Marcela Benavides: Towards a True Dialogue Between Latin American and European NGOs

By Susanna Jussila 

Marcela Benavides, an academic activist from Ecuador Decide, an Ecuadorian network of organisations opposed to free trade agreements (FTAs), participated as an observer in the FTA negotiation process between the EU and Latin America in spring 2010. During her stay in Brussels, she had the opportunity to observe how EU officials, governments, parliamentarians, NGOs and social movements in the EU position themselves in relation to the FTA negotiations between EU and Latin America, as well as how they interpreted and answered to her network´s demands.

 Afterwards, Marcela wrote an article, The EU´s push for free trade agreements with Latin America. A Latin American perspective from inside the EU, sharing her experiences and reflecting on them in a critical way. In her paper, Marcela addresses the difficulties she encountered in the relations between Latin American and European civil society organisations and between NGOs and social movements on both sides of the negotiations. Furthermore, she draws out some future opportunities and challenges for building a ´true´ dialogue between Latin American and European NGOs.

 WIDE conceives Marcela´s open and critical reflection on the relationship of European and Latin American NGOs as a crucial point of view. Building on Marcela´s article, this review concentrates on the question of how to work fruitfully together regardless of our different backgrounds and visions ­ whether we are from the North, South, East or West.

 NEED FOR SHARED AND MUTUALLY AGREED CONCEPTS ­ A LESSON LEARNED

The European­Latin American and Caribbean Civil Society Forum that took place in Madrid on 16 March 2010, two months before the EU­Latin American summit, confirmed Marcela´s concerns about the compatibility of different strategies among European and Latin American NGOs working on trade issues. At the forum, the umbrella organisation of development organisations in Latin America (ALOP) presented an internal discussion paper on joint strategies of Latin American and European organisations. While it raised a strong critique of the market-based development model and the power of transnational corporations, it equated democracy with institutional stability. Following from this equation, the paper stated a need to establish ´democracies´ in Latin America.

Although that does not sound exceptional at first glance and might well go unnoticed, Marcela raises an important question: What do we actually mean by ´democracy´? How do we define the concept and, moreover, who has the power to define it? Is the unalterable permanence of a president really a proof of high-level democracy, as assumed in the abovementioned joint paper? Marcela points out that in many Latin American countries there has been a permanent construction of new ways of direct democracy through a diversity of social actors which, in turn, has resulted in great democratic achievements. The constant change in governments that has been witnessed in Latin America is a result of mass mobilisations by politicised people who have not accepted dictatorships and have chosen to take their demands to the streets when there are no proper laws in place to serve their interests. "Isn´t that what real democracy looks like?" Marcela asks. Besides, she continues, "why is it only Latin America that is in the need of democratic change? If we were really proposing a dialogue for political cooperation and a common agenda, shouldn´t we also analyse what happens in the ´democracies´ of Europe?" This same paternalistic tendency was reflected in the negotiation process as a whole.

EQUAL NEGOTIATIONS SHOULD MEAN EQUAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Because of the foreseen impossibility to block the signing of the FTAs, the civil society groups took on a strategy that focused on showing the inconsistencies between the EU´s commitments to human rights and agreements with Colombia and Honduras ­ two countries that have constantly violated human rights. However, it is unsure if this strategy was successful, since questioning the presence of Colombia and Honduras in the negotiation process seemed to legitimise the FTA process. In addition, it empowered the EU to further judge democratic processes in Latin America unilaterally.

Therefore, Marcela argues that since there was a focus on human rights issues, the human rights situation in Europe ­ in particular, the situation of migrants ­ should also have been discussed. This impartiality reflects the unequal relationship of power between the negotiators. As Marcela puts it: "If we were talking about negotiations between equals, where a clause of human rights applies to both sides of the talks, the Latin American countries also had the legal authority to watch over its implementation in Europe." Yet, while this was widely agreed among the civil society representatives, it was never brought up during the meetings with Members of the European Parliament.

WE NEED OUR OWN AGENDA

Marcela acknowledges the fact that many European NGOs´ advocacy work and campaigns are designed to target the Brussels-based EU institutions. Therefore, the issues they work on are mainly determined by the European Commission´s agenda. This implies certain challenges or even disadvantages, as she points out: "The problem with following the Commission´s agenda is that it is not civil society or social movements that decide the issue, but the European Commission, which is very much acting on behalf of large corporations." Another problem in linking your work to the agenda set by the European institutions is that some topics, such as gender, trade and migration, become ´unspeakable´ or are not taken seriously. Taking into account how important an issue migration is for Latin American countries, Marcela was bewildered to notice that it was completely ignored in the EU­Latin American trade negotiation statements. Nor was it discussed in the meetings with European Parliament officials or in the meeting between European and Latin American NGOs organised by ALOP in Madrid.

Luckily, it seems that migration and migrants´ rights are finally being introduced onto European civil society´s common agenda. Marcela is glad to report that the EU-CAN network, ALOP and Grupo Sur have now started to work on the subject. There´s also a growing consciousness on migration and gender, thanks to the efforts made by feminist networks such as a new European Network of Migrant Women (ENoMW) to lobby EU institutions that launched recently, and WIDE holding its Annual Conference on migration and gender in June.

BREAKING THE FUNDER­RECEIVER RELATIONSHIP

Another problem Marcela encountered when trying to build new partnerships with European NGOs was that some people still limited the idea of ´working together´ to funding. Although financial support from European civil society organisations is important to Latin American organisations, Marcela argues that having a thorough political debate and making sure that the cooperation will generate positive outcomes for both parties should be the starting point.

"What both Southern and Northern groups need is to work collectively, share knowledge and define strategies together.This is the idea of a true partnership we want to create," says Marcela.

CREATING A COMMON AGENDA ­ FUTURE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Based on her experiences in observing the FTA negotiation process and collaborating with a number of European and Latin American NGOs, Marcela identifies big challenges for both: "Latin American groups must be clear that their main objective in their relations with European NGOs is not to acquire financial support for projects which comes with conditions attached." Rather, Marcela argues, they should strive towards a true political dialogue with European partners. In her opinion, an advocacy strategy inside the European institutions would be more important than small projects in their countries.

Instead of carrying out specific activities together with European partner NGOs, the main cooperation tendency until today, Marcela is looking forward to having a more in-depth and continuous political dialogue that would enable us to develop a common understanding based on our different visions and backgrounds.

According to Marcela, exchanging visions and strategies is the key for mutual, shared empowerment. Moving from the traditional ´funder­receiver´ development cooperation to a true political dialogue, however, requires a broader change in continuing Eurocentric mentalities, a change that she calls a "mental decolonisation". Saying this, Marcela reminds us that there are various European NGOs that have already taken this crucial move and who consider Latin American organisations as equal partners.

As good examples of this kind of symmetrical, vision-sharing and capacity-generating dialogues Marcela mentions her experiences in participating in the preparatory meeting for the alternative summit ´Enlazando Alternativas´ held in May 2010 and the WIDE capacity-building day in March 2010: ´Gender equality, trade and development. An introduction to EU trade and development policies and its implications for gender equality at the beginning of 2010´.

THE NEED TO CONNECT SHORT- AND LONG-TERM GOALS

A final big challenge, also concerning WIDE´s work as a feminist network, is to seek convergence between the groups working on short-term strategies and those opening up alternatives. For this purpose, Marcela says, "we need to clarify the policy positions of each of the organizations in the networks. Doing this, we will be able to define how to work together with clear rules." A constant presence of grassroots movements in NGOs´ work is crucial, since it helps to maintain the balance between tactical visioning (short-term goals) and political visioning (long-term goals), she concludes.

Reflecting on the article by Marcela Benavides, it seems that we are on the right track in building a true political dialogue. Following this track, WIDE has now started a process of mapping the network´s strengths, needs and knowledge. It will lead to a directory of organisations and individuals with their relevant fields of expertise as well as a policy document that will advise WIDE and its partners on how to build new bridges and to further engage in joint knowledge building.