The bewildered Helsinki Process

Matti Kohonen, NIGD/Tax Justice Network

The Helsinki Process gathered together a number of representatives from civil society along with governmental and some business representatives. The idea, as pronounced from the government of Finland was to build bridges between the World Social Forum and the World Economic Forum, which arguably are seen as two different poles of the spectrum of ideas on the course of globalisation. The Finnish government had participated in both Forums, and organised some events at especially the Mumbai WSF in 2004. However, the distinction that I want to make early on is that a process should not be mixed with its participants. Participation was fairly wide at the Helsinki Process, though having a process means methodologies and principles.

On the contrary, at the Democratising Globally, a parallel meeting organised by Attac Finland, Citizen�s Global Platform, Crash, Friends of the Earth Finland, NIGD, Siemenpuu, Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam and Visio , you could find a much clearer platform on which to organise events on, one which followed closely the World Social Forum charter of principles. This of course led to coming up with fantastic initiatives for the year to come! Firstly, the Africa Commission for the WSF in Finland (ACWSF) is a key building block towards building more independent civil society groups in the African continent through outreach from Nordic organisations who in various ways have been involved with their African partners in the past. The network group was formed by ATTAC Finland, Finnish Lutheran Church Diaconic unit, NIGD, Trade Union Solidarity Centre of Finland, Siemenpuu (Seed Tree Foundation), Workers� Educational Association Finland, and Vasudhaiva Kutubakam. The two clear points of convergence for all the activities will be the two WSF events to be held in Africa in the near future, in view of making the WSF 2007 in Nairobi an event of African, not just global civil society unity, and more immediately the WSF 2006 polycentric meeting in Bamako a successful event with at least a regional significance in the West African subregion. The second fantastic initiative, which is a continuation (or a relaunch) of the otro sistema financeiro platform of WSF 2005, was the way in which we started to anewly envision a platform for gathering together and debating the systemic reform for the global financial markets. Currently the idea is to use a name referring to public finances for the platform, and to invite further partners from the debt campaigns to come and join into the platform. Amongst the plan are also the setting up of a new website.

Another development I found was the interaction we had with the Citizens� Global Platform, the NGO network, funded by the Finnish Foreign Ministry, who organised the dialogue on Marginalised Voices at the Helsinki Process, by bringing civil society representatives of the CGP from India, Tanzania and Brazil. This concept of marginalised voices, is something that the Finnish government should seriously pursue as a result of the Helsinki Process, and it can be a legitimate conclusion of their interaction with the WSF and WEF, though how they intend to bring such voices to international politics is an open question. It could lead to the Finnish government to affirming the rights of indigenous people at the UN, already a major step forward by relying on the experiences from India and Brazil where organisers of indigenous groups were present in Helsinki. The Tanzanians, on the other hand, have a role in deepening the regional civil society networks to bring African voices to the general global arena as a whole, since the concept of indigenous people isn�t as workable in Africa, apart from perhaps South Africa, whose ethnically African population was nearly indigenised. There certainly are land disputes across Africa, but the ethnic diversity in Africa is the larger challenge to democratic governance as current state institutions, as anywhere else in the world in fact, are not built on truly ethnically diverse positions. The only federative state in Africa is Nigeria, with its 37 states, and even then it�s more of a legacy of British indirect rule, than actual political will to have a federation of different ethnically less diverse regions. In fact the traditional rulers still have a major role to play in Nigeria, adding to the complexity of governance in West Africa.

So, as a suggestion to the Helsinki Process, they need to quickly adopt criteria for what they are mobilising political will for. Like always the saying, �got theory, got programme� that works in party politics on a national level, works also in global politics. If the Helsinki Process, with its 13 friends had an understanding of the dynamics of globalisation, they could devise such a plan. Currently they are still baffled, bewildered, in the jungle of globalisation talk, not sure what the role of the state, the government, the public sector, or even human rights, or workers rights are any more in this global era. But for those being left out, the dynamics are quite clear, so why not listen to them, hence the power of the platform on marginalised voices, which can be a progressive platform. The CGP is a step in the right direction, and the WSF process taking place on the African continent has even a much larger potential for change, since it increases our scope of understanding the materialisations of globalisation to build the alternatives that are needed right now.

In a report written by Sanjay Suri of the Independent Press Service, Ilaria Rantakari, ambassador to the Helsinki Conference from the Finnish foreign affairs ministry said that: "We hope it will lead to action through emphasizing the multi-stakeholder approach, and that this approach will be taken up further in the United Nations, at inter-governmental meetings and on other occasions�. As a note, many conventional media sources completely ignored the Helsinki Process, including the Finnish press. But, exactly this multi-stakeholder approach is too weak to bring forward results. The problem with stakeholding is that it�s ultimately derived from the financial world. The word was launched in the Anglo-Saxon press, mostly The Guardian and the Financial Times, to widen the scope of what a stake was to mean non-financial stakes, such as the community and the environment. Why it�s inadequate, is that it�s based on an utilitarian conceptualization of value, which stipulates that you through means of ownership gain value, so the environment owning part of the company, or being represented in some way through NGOs in company decisions is what stakeholding is about. The concept has been popularised mostly in the UK by Will Hutton, with his book, �The State We�re In� , published in 1995, which emphasized the need for more participation, one that drives the discourses of civil society involvement in global politics, and Third Way politics. But, participation doesn�t allow for different understandings of value to be expressed, only a voice (a limited one) on the resources at use in the productive process. It has nothing to say about methodology, principles of engagement, or understanding of what should be the outcome of a process. Stakeholding only has a fancy form without content. Civil society needs criteria for engagement with governmental processes, and we should encourage governments to set up criteria and principles that guide larger processes.

I should also mention something about the Friends of the Helsinki Process, since they are an important part of the dynamic of the Helsinki Process. The Celso Furtado International Development Policies Centre was launched with an idea of taking recommendations from the Helsinki Process to its founding charter. There was a video address from Lula in the opening of the Helsinki Process to affirm this intent. In a way, the progressive governments are exchanging initiatives. Brazil wants to be the leader of the developing world, but still has not found the clout to challenge the status quo, where as parts of the Finnish government wish an alternative foreign policy, but don�t know where to start or how to balance it with the regional coalitions or financial interests, the space of maneuver paradoxically is thin for both Brazil and Finland. At the moment, we�re exchanging support for initiatives, but Finland could step up its act and support the global taxation initiatives set forward by the Landau Report to the UN in November 2004 and discussed at the UN MDG summit in September 2005. I hope by the time we reach 2007, such coalitions have more clout since then we can launch initiatives on the African continent, at the Helsinki Process held in Dar-Es-Salam, and at the World Social Forum, held in Nairobi. Other networks, initiatives and conferences should be organized in Africa also during that year, and the ground needs to be prepared now for that to happen.

In fact this task of global democracy can only be done if the political community that we attempt to build encompasses the whole globe, which is why at the World Social Forum and the global taxation and tax regulation initiatives are now being seen as a new global constitutionalism.