Lesson learnt
This year, in fulfilment of the 3-year objectives of the WEN programme, two major tasks have been taken on by the TF members: one is among the members and the communities they work with. There were activities and campaigns to contribute in their understanding that the continuing poverty and the hunger that people of the developing countries are experiencing is directly connected with the economic policies that our national governments have passed and are operating in. These economic policies are within the globalisation framework. As activists, the TF members assist the national groups in organising and mobilising women especially in the grassroots communities to be part of their national movement, and the global resistance against globalisation and unjust trade rules which govern and are being promoted by WTO and bilateral agreements.
On the other hand, the other task that the task force took, especially in the recent mobilisations for and in the 6th WTO Ministerial Meeting, is exposing the social impacts of these trade policies. It has been one of the major premises of economics – that trade policies are economic policies which are disconnected with social policy. This is the farce that as feminists we are exposing as we believe that economic policies are interlinked with social policies and have great impacts on social services and social relations. We believe that economic policies should be in place to provide the basic needs of the women and men as their constituents and not the transnational corporations and their profit.
This is the premise of the vision of food sovereignty – the critique of how the governments have reneged on their roles as providers, and have now taken on the role of middlemen for the TNCs business on agriculture, on food and of utilisation of natural resources; critique of how food have become a source of profit, rather than a basic need of the people; critique of how food producers have become mere consumers. Food sovereignty has developed into the alternative to the corporate rule of our food and agriculture, and our livelihoods. Within this advocacy, APWLD continues to highlight the manifestations of patriarchy in this current model of development, and that in any alternative that we develop and promote, an integral part of this is the breaking down of power relations that is present even in the basic unit of our society – the family.
The objectives that have been set by the 3-year WEN programme have been satisfactorily met, if not more. This can be measured in the dynamic participation of the TF members in Hong Kong, especially at the national level activities.
In Cambodia, Bantay Srei’s active involvement in the November People’s Caravan for Justice and Food Sovereignty, was one of the first national activities that they had. Centre for Human Rights Development held for the first time a grassroots level women gathering on the issue of trade and food in Mongolia. The success of that gathering was manifested in the enthusiasm of their large and active participation in Hong Kong. In Thailand, Sustainable Development Foundation was instrumental in the organising of the very first national meeting among women farmers, vegetable growers and fishers. It was in this conference that Women’s Action Network in Thailand was formed. All these actions were initiated after the Women’s Regional Conference on Food Sovereignty and Globalisation.
The TF members, which are mostly mixed groups, have reported that being part of WEN TF and its activities have contributed in the development and strengthening of women’s perspectives, women’s programmes for others, within their organisations.
Throughout the 3 years as well, the APWLD WEN programme has steadily become one of the major facilitators of grassroots women’s voices in the regional level among the broader people’s movements. That has been our main contribution in our membership and engagement with different regional networks such as Asia Pacific Research Network (APRN), International League of People’s Struggles (ILPS) and Pesticide Action Network-Asia Pacific (PAN-AP).
Future Plans
This is where the WEN programme stands on and will build on for the next 3 years. Still within the banner of the campaign “Don’t Globalise Hunger! Assert Women’s Rights to Food Sovereignty,” there will be the focus on corporate control over natural resources and how trade liberalisation perpetuates this. TF will pay more attention to the mineral resource. The mineral resource is one of the resources which are attracting the TNCs to come and to stay in the countries in the region, but particularly in the communities where food and livelihoods are mostly dependent on agriculture. The presence of TNC mining companies have been one of the major issues raised in the last two years by most of the TF members. Large-scale commercial mining operations have been creating so much ecological destruction, affecting health and livelihoods of the communities. These mining operations have also caused a lot of social and economic displacement. The WEN TF will focus on countries which have not been traditionally prominent in the anti-mining campaigns but because of the escalating economic liberalisation, have opened up to TNCs – Mongolia, Pakistan and Cambodia.
The presence of large commercial mining corporations is facilitated by various trade agreements and bilateral investment treaties. Thus, activities to further understand the links and impacts of these trade agreements and other trade instruments within and aside from those of WTO will continue to be part of the ongoing campaigns of the programme.
Strengthening the links and partnerships made in the last three years with the broader women’s and peoples movements which are forwarding the advocacy against globalisation and corporate control over resources, and towards food sovereignty, is essential.
The WEN programme will utilise different handles and tools for the campaign against TNCs control over natural resources and advocacy for food sovereignty. However, the main strength of the programme is the commitment of the TF members as individuals and their organisation to further the struggle towards a just, humane and genuinely sustainable development for all.
These stories from women from grassroots communities in the region are living testimonies of the empty promises, failures and crimes of the grand project of economic globalisation and its global agents like WTO and transnational corporations. But these women, too, are the living inspiration of the global movement.
In Indonesia, where there are around 500 TNCs present (eg. Monsanto, Newmont, Freeport, etc.), struggle for land is an ongoing issue in village and urban areas as the mining corporations, with the connivance of the Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) government, aggressively confiscates land from the rural and indigenous communities. This meant deprivation of resources for food production. Solidaritas Perempuan (SP) reports “... mine tailings from the mining operations affect health of women. Malnourishment of villagers in areas surrounding mining areas is rampant because the villagers find that they have no access to land to grow food and nutrition of what land has remained has been ruined by the pollution. ….Since the country acceded to the WTO in 1995, a number of legislation adjustments have been made to accommodate WTO accession, some of which are the following – Law 23 (2001) on Water Resources Privatisation; Law 22 (2001) on Mining; Law 23 (2001) on Patent; and Internal Security Act 2003 as part of the anti-terror policy which was deemed to protect the TNCs.”
According to Banteay Srei, Cambodia, as other countries in the region, did not have to import food as the country has subsistent agrarian sector. However, the influx of bilateral trade agreements on agricultural products with China, Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia, “resulted in the flooding of imported food in the local markets. This meant that local food producers could not compete with the cheap imported food products such as cucumber, tomato, green cabbage, onion, potato, watermelon.” On the other hand, life is made more difficult for the small food producers as their agricultural lands are confiscated by land speculators, mostly for foreign mining companies. Communities from the surrounding areas where there are mining operations are suffering from the pollution, which affect the health of the people as well as killing their livestock. “Mining operations by Chinese and Taiwanese gold mining corporations have been real threats to the economic and social rights of the people. The government officials who have vested interests in these investments turn blind eyes to the suffering of their people.”
In the southern part of Thailand, there has been a national policy to promote the economic growth in the coastal areas. “Introduction of the corporate fishing industry in the areas created conflicts between the corporate fishing industry and the small fisher folk. In the context of globalisation, the centralised government has the policy of privatisation of natural resources for economic growth.” Sustainable Development Foundation reported that “the Thaksin government wants to privatise the sea so that whoever wants to use the sea they can lease out a portion of the sea.” Further, “under the poverty reduction policy, individual has the right to borrow money from the bank so what happened is that those who have capital are likely to claim the ownership of public resources. This kind of policy will create more conflict over resources between rich and poor, and the coastal resources will be virtually owned by the rich.”
Thailand farmers are having the same experience of unfair competition with the cheap imported food and agricultural products, reinforced by the free trade agreements the Thai government is negotiating with China, Australia and US.
Mongolia with its very different landscape, has very similar issues with the other countries in the region. Gold mining companies are wreaking havoc in the ecology and in the livelihoods of the food producers and herders in the country. With the rural communities suffering intensive loss of livelihoods because of the ecological impacts of mining operations, as well as use of pesticides, immigration from rural to urban has increased. However, “migrant groups, especially women-headed families face difficult situations as they have no skills relevant to urban areas. Thus, these women are vulnerable to trafficking to Singapore, Korea, Japan and Macau.” This is according to Centre for Human Rights Development (CHRD). Land privatisation law (2002) which was backed by the World Bank proved to have had adverse impact on women, as they are further alienated from the land. Mongolian women, even those who are head of the families, cannot own land.
Sunflower, which is a pretty attractive crop, has injurious effect physically, as well as economically on women of Pakistan. Roots for Equity reported that there is an issue of water scarcity in some areas thus landlords are shifting to the sunflower plantation as it is a residual crop and does not need water. “It is threatening to food security because cash-crop plantation is taking over food crops.” Moreover, sunflower seeds are mixed with pesticides, thorny and hardy, and women are the ones who handle the seeds, causing health issues. The sunflower seeds are imported from foreign countries at a very high price and monopolised by agro-transnational corporations.
Mining, yet again, is a major concern in Pakistan. “Mining is destructive to the local community. The profits from the operations go to local elites and the foreign companies. Some of the findings of the research done by some public interest institutions reveal that labor, like the carrying of limestones is done by marginalised people from drought-stricken areas of the country. Working conditions are so inhumane that incidents of people losing eyesight or their hands, is not uncommon.”
|
Click here to view the latest information about the program ( 1.34 MB)
« Previous Page
|
Women
and Environment Programme (Page 2)
go
top