 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Impressions of the 7th Global Forum
on Reinventing Government: Building Trust in Government.
It was a great honor to me to represent the Association of World Citizens at the Vienna conference, and I thank Douglas Mattern, president of AWC, for putting his trust in me and sending me. The question is: Did they manage to build trust in government during the 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government at Vienna, which was on: Building Trust in Government? During the first two days of plenary sessions the keynote speakers spoke on political processes that should improve or lead to democracy. They spoke about the nature of true leadership, which should encourage citizens to trust their governments about services that should be offered to citizens, and about capacity building that should empower citizens and invite them to take an active part in politics. The speakers expressed their worries about increasing levels of corruption, and they affirmed their own commitment to the rule of law and to peace as a prerequisite to development. The audience was allowed to hand in written questions to the speakers, but the answers were short as there was little time left. “In fact. “we are running out of time” was the four days’ mantra. Harmony lingered, for who will disagree when participants require ‘secure legitimacy of government’, when corruption is condemned, and when ‘effective knowledge management’ is seen as a tool to improve public service capacities. And who will disagree when ‘social and legal barriers’ to women’s participation in social and political life are criticized? Again and again speakers pointed out that 50 per cent of the world population are women. Key words such as ‘rule of law’, ‘transparency’, ‘inclusiveness’, ‘reconciliation’, ‘safety’, ‘access to’…, ‘accountability’, ‘gender equality’, appeared as sham pearls interwoven into the web of speeches held during those four days. At least some African and Indian representatives did point to problems such as foreign influence on the politics of their countries as well as on their cultures. Their remarks were approved by some applause by the audience. Many keynote speakers, however, evoked the impression of being election campaigners trying to tell the audience that everything worked well in their respective countries, and that with some effort minor drawbacks should quite easily be remedied. I had the impression that most speakers summarized widely known ideas, which have been repeated for decades and solemnly been written down in many declarations, UN papers, and manifestos. Concerning the topic of the conference, ‘trust in government’, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon wrote in his welcome message: “There is no easy path to this goal” (Programme Handbook). But moving on difficult paths means removing the stones and thorny bushes obstructing the passage instead of relaxing on green grass. The election campaigners certainly did the latter. Trust in government can be generated when citizens live free from want, with dignity in living conditions locked in human rights, and given their due share in shaping the world. Looking at the state of the world today, it would literally be dangerous to trust governments. Declining trust in government, however, breeds apathy rather than an increase in civic engagement. This is one of the paradoxes inherent to modernity. At the same time the political and economic world is in a position, for the first time in history, to shape conditions of life so that the needs of all humans are met. But as long as those people relaxing on green grass do not get up and respond to the crucial issues of our time, theses issues will continue to exist. Surely one these issues is the widening gap between knowledge production and the wholesome use of knowledge. Knowledge is not shared voluntarily, nor does it inevitably translate into action.. Neither does access to knowledge imply the development of an ethical dedication. The fruits of the modern knowledge explosion are being harvested by those in power, who mainly apply it to serve their selfish interests. The 7th Global Forum was proudly praised as a conference bringing together “ministers, senior government officials, mayors, civil society organizations, and representatives from the private sector, academia and international organizations to exchange good practices, innovations, and strategies that improve governance and build trust in government” (Preamble, 1st para). Events such as the 7th Global Forum could indeed be areas where bases are set for true cross-border collaboration and the implementation of new forms of governance based on human rights. The old traps of dependency, in which political and sometimes even social organizations are caught, were not analyzed in Vienna. This includes dependencies on financial aid, on foreign technical assistance, on military support, and on capitalist requirements. They ban narratives of equity, of justice, of the end of poverty, and of peace into the fragile realm of fairy tales. To ‘reinvent government’ means to denounce its weaknesses and to take measures to abolish them –the stones on a thorny path. Here are three of them, the removal of which was not discussed in Vienna, but which are the root causes for most problems: Arms trade as one of the most abject trades was not accused as a source for fueling and refueling wars, nor was the run on resources discussed as a major cause for waging wars. If one is aware of the fact that the Earth has never been a gift to individuals but to humankind, it would have been of paramount interest to start and work out plans to redistribute the existing resources and to establish fair exchange between ‘donor countries’ that offer resources, and ‘producer countries’ that need resources. When talking about poverty, debt relief cannot be seen as a means graciously granted to poor countries. Accumulation of debts and their ‘relief’ should be regarded from a historical point of view: Colonizers invaded foreign continents destroying cultures and exploiting resources without paying for them. Consequently, questions of ‘redress’ rather than of hypocritical ‘relief’ should be on the agenda. Of course there were very convincing speakers at the conference. I would like to mention Huguette Labelle from Transparency International; Kumi Naidoo the South African Founding Executive Director of the South African NGO Coalition; Franz Küberl the President of Caritas Austria, and a most convincing woman, touching in her speech, Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka, UN-Habitat, Under-Secretary-General, UN. Discussions and inspiring exchange of ideas during the workshops did lead to precious contacts, at least in the workshop where I took part, but the mantra “We are running out of time” continued, so my feelings towards the 7th Global Forum are ambiguous. I met fine people, I could talk to people whose work I really admire, and whom I admire for their perseverance and almost endless patience. It was good to see the world from a different angle for a couple of days, and to become aware of the fact that decisive momentums were introduced mainly by non-Western representatives. From this point of view the conference was an enriching experience. And yet with more than 2 000 participants at the conference, had there been more time for discussion and less speeches, and if the majority of participants had the dedication, the commitment, and the courage of women like Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka, the conference would have made a difference. For the Vienna Declaration issued at the
end of the conference see: |
Home Page | AWC Goals | AWC Branches | Archives
Resolution 2010 | Human Manifesto | AWC History
United Nations | AWC Staff | Join Online Today | Worldometers
Contact Us