In the countdown to the World Social Forum due to be held in Nairobi in January 2007, Mouhamadou Tidiane Kasse analyses the trajectory of the social forum movement in Africa and warns that a lot of work remains to be done if the transformative potential of the movement is to be optimised. “By taking the torch from Bamako in January, the Kenyan social movement and the secretariat of the WSF find themselves faced with a lot of work, at the level of the structuring of the social movement in Africa, to raise awareness and popular mobilisation within the country itself, and to consolidate the dynamic of regional solidarity,” he writes.

When Africans first participated in the World Social Forum (WSF) in Porto Alegre, they were only about thirty people, drowned by tens of thousands of others. At the meeting in Mumbai in 2004, their delegation was bigger, but they still comprised no more than 500 people in a sea of anti-globalisation protesters which exceeded 100,000. Their lack of presence was almost laughable.

Africa’s voice was nonetheless heard at the International Council of the WSF, when it was raised to lay claim to the big-tent anti-globalisation event for Africa. Despite the scepticism of some people, even amongst the African delegates themselves, that Africa could welcome such a popular mobilisation on the continent, and could host an event of freedom where so many freedoms are abused, the request was granted. Holding the WSF in Africa will become a reality in 2007, and it will fall on Kenya to host it. But behind the enthusiasm, the challenges facing the Africans are numerous.

When the Indian Social Forum took place in Mumbai, the aim was to de-localise an event associated with Porto Alegre, and to enhance its popular dimensions, thematic richness and excellent organisation. Moreover, on the Asian continent, there were particular concerns at stake within the framework of structural global inequalities. In Asia, the imbalances are not only vertical between the South and North. They are also horizontal and endogenous, and cut across the societies of the Southern countries: the issue of the Indian caste system characterised the Mumbai forum.

The successes of India strengthened Africa’s wish to host the big anti-globalisation event. This was despite some doubts about the suitability of its political environment to host the iconoclastic and critical debates, about the continent’s capacity to host and organise an event for tens of thousands of people, and to ensure real, mass mobilisation.

Until the polycentric World Social Forum in Bamako in January 2006, meetings of African social movements had never been anything but quasi-confidential conclaves. The African Social Forum in Lusaka in December 2004 failed to attract more than 1000 people to the Mulungushi International Conference Center, which resounded with a despairing emptiness. Barely 50 people participated in the march on the streets of Lusaka, and in any case, a ban on demonstrations would have aborted the skeleton procession, which only made it as far as 500 metres from conference centre.

The first west-African social forum in Conakry in November 2004, which attracted about 2000 people, gave a glimpse of the kind of local mobilisation that is possible. But the ensuing events have not exceeded this level of participation, and the popular voice remains restrained. That the events have no roots in the majority populations is evident. Nowhere, with the exception of the last WSF in Bamako, which claimed some 30,000 participants, has the event been strongly linked to the local agenda. It is as if there is a disjuncture between the ferment of opposition and the daily lives of ordinary people.

The African social movements still lack visibility even though the pertinence of the ideas and causes they embrace are in keeping with the urgent matters confronting Africa in the construction of a better world. There have been delays in implementing mechanisms which would allow this dynamic to reach through to the roots of society, and create a genuinely popular movement. From one meeting to another, the debates struggle to escape from the circles of those in the know. Panel discussions are essentially bringing together the same people, going over the same old ideas, and struggling to find an anchorage in people’s realities. The structure of the organisation probably also needs to be challenged, and their chief instigators could do with being reconsidered.

Getting it off the ground

Said Saadi, a member of the Moroccan social forum, stated at the African social forum in Lusaka: “After three meetings, we are at a turning point. The forum must be strengthened by opening it up to all the other groups, which are fighting on the ground. What about the trade unions for example?...We must avoid looking like a group of NGOs, which are keen on travelling but do little real work at grassroots level. The forum must position itself to redress the balance, and outline an opposition agenda with a precise timeframe.” In the same tempo, Abdourame Ousmane from Niger remarked: “It is time to develop alternatives that take account of the aspirations of the populations at the bottom of society, that will be legitimised by nature of their democratic anchorage.”

The social forum evidently remains a space where participation is not predetermined. It is not about groupings that anyone is looking to engineer, rather is organised in such a way that ideas ferment reciprocally and experiences inspire change elsewhere. But certain tendencies are favoured. There will not be real change unless there are veritable actors at the centre of the processes. Whatever the merits of the unions and the rural movements, there is a virtual absence of organised social movements in Africa at present. The themes discussed in the panels and workshops are omnipresent, discussions about the future – ‘a different world is possible’ ¬– are shaped from the perspectives of ordinary people, and yet their own dynamic does not let itself be felt.

The question of the unions in Africa in relation to globalisation was usefully analysed at the Conakry meeting in 2004 in terms of the necessity for their re-orientation. First of all, solidarity is an imperative. When the multinationals set out to blackmail the workers, there is no better defence than union solidarity. How can this be achieved? There must be a fusion of the groups of affiliated unions at both national and global levels. In this respect, the Anglophone countries are further on. COSATU in South Africa is a good example. The second stage involves the promotion of international norms: International agreements, treaties, UN institutions, the World Bank and the IMF must integrate union liberties that symbolise the social dimension of development politics.

The final stage of mobilising the unions in the struggle for ‘another world is possible’ involves the ‘enlargement of the mandate of the union movement’. This change must take effect in several stages. It requires the mobilisation of supporters, sourcing of funding, the democratisation of the union movement, and the construction of partnerships with governments and multinationals. But the union representation in Conakry was not sufficiently consistent to institute a real debate on this ‘road map’.

For the five years that the African social movement has been aligned with the anti-globalisation movement, it has still not identified the motor to get itself off the ground. The key actors for change and the path of ‘liberation’ has been identified, but the forces yet to be unleashed remain marginal to the event.

Can the ‘Women’s Court’ for example, launched in Lusaka in 2004, and again in Bamako in 2006, push for the mobilisation to change the situation of women, moving beyond the mere habitual condemnations of violence and the denial of all sorts of rights, which through being churned out again and again, risk becoming clichés? Will the ‘youth forum’ be a space for the raising of awareness where the identity of the future can be constructed around values which break with the discredited politics of the day? The discourse often betrays a willingness, but the means of bringing about change are neither clearly identified nor widely-embraced.

Paving the way for the younger generation

At the centre of the youth element of the African Social Forum in Conakry, the Ivorian Ouattara Diakala expressed the problem thus: “Young people are out of touch…with the objectives of the WSF. The struggle against neo-liberalism for example - what does that mean to them? What are the ins and outs of it? When someone does not understand a given situation, it is difficult for them to engage. We are going to have a find mechanisms for supporting mass youth participation in these discussions, to generate more activities in which young people can get involved locally.”

At the 2006 forum in Bamako, the rallying cry to pave the way for the young people was around Thomas Sankara, a symbol of protest, defined as an anti-globalisation pacesetter – in word and in deed – ahead of his time. But a representative from an NGO in Burkina Faso remained unconvinced about the impact of this strategy: “Sankara lived what he lived, but the important thing is what he did. He had a strong instinct of what had to be done, and this is what young people today must imitate. Today’s youth strikes me as being more ideological than pragmatic. They need to flesh out their talk with work.”

The secretariat of the WSF is conscious of the importance of the Nairobi forum for the structuring of the movement in Africa. The choice of Kenya from amongst several other candidatures, more-or-less the officially advanced countries such as Morocco, was decided on the basis of criteria drawn up and approved at the World Social Forum held in March 2005. These imply, that at the level of the host country, there is the opportunity for the freedom of expression of opinions, including through public marches and demonstrations, publications, radio and TV broadcasts, and contact between the local populations and the organisers from abroad; and for the possibility of ‘mass social mobilisation’. To ensure the forum achieves an impact, the application must issue from the mainstream social movements of the candidate country, and the sub-region. At the same time, the social movement of the candidate country must prove a certain level of organisation and dynamism, as well as the capacity to mobilise the population around national, continental and international issues.

By taking the torch from Bamako in January, the Kenyan social movement and the secretariat of the WSF find themselves faced with a lot of work, at the level of the structuring of the social movement in Africa, to raise awareness and popular mobilisation within the country itself, and to consolidate the dynamic of regional solidarity.

From Bamako to Nairobi, one trend is to favour ‘linkages’, to give a reality, indeed an identity, to the African social movement. The aim is to construct a continental solidarity which goes beyond the linguistic divisions and sub-regional groupings which have thus far marked the evolution of the WSF through its polemics and internal conflicts.

Bamako also identified a trajectory: “Beyond all political, cultural, economic, and social resistance at the basis of anti-globalisation, one of the challenges in Nairobi will be to resume the process of establishing a Charter of unity, for the people and future of Africa, the foundations of which were laid sixteen years ago in Arusha. Between now and then, there must be a process of consultation throughout society and within social movements, so as to achieve a meeting of ideas, consensus, and an affirmative assembly in Nairobi in 2007.”

* Mouhamadou Tidiane Kasse is Coordinator of Flamme d’Afrique, a daily newspaper published by IPAO and ENDA on occasions of meetings of social movements.

* This article was translated from French by Stephanie Kitchen. It was originally published in the French version of Pambazuka News, Please send comments to [email protected]