Inspiring stories of The Street Store, a pop-up fashion “store” for the homeless

By Posted on 3761 views

In this blog, Luciana dos Santos Duarte, a PhD Researcher at ISS, delves into The Street Store initiative: a pop-up fashion ‘shop’ for the homeless. The Street Store is a pioneering initiative that collects clothing donations, and then sets up a ‘pop-up shop’, so that homeless people can have the experience of shopping for clothes in a store. This means that people are able to choose clothes that they like, and take part in a social, humanizing experience.

Photo: Vitor Colares

I was painting at a Buddhist sanctuary in Koh Yao Noi, Thailand, with other artists from around the world, sponsored by the NGO World Peace Initiative. At the top of the mountain on this peaceful island, just me and an artist from South Africa, Ricky Lee Gordon, were creating our artworks. One of the canvases I did was a crown like a carnival mask, in reference to the shut down in Bangkok, on the revolutionary day of 13/01/2014. Once, we made a Secret Santa out of time, and my colleague got my name. On his knees, Ricky handed me a Nelson Mandela t-shirt, happy to have pulled off “someone with a political conscience”. I have never had a man on his knees happy to give me something. Coincidentally, we took the same flight to Ethiopia. And from there, I returned to Brazil with an inspiration – not artistic, but political. In the same year, I found out about a social project that had started in Cape Town, called The Street Store.

1st The Street Store Belo Horizonte, 2015. Photo: Flávia Viana

In early 2015, I published on my fashion website about this project: engineering students were going to run a ‘street store’ for the homeless, where everything is for free. Twenty students would be volunteers working as if they were salespeople, and homeless people from the area could choose clothes according to their taste, subverting the logic of donation (normally from top to down). A newspaper in Belo Horizonte, one of the largest cities in Brazil, read my blog and then published an article as if they had interviewed me. Consequently, other newspapers published about the project, and I received about 30 emails a day from people wanting to be clothing donors or volunteers!

Thus, I resized the project to have 140 volunteers for the first edition. We served more than 800 homeless people in one day, ‘selling’ hundreds of items clothing. That year, I counted more than 100 reports about the project on TV, radio, in magazines, and on websites. As narratives tend to focus on a heroic individual, which has always bothered me, and this was a team effort, I asked a volunteer to take the lead and attend to the journalists, whilst I would be backstage, sorting clothes, and doing internal communication. My best student (who became a friend) handled the logistics. From 2015 to 2019, we held 10 editions, with more than a thousand registered donors, hundreds of volunteers, and thousands of clothes given to hundreds of homeless people.

2nd The Street Store Belo Horizonte, 2015. Photo: Bruna Teixeira

 

Every shopper has a face and a story

Talking about large numbers takes away from all the wonderful stories we lived. Homeless people who chose a smart suit and then got a job as a security guard, or as a waiter. Young boys choosing backpacks to carry their books to school. A woman that chose clothes for her entire family. One of our most interesting customers, who we met in 2015, was Gleisson. He gave me an origami flower made from cigarette paper in 2016, and after we hugged, he told me that he was wearing an ankle tag having been he was arrested for robbery. In 2018, when I last saw him, he told me he was working, and that he was free.

Gleisson and Luciana, 7th The Street Store Belo Horizonte, 2016. Photo: Silvia Xavier

Another great pleasure was seeing fancy clothes from brands such as Gucci, Prada, Dior, Louis Vuitton, and more, all being given to homeless people for free. Robin Hood, in his own way, must have felt as I did about giving from the (white) rich to the poor.

In the 5th edition, a group of tricksters, not the homeless, decided to pick up most of the clothes before the store officially opened for the day. At the same moment as the crowd of people came to the store, a sensationalist TV presenter arrived to record it and tried to blame the lack of policing. But I reminded all 100 volunteers, and the journalists, of how Jean Valjean, the thief from Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables, had been received by the bishop. After serving the sentence of 19 years in prison for stealing bread, one day he is hosted in by the bishop, but in the middle of the night, he steals the religious’ valuable silverware. However, the police caught him and took him back to the bishop, who said: “But did you take just that? I gave to you much more!” The police immediately set Jean Valjean free, who was now aware of his dignity. I explained that we could not label the homeless as tricksters, and that the clothes were going to be donated to all, regardless who they were. A pity that just one group pick almost everything, without choosing.

The Street Store project that we co-ran received an award in the Generosity category by the Brazilian Architects, in 2015. In 2022, the project was selected by the Netherlands National Programme Open Science. In 2023, the two main volunteers who became leaders— my friends Leonardo Máximo and Priscila Prado— held the 11th edition of the project in Belo Horizonte recently.

Leonardo Máximo, Luciana Duarte, Priscila Prado 10th The Street Store Belo Horizonte, 2019 Photo: Silvia Xavier

 

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Luciana dos Santos Duarte is doing a double-degree PhD in Production Engineering (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil) and Development Studies (International Institute of Social Studies, ISS/EUR). She holds a master’s degree in Production Engineering, and a Bachelor degree in Product Design. She is also a lecturer in Industrial Design Engineering at The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS).

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

How, when, and with whom can Humanitarians create power in their negotiations? Lessons from a 3-day workshop at the Centre for Strategic Negotiations

By Posted on 1284 views

In this blog, Paul Alexander, the founder of the Centre for Strategic Negotiations, dives into the various modes, contexts, and techniques that Humanitarian Actors can use in the course of their work. This blog has been written following a 3-day workshop where the Centre for Strategic Negotiations partners with the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative.

Photo by huettenhoelscher

Frontline humanitarians often literally negotiate down the barrel of a gun, one with militaries, militias or proxies behind it. It’s a clear example of asymmetric negotiations – where one party appears to hold most power. An extreme, and often extremely high stakes, negotiation.

Such extreme examples were important to consider when designing course material for delivery at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. ‘What power do humanitarians really have, and can power be created?’ Not only passing AK47 checkpoints, but for complex multiple engagements.

 

Asymmetrical negotiations and power dynamics

Such was the case here: the Donbas, Ukraine, just prior to February 2022. Locked in a conflict since 2014 that affected over a million people, particularly vulnerable children and pensioners. Humanitarians were negotiating with senior commanders’ or their civilian proxies.

This was a problem: the counterpart was sophisticated, and likely to know their power. It was also an opportunity to speak to decision makers and to, over time, improve conditions. An opening to build a relationship, some understanding and possibly some leverage too.

When observing previous humanitarian negotiation training, there seemed an almost visceral resistance to fully engage with models that seek to explore counterparty’s interests. This was understandable. Who wants to deeply understand minds so often seemingly ruthless and self-serving?

I informed Harvard that the plan was to explore this gap, at the end of the first day, which might make them upset. Understandably they questioned why – “you do know that their job makes them upset anyway, without your help? Maybe give them a break.”

The course material was over three days, enough time to structure participants through a 3-stage process. One that can move from concept to application. Practice ingrains learning, but so too does evoking emotional experiences; the idea was to make it experiential.

 

Day 1: Power and ‘The Gap’

The starting point for humanitarians is often a moral case, caring for innocent people. If their counterparty doesn’t care, and sees no other interest from assistance, what then? In this context we explored power, and interest, and their complex inter-relatedness.

Each participant then picked a live negotiation to work on. They completed an exercise on their negotiation goals, explored if the order was right, and whether any goals had been collapsed with the means to achieve them. They then did the same for their counterparty. The contrast was stark.

Participants had little to say on their counterparty’s interests. Silence, then emotion, followed as they reflected on the cost – for past negotiations as well as present. It became a brief, collective, grieving process. A potential pivot point, often seen when turning around teams.

 

Day 2: Interests and Narratives

They returned ready to engage newly with interests. We started with deeper conceptual work on interests. Then applied it to live negotiations. One participant, ‘Anna’, faced a commander refusing to approve even a toilet for a basement bomb shelter used by a hundred children.

She repeatedly told him that every child has a right to a normal childhood. It was both her opinion and an emotional lever to move him – unsuccessfully. ‘Anna’ was rage-filled. Despite years of experience, she couldn’t comprehend such disinterest and callousness.

‘Anna’ had, during her unsuccessful attempts, observed him enough to note that he cared about one thing: losing his job. The greatest risk to that was bad publicity, so problems that escalate to being media news. We explored alternatives to ‘normal childhood’, ones fitting this concern.

‘Anna’ started with ‘normal conditions’ and the ‘safety of children’, moving on to ‘breathe normally’. All were powerful but still lacked that specific punch. She tried ‘potable water’ but that was too specific and lacking the emotive quality for a good headline.

She then arrived at ‘basic needs met’ – a narrative but also that unfavourable headline: children’s basic needs not met. It was still framed as a low level of ask, so both a low risk to permit and a big risk to deny. Yet still vague enough for ‘Anna’ to determine what it meant.

She replaced emotion not just with logic, but with the commander’s logic. However self-interested, depraved or even illogical. A key lesson for participants: ‘Listen for what they really care about; if it isn’t much that might even help. Engage to fulfil, influence, reshape their logic.’

Being external to a conflict, offering professional skills and crisis experience can all create leverage. However, interventions still need not to framed as not contrary to, or even supporting, commanders’ interests. Whilst avoiding further legitimising these commanders.

 

Day 3 Mandates as Narratives

Humanitarians often start with their mandate: their purpose and justification for being there. This can create both leverage, or resistance, if heard as Western interference. They also start by outlining their principles, or ways of working: neutrality, impartiality, independence.

On the surface they are similar but can mean different things dependent on the context. Could they be used more? Beyond descriptions of method, rather as narratives tailored for specific situations and interests? As ways to both counter any mandate resistance and create leverage.

We explored different ways to express these principles, focusing on the subtle but important difference between neutrality, impartiality and independence. The group were in less of a mood to consider principles as hallowed, and more interested in how they delivered leverage.

‘Erika’ saw that her default principle, neutrality, kept failing because it wasn’t believed. She came from one side of the conflict. How could she possibly be neutral? It would be more plausible, and useful, to say independent. If not neutral, you can still choose independence.

‘Anita’ saw how each principle can create different stories of their role. These stories might communicate differently to each listener and can be adjusted as the engagement develops. Impartiality was useful to hold back in case they found themselves as mediator in a dispute.

They were building negotiation strategies. Each tailored for a new situation, counterparty and stage. Their principles became strategic narratives, nuanced to fit the context and interests. Creating, and selecting, these narratives could convert others’ interests into your power.

This helped reframe their understanding of power, and negotiation power, through its association with interests. In asymmetric negotiations, faced with hard power, the soft power of narratives and process can create leverage. An opening to trade, both ethically and silently.

Please email info@centrefsn.com if you would like to be notified of upcoming online free events.

Photo by huettenhoelscher  — HANNOVER / GERMANY – JUNE 24, 2020: Paramedic of the German army with an emergency backpack stands at a military ambulance.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Paul Alexander is founder of the Centre for Strategic Negotiations (CSN). CSN specialises in maximising the value of high stakes negotiations. It operates across the commercial, government and NGO sectors. http://www.centrefsn.com @centrefsn

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

In supporting Israel’s genocide, Germany has learnt nothing from history

By Posted on 3278 views

It is becoming increasingly clear that as the German government targets migrants and cracks down on pro-Palestine protests, some lives are more valuable than others. In this blog, Josephine Valeske—a project officer with the Transnational Institute’s War and Pacification programme—calls on the German Government to rethink its stance in both domestic and foreign policy.

Image by Author

Earlier this month, amid the unfolding genocide in Gaza, German leaders convened in a Berlin synagogue to mark the 85th anniversary of the 1938 November pogrom that formed part of the genocide perpetrated by Germany against Jews in Europe.

But it seems they have failed to learn from their own history. In a memorial speech for the victims of that night and the Holocaust that followed, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz affirmed that “Germany’s place is on Israel’s side”.

Referring to pro-Palestine solidarity protests, he said: “Any form of antisemitism poisons our society, just like Islamist demonstrations and rallies,” before going on to threaten migrants with deportation if they exhibited antisemitic behaviour.

The German government habitually conflates Judaism with the Zionist project in Israel, and has adopted a working definition of antisemitism that includes hatred of or attacks against the state of Israel. Its crackdown on Palestinian solidarity – from protests to memorials to cultural events – and the dangerous curtailment of freedom of speech have been well documented.

But as Scholz’s speech revealed, this crackdown also has an Islamophobic, anti-migrant dimension, at a time when the Social Democrat-led government has adopted a hard stance on migration in a desperate attempt to recapture votes from the right.

On 25 October, following a surge in support for the far-right AfD party and a panicked debate about rising numbers of immigrants, the government agreed on a legislative proposal that would expand police powers to search, detain and deport people without papers.

Two weeks later, a summit between the federal and state governments ended with the announcement of further cuts to financial support for asylum seekers and the possible outsourcing of asylum procedures to third countries – a potentially illegal process similar to the UK’s infamous, and ultimately failed, Rwanda deal.

 

Rights restricted

But for many centre-to-right politicians, this does not go far enough. They frame Palestinian solidarity protests as antisemitic, and instrumentalise them to demand further restrictions of rights.

In a recent video, Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck from the Green Party called on Muslim associations to explicitly distance themselves from Hamas, and threatened deportations and revocation of residency permits for those who voice support for the group.

Meanwhile, Germany’s largest opposition party, the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), is proposing legislation that would increase the sentence for antisemitic crimes, and lead to the loss or denial of international protection for refugees if they commit such crimes, including possible deportation.

Similar moves already seem to be taking place in practice: Zaid Abdulnasser, coordinator of the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, which was recently prohibited in Germany, reportedly received a deportation order because of his activism.

Under the CDU proposal, people applying for German citizenship would have to pledge their support for Israel’s right to exist and could be denied citizenship if they fail to do so, or if they are deemed to have an “antisemitic mindset”. Germans who hold dual citizenship and commit an antisemitic crime would stand to lose their German passport if convicted and sentenced to more than a year in prison.

Two weeks ago, explicitly citing pro-Palestine demonstrations, the CDU demanded the cancellation of a pending law that would make it possible for foreigners to fast-track their citizenship applications. In addition, former justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, of the Free Democratic Party has proposed to limit freedom of assembly to German citizens only.

While German politicians are outdoing each other in blaming antisemitism on immigrants, Muslims, Arabs or anyone who is not white, they conveniently ignore the fact that antisemitism among white, Christian and atheist Germans is actually a widespread problem. More than 80 percent of antisemitic crimes in 2022 were committed by people on the right-wing spectrum, continuing a trend from previous years.

When it became public in August that Hubert Aiwanger, the deputy governor of the state of Bavaria, had shared antisemitic propaganda in the 1980s, his party’s vote share increased in the following elections, and the government rewarded him with a fourth ministry.

 

Historical responsibility

If the German government is genuinely concerned about protecting Jews, it should address antisemitism coming from the majority white, right-wing population, instead of inciting hatred against minority groups. A similar message was recently conveyed by the Jewish Bund during an action called “You do not protect us” in front of parliament.

Right-wing violence has traditionally gone unchecked by authorities, whether it takes the form of antisemitism or other hate crimes.

The government failed to take any comparable action when it became known in 2011 that neo-Nazis had been on a seven-year murder spree while shielded by the intelligence service; when from 2014 onwards, tens of thousands of right-wingers started Monday marches against the “Islamisation of the West”; when a right-wing fanatic fatally shot nine people with migrant backgrounds in Hanau in 2020; or when a 2023 study showed that racism against Black people in Germany had risen by nearly 50 percent since 2016, among other examples. White, Christian and atheist Germans were never asked to distance themselves from any of these incidents.

Indeed, it is becoming increasingly clear in both internal and external policy discourses that for the German government, some lives are more valuable than others. The demonisation of (those perceived to be) Muslims or immigrants, and the crackdown on solidarity protests goes hand in hand with Germany’s political and financial support for Israel.

While many countries, including France, are calling on Israel to cease fire amid its relentless military assault, which has killed more than 11,000 Palestinians in Gaza, Scholz has reaffirmed his resistance to any such calls. Instead, his government has increased arms exports to Israel tenfold over 2022, with 85 percent of the permits granted after the Hamas attack and the ensuing military campaign.

Eighty-five years after the November pogrom, Germany should have learned that a genocide cannot be atoned for by enabling another genocide. Similarly, those who think that stoking Islamophobic and anti-migrant sentiments will fulfill Germany’s historical responsibility to fight antisemitism have learned nothing from history.

The German government must stop paying mere lip service to its commitment to human rights, and drastically change its stance in both domestic and foreign policy.

This article was originally published on Middle East Eye.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Josephine Valeske is a project officer with The Transnational Institute’s War and Pacification programme.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

A right-wing populist party ‘won’ the Dutch elections. What does this mean? And will Geert Wilders become Prime Minister?

By Posted on 4837 views

In this blog, Thea Hilhorst looks at the potential outcomes following the Dutch general election last week. Whilst the PVV party, led by Geert Wilders, won the largest proportion of votes, this is just the beginning of the government-forming process. The Dutch system requires building governing coalitions, and the largest party does not always form the next government. So, what is the PVV? How might they govern? And will Geert Wilders become Prime Minister?

Photo 5533984 | Dutch Parliament © Jan Kranendonk | Dreamstime.com

Last Wednesday, 22 November, the PVV (Party for Freedom) led by Geert Wilders won the most votes in the national elections in the Netherlands. But the national elections to elect members of the Lower House of parliament in The Netherlands is just the beginning of the government-forming process.

The Netherlands has a system of parliamentary elections, unlike other countries that have presidential elections. In those countries, the two winners of a first round of elections may need to contend in a second round until one of the presidential candidates obtains a majority vote. In a parliamentary system, on the other hand, elections are about allocating parliamentary seats to political parties. The Netherlands has 150 parliamentary seats, and a party or coalition needs 76 seats to form a government, and so select a Prime Minister. The PVV came out of the elections as the largest party with 37 seats. As there are 150 seats in total, this means that slightly less than 25% of the electorate voted for PVV (and 75% did not).The second place in the elections came to the combination of the Green Left and Socialist Party, that ran together in these elections for 25 seats, followed by 24 seats for the currently largest party VVD and 20 seats for the new party of New Social Contract.

Another notable difference between a presidential and a parliamentary system is the different power invested in the leader of the government. While a President usually has executive power, a Prime Minister is technically speaking just the chairperson of the government – although far more powerful in practice than this job description would imply.

 

What is the PVV? And what did they win?

The Party for Freedom is mainly known for its leader: Geert Wilders, who has started PVV in 2005, having previously been a politician for the VVD party (of Mark Rutte, current Dutch PM). As a party it stands out, because there is no membership and hence it is often referred to as a ‘one-man show’. The PVV can be seen as a right-wing populist party. It rides strongly on anti-immigrant sentiments and islamophobia, and it denies the relevance of climate policies. Its political programme for the election proposes to end immigration, development cooperation and involvement in climate action. Geert Wilders also announced he wants to spend “not a single Euro” on gender equality, and he is a proclaimed fan of NEXIT (Netherlands leaving the EU). Socio-economically the PVV profiles itself as the champion of marginalized people, promising to lower costs for health insurance, lower the retirement age and increase minimum wages, although it is not clear how proposed measures will be financed.

The PVV has never previously been part of the Dutch government, but in 2010 they did provide support to the first government formed by Mark Rutte. This arrangement, sometimes known as a ‘confidence and supply’ formation meant that whilst the PVV did not provide any Ministers, they did support the government during votes in the Upper and Lower chambers of the Dutch parliament. In any case, the PVV pulled out of this arrangement in 2012 and collapsed the government, leading to fresh elections.

 

The Dutch government is almost always a coalition, and the process can take months

In the Dutch parliamentary system, coalitions need to be formed of different parties to reach a majority of seats in the parliament. Ruling by a single party could only happen when a political party won more than 75 seats, which has never happened in Dutch history. This means that PVV cannot form a government unless it can form a coalition with at least two more parties. The RTL News service has made a handy ‘coalition forming tool’– with so many political parties having been elected, coalitions can involve up to 5 parties in partnership. The formation of a coalition is a long-term process. The last government of the Netherlands consisted of 4 different parties and only reached an agreement  after 271 days. It is usual that the largest party can initiate the coalition building process, and that this party will take the lead in the government and provide the Prime Minister. This is not always the case, in fact there have been 11 elections in the 20th century where the leader of the largest party did not become Prime Minister, the most recent in 1986.

Moreover, it is even possible that the winner is not going to be part of the new government at all. Whilst the largest party is given the first chance to form a coalition, there have been a few historical precedents where coalition negotiations failed, and new negotiations started up with other parties. This can have the consequence that the party with the largest number of seats is shut out of the government. This happened three times in the last century, and co-incidentally always in cases where the Labour (PvdA) party won the elections. In 1982, the party obtained 52 seats, more than one third of the votes, and was nonetheless side-lined in the formation of the government.

 

What happens next?

Formation processes are very unpredictable. The programmes of PVV and any likely coalition partners (other parties on the right side of the political landscape) have some issues in common but are also hugely different on others. An additional complications  is that the VVD –the largest party for the last 12 years – now has a new leader who has initially ruled out working with the PVV. The new leader, Dilan Yeşilgöz, remarkably has a refugee background herself yet opposes liberal asylum practices.  The second likely coalition partner for the PVV would be New Social Contract (NSC), that is an entirely new Party formed by the popular parliamentarian Pieter Omtzigt, who won 20 seats  at the first election it joined. The combination of a new leader of the VVD and an entirely new party sitting at the negotiation table with Geert Wilders, who has been a solo player since he started the PVV, makes the process markedly unpredictable.

The three parties may find it easy to form a right-wing government in no time, or they may clash over their differences and leave an open arena for other parties to try to form a coalition. Only time will tell.

Photo 5533984 | Dutch Parliament © Jan Kranendonk | Dreamstime.com

Follow Link on LinkedIn.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Dorothea Hilhorst is professor of Humanitarian Studies at the International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University.

 

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Institutional care is an affront to rights of children with disabilities

By Posted on 1828 views

In solidarity to the 16 days activism against gender-based violence, this article highlights the structural violence that impedes the rights of children with disabilities —including girls— in Kenya. The author Stephen Ucembe, who is an alumni of the International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, emphasizes the need to protect the rights of children confined to institutional care.

Image Credit: Hope and Homes for Children

Every child, including those with disabilities, is entitled to the rights enshrined in the Convention of the Rights of the Child which Kenya has ratified. As a country, we have agreed to uphold these rights through the Children’s Act 2022.

However, in contravention of their rights, children with disabilities are often hidden away in communities or sometimes separated and isolated in institutions against their wishes. Isolation from communities on the basis of disability is discriminatory. It is a dereliction of duty – an abdication of responsibility by the government. Supporting these children to be visible in our communities and families normalizes disability. Hiding them from others dehumanizes and perpetuates stigma and discrimination, hence exacerbating the problem.

Furthermore, unnecessary placement in residential care institutions often multiplies violations; children with disabilities are denied other rights, like the right to family and community care, to culture, to identity, to freedom of association.

A global Human Rights Watch report, published in 2017 titled, ‘Children with disabilities: Deprivation of liberty in the name of care and treatment’ documented that children with disabilities often face severe neglect and abuse. This included beatings and psychological violence, sexual violence, involuntary and inappropriate medical treatment, use of abusive physical restraints, seclusion and sedation, denial of education and denial of regular contacts with families.

An investigative media exposé traced how the problems described above play out locally. It uncovered multiple human rights violations perpetuated against institutionalized children with disabilities, by a government agency.

Nobody is seeking to romanticize families and communities. There are many children facing abuse, neglect and exploitation, including stigma and discrimination within family and community settings. However, studies consistently point to serious violations in institutional care settings. Moreover, over 80 years of research shows that supported families and communities are far better equipped than institutions when it comes to improvement of children’s overall well-being.

The primary role of government should not be to create more barriers, or spaces that deepen inequality and diminish inclusivity. Yet, this is exactly what we do when we institutionalize these children or neglect them in communities. The role of the government should be to ensure their protection and enjoyment of all rights, through full inclusion and participation in the community.

To make inclusion a reality, we need responsive initiatives that tackle ubiquitous stigma and discrimination. That starts with community services and facilities available to persons with disabilities, enabling them to access education, housing, rehabilitation and therapy.  It extends to respite care centers that allow struggling care-givers time off, or time to go and work. And it means we must improve infrastructure and provide necessary assistive devices, aids and services, like hearing aids, crutches, wheelchairs, tricycles, white canes and walking appliances to support full participation.

Lastly, it’s up to us to ensure we do not leave these children behind in the care reform processes that the government has initiated. To support governments to include disabled children in family based alternative care, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities developed ‘Guidelines on deinstitutionalization, including in emergencies’.

These guidelines are meant to ensure an end to rampant violence against institutionalized persons with disabilities, including children. This advice should ensure children with disabilities are included and supported in families and communities, and prevent their institutionalization.

This article was first published on The Standard.

Follow Bliss on LinkedIn.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Stephen Ucembe is the Regional Advocacy Manager, Hope and Homes for Children. He is a professional social worker with skills, knowledge, and experience working with children and young people without parental care, and vulnerable families. His preference is to work in Kenya, or regionally (east and southern Africa) with organization (s) whose mission and vision is family and child focused.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.