Introduction and Objectives

This Conference of human rights defenders, grassroots activists, movements and individuals committed to participatory democracy and human rights analysed the state of democratic rights in the midst of a wave of populist authoritarianism and neoliberalism. 

The objective of the conference was to analyse the trend where right wing nationalist authoritarian leaders entrenched themselves in many countries across Asia and Europe. To highlight the comparisons between countries, to see the different contexts, to discuss the reasons for this trend and to make a plan and calendar to help ignite popular action to restore and rekindle participatory democracy. 

To set the context, the series of elections in Asia and Europe 2018-2019 elections-–and their implications was analysed. It is evident that expanding corporate power concurrently supports a nexus between political, economic and social trends. This directly promotes and deepens political authoritarianism and increases social-cultural instability.  

There is great need to connect progressive forces in civil society, peoples/social movements and those political parties, which are the drivers of resistances to political authoritarianism, social-cultural insecurity, neoliberalism and corporate power. The methodologies of forging alliances/partnerships among progressive forces across Asia and Europe–including civil society, people’s movements, parliamentarians and political parties—to resist and stop authoritarianism and oppression, and build/strengthen participatory democracy, peoples’ rights and non-capitalism economies is a challenge and objective of this conference.

The Context:

Since migrants are presented as the causes of economic instability by right wing forces, creating complex and dangerous “push and pull” forces, it is appropriate to create the correct perspective on this issue from the framework of participatory democracy and human rights.  At the Global level there has been a major defeat and roll-back with the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration adopted by the UN in Marrakesh, December 2019. This is a roll-back to voluntary recommendations – far from the binding obligations of the International Convention for the Human Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. 

The discussion showed that there is a nexus between political forces, capital and neoliberalism. This nexus has deep social-economic impacts that include:  expected/unexpected political outcomes and forces that are evident from recent elections; the elements that have enabled the rise and expansion of extreme authoritarianism, majoritarian rule, narrow nationalism, and the move away from secular democracy. However the reasons for migration (economic distress, war, resource conflicts, displacement from land-grabbing, infrastructure and investment projects, political, religious and social persecution, disasters/threats, etc.) are often hidden but need to be addressed.  Migration is related also to asylum seekers and refugees. The trend in Asia and Europe are fortified by cross currents from the US where the conscious organising of right wing forces at grassroots level has intensified. 

Europe

The rise of authoritarianism and right wing populism has been further entrenched in the 2019 European Parliament Elections.  However, there has also been a counter-trend e.g. in the outcome of the Spanish and Denmark’s national elections where the Social Democrats gained significantly in a context where the right wing parties were expected to make advances. 

 Across countries, the issue and situation of migrant and refugee people is at the centre of the political agenda. The earlier legislative frameworks that had some empathy with migrants and refugees have been rolled-back: e.g. in Italy, Austria, Hungary – and these are not officially contested at the EU level, since immigration and asylum policy has always been a matter of national jurisdiction.  There is an EU-wide collaboration on an ’architecture of the hostile environment’ which includes measures like: hard borders, externalization/militarization of border policy, based on by a diversion of development funding; the complicity of governments of the Maghreb and Turkey for the out-sourcing of EU/Europe’s security on the Mediterranean and Aegean Sea; widespread criminalisation of the migrant and refugee sector itself as well as criminalisation of opposition and solidarity. 

There are however hopes and signals of growing resistance. Some positive  instances include: – Migrant and Refugee organisations have organised 5 Sessions of the Permanent Peoples Tribunal (PPT) over the past 2 years and have generated  a narrative of an in-depth alternative analysis from the forced displacement in the global south to an opposition to detention and racist discrimination in Fortress Europe. -This is contributing to a new narrative on humanizing the different and showing the significance of labour and gender rights-where increasingly there are ‘sites with rights’ and ‘sites without rights’. 

• There are exciting practices of a new nexus of transnational activism and solidarity between migrants, refugees and citizens. And there are the Game-Changing initiatives of Mayors of 10 cities strongly opposing the necropolitics of the Mediterranean.
• The resistances to “austerity” (Yellow Jackets); and impressive mobilisation on Climate Change show the gradual but significant build-up of a counter hegemonic discourse and action.

Asia

The survey of recent elections in the Philippines, Thailand and India reveals how the ‘strong men’ in the region got popular support (Rodrigo Duterte, Prayuth Chan-Ocha and Narendra Modi) even as in their differing ways, they tightened their grip on the levers of power in their respective countries, post-polls. 

Striking similarities manifested themselves in these processes in all three countries: the crushing of the opposition, the consolidation of support across class-caste lines, with the middle class playing a central role; the hollowing out of institutions of regulation and oversight, including the judiciary; the tightening of executive control on the electoral machinery; the deployment of police repression and use of laws against sedition and terrorism to neutralize opposing views…these were only some of the features common to all three electoral contests. 

In Indonesia, religion and race are used as political drama to build the support base of right wing leadership. This was played out in the Jakarta elections which bore witness to how parties gained control. Democracy is stagnant in Indonesia and the military still controls some important business such as the natural resources. For instance mining and palm oil industries are controlled. Speaking about the Indonesian Presidential elections, a strong voice called it a “horrible political drama”, 

there have been good changes on a state level, such as the provision of water with the people being the victims of the chaos.   

In Malaysia for free for the poor as well as protection of healthcare for the underprivileged.  However, it will take time for the federal government to make large scale changes, as the civil servants are still loyal to the previous government which ruled the country since independence. The elites are thought to have been damaging to the political process, and that the running members knew how to manipulate racial sentiments to invoke nationalism as a bid to win votes. Has diversity been eroded to gain power? “People use social media for 14 hours a day” says MP Charles Santiago as he points out that social media is becoming a player in democracy. Those who control social media may control the narrative that people will believe. Social media was a key player in the Malaysian elections, and it can become an ally for the left if it is harnessed and utilised effectively. In Thailand, social network is used widely during elections. It is also notable that some peoples’ lives are not revolving around social media but to remain active in politics, social media is used liked an airstrike.

In Burma/Myanmar, Cambodia, India, Ireland, Philippines, Malaysia & Thailand are all examples of countries in which identity based nationalism is a game changing technique used to gain hegemonic power. ‘Popular Sovereignty’ based on ethnicity, race & religion are constructed using xenophobia, chauvinism, extremism as modalities of governance. Enemies (generally the minorities, migrants and the different) are defined and majority & minority conflicts are dramatised. Also this pattern is far removed from the real issues of addressing poverty and in fact is deemed to result in deeper impoverishment. Populism is connected to authoritarianism which results in ONE strongman emergence as an iconic symbolism of nationalism.

Populist Methods

The Populists work by capturing and controlling institutions and societal discourse through legal and extra-legal means (for e.g., social media, vigilantism, rogue security actors). Violence is used against minorities, migrants, ‘dissenters,’ women, indigenous peoples and anyone who differs from the dominant narrative. Force is perpetrated directly or supported by the state, is justified and normalized. Misogyny and new manifestations of patriarchy are on the rise.

Under authoritarian populist regimes the character of the state and civil institutions is threatened by a nexus and cartels which entrench themselves in the democratic space. We have a military industrial – corporate nexus, business – oligarchy nexus, judiciary – corporate nexus, corporate – media nexus. The state uses repressive laws to control the opposition.

One major force that has exacerbated right-wing authoritarianism is neo-liberalism. Populists are able to link numerous and varied forces and crises in social, economic, political and cultural life to reject the liberal order, social justice and traditional elites.

Populists are able to link numerous and varied right wing forces in social, economic, political & cultural life that rejects social justice and liberal order. People who benefit from this nexus and right wing populism are international finance institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO, corporations, arms manufacturers, upper class & caste, religious groups, party cadres.

Voices of Resistance

• Activists from the Philippines have been working on various issues related to authoritarianism, alongside various sectors from the country, one of them being the Church to help spread their message of counter authoritarianism. Authoritarianism in the Philippines has meant a decrease in the democratic freedoms of the people, and activists have teamed up with prominent human rights lawyers to fight for the people’s freedom and right to free speech and a free press. The activists also emphasised that a large chunk of what they do is work with local communities, as they say that collaboration with them is crucial in the fight against authoritarianism. Activists in the Philippines reported that Multinational Corporations often ensure that articles that speak of their crimes are silenced, and thus the use of social media has been vital to these activists to bring the truth to light. An organisation like “ I Defend “ is a conglomeration of various organisations including the families of extrajudicial violence, with the idea to expose the nature of Duterte’s rule which draws on the support of a huge overseas Filipino population. So now these categories are being approached to expose Duterte.
  
• Activists and professors from India spoke on resistance to the Modi government in India. The farmers’ movements are seen to be one of India’s biggest hopes for oppositional politics. However the divide among the people is because the opposition is without a strategy for a united front for freedoms and even of land rights. People need to realise that authoritarian leaders exploit the various religions and castes to create a divide. The only way that resistance can be sustainable is if they remain united. One of the heartening developments in India is that groups that were not talking or working together are today exploring common ground to resist the ruling forces. A panellist member from India brought up that recently, 49 prominent figures wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister on the rise of mob lynchings in the name of religion and their outrage over this. The case launched against them had to be withdrawn as thousands others joined the protest.

• In Europe, in relation to the constituency of transnational migrants, one of the biggest issues is access to rights and the racist nature of policing. This fosters animosity and unrest amongst the public, and leads to a democracy having to deal with civil unrest and unable to focus on other policies. The activists reported that the Permanent People’s Tribunal is being used to address immigrant concerns. However, economic inequality and the rise of Shell corporations also pose a threat to European democracy, where the most industrialised regions are often actually one of the poorest. “Shell is able to manipulate democracy” says a voice, talking about how these companies don’t have to pay taxes in the Netherlands. “Netherlands is Europe’s biggest Tax haven”.
• In Burma/ Myanmar, student unionists are the new forces resisting the authoritarian order. This is quite powerful, as the youth are using their rising influence on social media apps to attract a global attention to the ongoing genocide. Women’s groups from different ethnic nationalities are also quite progressive, supporting resistance groups and activists. This shows that Burmese can form a united front in the fight against authoritarianism. Unfortunately when the attacks on the Rohingya broke out only one women’s group came out against them. Moving forward, resistance groups need to remain active even in the worst conditions.
• Talking about Cambodia, activists work with a range of groups including those of farmers, water activists, sex workers, garment workers and others. These are cross sectoral networks of people who are powerless or left behind.  Cambodian activists have learnt to use action research methods that include learning of social realities and use this learning to build counter strategies. With the rise of nationalism, these research strategies will prove powerful to help change the narrative to one that is willing to stand up for democracy.
• Thailand does not seem to have a Left movement and so the emphasis becomes on building unlikely alliances of victims across various divides. The tactics of the Thai Junta has also become more violent. There have been disappearances, killings, beatings.  The people have responded with very unconventional forms of activism, such as the symbolic three finger gestures.
• In Pakistan, there has been a peasant movement in defiance of the military. Here peasants, largely women, by refusing sharecropping payments to the military, are resisting military take-over of their lands. When military agents tried to destroy the cemeteries of Christian peasants, Muslims peasants came out in support of their Christian counterparts.

Alternative Strategies

The key question is how do we counter this authoritarian trend?  How do we consolidate ourselves & how to strengthen analysis and capacity against capitalism and Neo-liberalism?  The participants felt that elections alone will not be enough for the new left wing politics, social movements need to actively engage.  

• New challenges of the downfall of big parties in Europe where a reform is needed indeed, for example there is a need to nationalize large parts of the economy.

• There is a need to develop the ability to show that how some religious leaders convince the population to choose a stance on policies blindly, even though some of their arguments do not have a logical view.

• To counter nationalist authoritarianism we have to go back to the basics, in organising against dictatorship. 

• It is vital to work with the media, to connect those who are both inside and outside of government. 

• Empowering youth is fundamental to take stock of the issues. Rather than only talking about problems, we need to address and challenge all issues by engaging with representatives of the government, networking and building local capacities.

• The kind of common actions that can be initiated are: data monitoring, coordination between the local and international, building allies, having flexibility to assess important issues and energy to work in an inclusive manner. Counter narratives are also a part of the larger narrative and is important to spark interest and awareness.

• There should be global opposition to racism, religious nationalism, islamophobia, and majoritarianism. 

• More work needs to be done on the analysis of the nexus between politics & finance, using all human rights mechanisms nationally, regionally & internationally. To be able to develop a new thinking paradigm to challenge the legality of these alliances.

• Building law from below, building peoples sovereignty & community based laws. It is important to manage youth energy to make them active in the economic sphere and not to be driven as puppets by political parties. 

• The weak understanding of political ideology in Myanmar was discussed which is used to silence communities. Hence, as in Thailand and some other countries it is necessary to engage across sectors in partnerships, including politicians who cannot be isolated and who provide legitimacy to resist negative forces. For instance, using the Church and religion to collaborate with local communities. 

• Even while directing energies to counter the negative forces there must be transparency and democracy within movements as well. That is ‘walk the talk’ and ‘back to basics’.

• Flexibility in terms of constant reorganisation is vital to resist negative forces and new narratives and open data knowledge and resources needs to counter shrinking spaces.

Priorities and Recommendations:

• AEPF analysis on authoritarianism connection neoliberalism, corporatism, racism and political economy. Understanding new reality
• Academics, scholars, people’s movements: immersion and learning sharing.

• New narratives: How we do things

• Training

• Link campaigns for example with the International Human Rights campaigns.

• Meeting of Lawyers that will frame legal strategies. For example, an international campaign against sedition as a way to curb freedom of speech and right to dissent.

II The Interface between Asian and European Parliamentarians

MPs and CSOs in the AEPF Conference on Re-Imagining Democracy and People’s Agency were concerned with the shrinking spaces for freedoms even within democracies. The combination of the growing power of corporations, linked with exclusive nationalism is a matter of great concern. The conference looked for strategies to reclaim people centred democracy. 

Since the holding of the AEPF 12 in Ghent, Belgium we have witnessed the further rise of authoritarianism and right wing populism has been further entrenched including in the European Parliament Elections (we give the data when it is available). Countries across Asia witness, including those where democracy had taken roots see a sliding scale of repressions where the nascent democratic and human rights are systematically violated and an atmosphere of fear prevails. In the already authoritarian- militarized countries, there is even more repression against dissenters, minorities, migrants and the different). 

There has also been a counter-trend e.g. in the outcome of the Spanish national elections where the Social Democrats gained significantly in a context where the right wing parties were expected to make advances. The conscious organising of right wing forces and organisations at grassroots level and in institutions has intensified – with cross currents from the US. There are operative linkages between Steve Bannon and his brand of ideology and politics and key populist leaders and networks of neo-fascists. 

Meanwhile the situation of Migrant and Refugee people is at the centre of the political agenda. The legislative frameworks at national levels have gone into further roll-back: e.g. Italy, Austria, Hungary – and these are not officially contested at the EU level (immigrations and asylum policy has always been a matter of national competence). At the same time, there is an EU-wide collaboration on the ‘architecture of the hostile environment”; borders and externalisation of borders policies; expansion of militarisation and diversion of development funding into forced complicity on governments of the Maghreb and Turkey for the out-sourcing of EU/Europe’s security on the Mediterranean and Aegean Sea; widespread criminalisation of the migrant and refugee sector itself as well as criminalisation of opposition and solidarity. In Asian countries too, migrants are the main targets as new citizenship laws are being enacted and violent repression used to displace and force out migrants.  

There are however hopes and  strong signals of growing resistance – Migrant and Refugee organisations have organised 5 Sessions of the Permanent Peoples Tribunal (PPT) over the past 2 years and have generated with their protagonism and struggles as an in-depth alternative analysis from the forced displacement in the global south to -detention and racist discrimination in Fortress Europe. In Hong Kong the resistance to new laws on extradition brought millions to the streets. This is contributing to a new narrative on human, labour and gender rights-where increasingly there are ‘sites with rights” and “sites without rights’; exciting practices of a new nexus of transnational activism and solidarity – between migrant, refugees and citizens. And there are the Game-Changing initiatives of Mayors of 10 cities strongly opposing the necropolitics of the Mediterranean; the resistances to “austerity” (Yellow Jackets); and impressive mobilisation on Climate Change. 

Links

1)  Programme of the Conference at
https://aepf.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/The-Program.pdf

2) Statement from Parliamentarians: https://aepf.info/single-post/Petaling-Jaya

3) Media Statement : https://aepf.info/single-post/2019/07/25/AEPF-Media-Statement-From-Petaling-Jaya-Malaysia

4) Glimpses of AEPF Conference on: https://aepf.info/single-post-2/AEPF-Malaysia-Glimpses

AEPF Website

Day 1 Video: https://aepf.info/single-post/AEPF-APHR-Malaysia

Day 2 Video: https://aepf.info/single-post-2/AEPF-Malaysia-Glimpses

Interviews: https://aepf.info/videos/

 

Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF)
Interface with Asian and European Parliamentarians

Kuala Lumpur,   24 July 2019

Aims of the Meeting

• Facilitate a strategic interface between Asian and European Parliamentarians and AEPF.
• Share experiences of Parliamentarians from each region on the current situation.
• Enable involvement of Parliamentarians in some key aspects of the AEPF Peoples Agenda and the Ghent spirit.
• Learn how Parliamentarians are using strategic tactics and parliamentary processes to work in the current very difficult situations.
• Prepare and release a Common Statement with the key goal on rights and participatory democracy, as well as continuing interface between civil society and parliamentarians.

Panel Of Parliamentarians

Charles Santiago (Malaysia)
Mercy Barends (Indonesia)
Deepak Bhatt (Nepal)
Coining Dorji (Bhutan)
Aida Kasymalieva (Kyrgyzstan)
Hassan Murtaza (Pakistan)
Mylvaganam Thilakarajah (Sri Laka)
Eulàlia Reguant (Spain)

Resource Persons:

Brid Brennan (Ireland/Netherlands)
Kamal Chenoy (India)
Geo-Sung Kim (South Korea)
Achin Vanaik (India)
Farooq Tariq (Pakistan )
Tian Chua (Malaysia)
Leong Tsu Quin (Malaysia)
Tina Ebro (Philippines)
_____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________

the state of democracy, growing authoritarian tendencies and peoples’ resistances in their own countries in a brief way, What they face and what are strategies in their own countries as located regionally and globally. In the light of growing populist authoritarianism and deepening neo liberalism, These below are some  questions you that can guide and focus the discussion: 

• Can you sum up state of democracy in your country.
• Is there hate speech, who is targeted and by whom?
• What are the connections between the political, economic and social trends that support the increasing corporate control (and foreign capital in Asia) How important is the impact of foreign capital on your domestic economy and how does it impact policy making?
• Which forces are supporting the increased executive power and why? 
• Who is benefitting from the growing authoritarian policies?
• What new laws are squeezing democratic spaces, helping foreign capital?
• Which forces are creating space for resistance and are the source for giving alternate agendas?
• Who are challenging and what are the ways to counter right wing xenophobic nationalism ?
• Is there any exception to these hegemonic policies? (eg. Nepal, Denmark) and what is the impact on your country from neighbours and ‘greater powers’?
• Any success stories of electoral victories? Any success stories in the economy and in the environment?