A Critical Report Final Version

A critical report on

SOLIDARITY BUILDING and

NETWORKING with EUROPE This report emerges as a result of my good fortune to receive many invitations to participate in a variety of activities in Europe from 3 March - 10 August 2009. The field-trip brought important opportunities for honest discussion and debate with friends and comrades old and new, and gave me some much needed time-and-space for reflecting and thinking about ‘the way forward’ and the problems we face in our campaigns and struggles to establish effective, long-term, local-regional-global labour rights strategies. In the report I reflect on thoughts and feelings that I know are shared by many labour rights NGOs and activists in the South that have been engaged in movements for global justice for a long time, and some aspects of the report are critical.

Junya Yimprasert THAI LABOUR CAMPAIGN with assistance from

Richard Thompson Coon

Photo: Participants of the Make-IT-Fair Youth Roundtable, Amsterdam 13 - 15 March, 2009.

1

CONTENTS Programme and activities in Europe

3

Reflections and thoughts Consumers against corporate exploitation

6

Charity approach and rights-based approach

7

Freedom of Association

8

Social Solidarity Economics

9

‘The Voter’s Uprising that is changing perceptions in Thailand’

10

Learning about Oxfam’s shops

11

Moving beyond North-helps-South to sustainable solutions

11

North and South in partnership

12

Problems with the ‘Log Frame approach’

14

From CoC to CSR and the UN Global Compact

14

Corporatisation

15

Global unions

15

Climate change

16

Partnerships beyond the old patron-client syndrome

17

CLOSING WORDS

17

A few thoughts on the way forward

18

MANY THANKS

20

Written work completed on Suomenlinna

21

Some personal rewards

21

Two Thai recipes

22

2

Programme and activities in Europe MARCH 13 -15 16 17 18 19 -28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

26 27

28 30 31

Make IT Fair Youth Roundtable, SOMO, Amsterdam. Visit to SOMO to discuss joint research projects on gemstone and electronics. Cooking Thai food for friends. Visit CCC, discuss about TLC – CCC cooperation and urgent appeal cases. Learning about organic farming in Amsterdam. Travel to Brussels, dinner with Solidar’s President. Sharing experiences with consumers and Oxfam Solidarity volunteers. Visit to ITUC. Preparation of speaking tour programme in Belgium with Oxfam Solidarity. Visit Oxfam Solidarity book and computer shops. Presentation to high-school students. Meeting with WIDE Coordinator. Organic farming day. Visit to farm, lunch in organic food shop. Visit to city collective organic garden and organic basket distribution point. Visit Oxfam Solidarity book and computer shops. Presentations in Gent & Knokke-Heist. Evening panel discussion with Indonesian activist (TURC) on working conditions in SE-Asia. Visit two Oxfam Solidarity book and computer shops. Presentations in Nirdles and Charleroi. Visiting European Institute of Asian Study (EIAS), Brussels. Visit Solidar office. Dinner with Oxfam Solidarity friends. Presenting in two sessions at the Oxfam in Belgium Partner Day. Meeting with journalists. Interviews together with Zap Mama. http://www.oxfamsol.be/fr/Thailande-Belgique-dialogue-de.html and http://www.mo.be/index.php?id=348&tx_uwnews_pi2[art_id]=25190&cHash=3f6042a13c Travel to London. Learning about ‘No Sweat’ and preparations for the Climate Camp. British Museum. Meeting with Thai political activists in exile. Meeting with ITF labour activist from New Zealand.

APRIL 1 2 3 4 6 8

8-14 16 14-21 22 23 - 24 25 26

Learning about how to the UK activists organise Climate Camp. Participate in Climate Camp. Article on Climate Camp in Thai published by Prachatai, Thailand. Meeting with Dr. Dae-oup Chang, SOAS. Brief tour of SOAS / discussions with lecturers. Cooking Thai for dinner meeting with No Sweat, Labour behind the Label and Action Aid UK. Travel to Helsinki. Communicating with TLC. Participation in a KEPA SE-Asia strategy meeting. Presentation on Women Workers in the Global Supply Chain to 20 young activists at the Fair Trade Center. An interview with Voima magazine. http://fifi.voima.fi/artikkeli/Pukisitko-paidan-Pohjois-Koreasta/2838 Monitoring the political crisis in Thailand from TV, internet media, and political chat boards. Presentation on Thai Politic and Global Supply Chain at ‘One Drop Forum’, Helsinki. Preparing article on ‘The Voter’s Uprising that is changing perceptions in Thailand’. Travel to Luxembourg. Presentation on ‘Solidarity Entrepreneurships’ at the Social Solidarity Economy Congress, LUX’ 09. Travel to Paris. Touring Paris with a TUAC friend and a union activist from Ghana.

3

27 28 28 29 30

31

Preparation for the presentation to OECD at TUAC office. OECD conference on ‘Gender, Development and Decent Work: Building a Common Agenda’, Distributing ‘The Voter’s Uprising’ to over 50 participants at OECD conference. General discussion with a TUAC friend. Travel to Geneva by train. Meeting with Global Labour Institute. Visit International Workers Union for Food, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering and Tobacco (IUF). Cooking Thai food for friends from IUF and GLI. Visit to organic farm. Helping to plant vegetables. Learning about organic basket system in Geneva (which has 20 years of experience) from a Farmer’s Union spokesman. Visit CETIM office (an organisation that helps political refugees). Interview by a journalist from the Courrier (http://www.lecourrier.ch/special/promotion/152d7f87f964fa3/LeCourrier_2009-05-23.pdf) Meeting with SOLIFOND, Geneva

MAY 1 2 15 - 30 30

Travel to Helsinki. Revising ‘The Voter’s Uprising’ and posting to the web. www.timeupthailand.blogspot.com Work with Gender and Trade manual (the dialogues). Translating ‘The Voter’s Uprising’ to Thai.

JUNE 3 8 9 10 11 12 13 14-30

Distribution of ‘The Voter’s Uprising’. Travel to Paris. Participation in CCC strategy meeting. Visit to TUAC office. Travel to Brussels. Discussions with Oxfam Solidarity. Discussions with WIDE. Travel to Helsinki. Work with Gender and Trade manual.

JULY 1 - 31

Work with Gender and Trade manual. (One week with high fever.) Developing concept paper on ‘ASEAN Democracy Campaign’. Preparing this text: ‘A Critical Report on Solidarity Building and Networking with Europe.

AUGUST 1-9 10

Work with Gender and Trade manual and this report. Return to Thailand.

4

London Climate Camp 5

Thoughts and reflections Consumers against corporate exploitation Thailand, in collaboration with consumer movements in Europe and the USA, was one of the first countries in Asia to engage in direct-action against corporate exploitation of the poor, in particular with the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) in Amsterdam. My participation with 30 young European activists in SOMO’s ‘Make-IT-Fair’ workshop, Amsterdam, March 13-15, 2009 provided a good start for this field-trip in Europe. The workshop seemed to indicate how well consumer movements in Europe are succeeding in reaching-out to the youth, and cooperating with environmental organisations like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, and with the public in general. Full of lively debate, the participatory process was assisted by professional facilitators who filled the programme with excitement and fun. Just a bit irritating for us poor, grass-root activists from the South was the over-emphasis on impressive organisation, with unnecessary expenditure on e.g. choice of venue and evening entertainment. We were glad to hear a few young activists from the North making the same observation, and pointing-out that this was not their normal practice. Despite much attempt by partners from the South to focus attention on the need to bridge the gaps in understanding between North and South - by making greater effort to include Southern partners in designing campaign strategy and actions, campaigning for global justice in the South remains North-led, and appears to be dominated by thinking that campaigning for global justice means pandering to what young, consumers in the North think or imagine is cool and sexy. What positive impact does this approach to campaigning have on bridging the gaps in understanding between consumers in the North and workers in the South? The subject can be debated, but the answer is - not enough. By the end of the conference there was not a single action plan that aimed at ‘reaching out’ to meet and learn first-hand from communities and workers in the South. Many people have reflected that attempting to appeal to the consumer tastes of northern youth as a means to develop global justice is costly, time-consuming and often skates over the core issues.

The word ‘solidarity’ speaks about strong commitment to the universal principles of social justice. When fashion not basic needs rules demand and supply, our strategies become confused. We must be more aware, more alert and more critical. To be able to know what they are talking about, to be able to work in a true spirit of solidarity with the struggle of workers in the South, activists need at least some first-hand experience of living under oppression in the South. Fair trade campaigners in the North may regard themselves as progressive, but what people in the North need to know more about is the work, courage and determination of the workers in the South, about their movements against oppression and about the tens of thousands of grass-root activists who, while living in poverty themselves, dedicate their whole lives to struggle against slavery. However well-meaning, if campaigning in the North does not represent the situation of workers in the South, the result may prove negative. Presenting workers in the South to consumers in the North as ‘victims’, as ‘people to be rescued’, as people for whom ‘any job is better than no job’ is mis-representation. Workers in the South do not say ‘Any job is better than no job’. Most of the time they think (even if they don’t say) . . ‘If you capitalists from the North cannot treat us as human beings, then please go away. We don’t want you’. The voice of workers from the South has never stopped ringing with words that emphasise: ‘We fight and will fight for our dignity with or without NGO support and development aid’. Southern activists go to Europe because workers in the South are held in slavery by global capitalism – which is rooted in the North. They go in search of

6

solidarity because they understand that North-South solidarity is needed to overcome the ‘dark forces’ of greed that threaten our common future. The language of the poor is not with the written word, it is with the spoken word, but southern partners are not just messengers. If the wellmeaning people in the North and the big northern NGOs really want partnership they must include their southern partners as equals in the planning process. Moving on a bit we ask . . ‘what are the real consequences of engaging the super-rich superstars of western society as ‘ambassadors’ of human suffering. Do we need these neo-liberal, Calvin Klein missionaries? More North-South / South-North bridges are needed

and must be built, but the possible negative consequences of campaigns designed in the North must be more carefully analysed, discussed and examined on an equal platform, with more attention given to encouraging workers from the South to speak their minds openly (in the North). Furthermore, short-term sponsorship aimed at satisfying the fancies of consumer campaigns designed in the North can do serious long-term damage to conceptions of North-South partnership. The common practice of sending writers and media crews to ‘bring back’ the best possible images of suffering in the South needs more careful evaluation. Activists in the South have no time or resources to give to ensuring that (fast-track) journalists point their noses and cameras at the core issues, and no time to correct the damage done when they fail.

Charity approach and right-based approach Far too many North-South partnerships leave the South with a multitude of problems when support from the North is terminated. Charity hinders progress to sustainable development in both South and North. Moving forwards means making sure that a ‘rights-based approach’ (enabling the poor to feed themselves) displaces the ‘charity approach’ (feeding the Poor). While many ‘big donors’ in the north still focus on charity, on dumping food and second-hand stuff on the South, there is a growing number of organisations in the North that are focusing on rights-based strategies - on moving to joint-struggle with the South, but these too are frequently burdened by demand for fast results, and, in final analysis, may also aggravate rather than improve situations. Joint-struggle through a rights-based approach is always the most difficult, because it goes to the heart of all illness in society and is time-consuming. All southern grass-root organisations that work with a rights-based approach face all kinds of abuse and violence. When governments in the South do release cash for local development projects, it is given to projects which pose no threat (e.g. lottery, liquor and tobacco taxes to campaigns to reduce alcoholism, domestic violence and child abuse!

NGOs dedicated to the rights-based approach are classified as a danger to neo-liberal development priorities, to the imago of the state in relation to FDI, to economic stability and so on. Whose economic stability we ask? Those who work with a rights-based strategy never stop attempting to point-out that ‘poverty’ in the South does not just mean starving, it means hunger for a democratic society in which all can participate - for government that is dedicated to kicking-out corrupt structures, corrupt politicians, rotten military forces and unwanted exploitation of local communities by outside investors. Five months in Europe has confirmed my thinking that the right of access to and control over natural resources, the closing of the gap between rich and poor and the whole goal of sustainable development, can only be secured through democratic social governance. Most countries in the South are still fighting to establish their most basic democratic infra-structure. For most people in the South democracy is still just a hope, an unknown vehicle that they have heard carries the promise of ‘freedom’. In practice democracy in the South is often just a charade for buying rights and selling votes.

7

So what does all this confusion mean? It means we still face decades of struggle before the majority of people in the South are able to understand, manage and experience democratic governance. It means that the North must stop demanding fast-track results that deepen confusion rather than release people from suffering. Southern labour rights activists, organisations and NGOs cannot fulfil the North’s short-term, fast-track demands without selling-out their own people. This indirect bullying has no long-term value and must be eliminated. We are not just fighting against poverty for a living wage; we struggle for freedom of speech, freedom of association and for gender equality in a fullyinclusive, fully-functional democratic framework. Despite all this criticising, TLC has always had a close relationship with many campaigners in the North. We cannot thank CCC and partners enough for all the non-stop assistance they have been giving to our campaigns for worker’s rights since 1996. The Clean Clothes Campaign network is a unique and admirable movement. We appreciate deeply that CCC was started by a group of women activists who for 20 years travelled endlessly to countries in the South to learn and understand the exploitation and living conditions of workers, and

built the relationships and solidarity needed to launch a global campaign that is able to stand-up against the global brands and the TNC race to the bottom to exploit the poor. With an operational network covering 13 countries in Europe and over 250 partner organisations around the world, CCC is surely one of the most exemplary activist organisations in the European consumer movement. But we must be critical, even of CCC. Especially we keep requesting CCC to not co-operate directly with brands without assurance that there will be space at the negotiating table for unions and workers. And we keep requesting they take into consideration that, in the South, adjustment to new approaches and project priorities takes at least double the time it does in the North. At the CCC strategy meeting in Paris (9-10 June) and other venues, TLC has been asked why, with ‘all the world’ moving to engagement in promoting Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the ‘Asian Floor Wage’ and ‘Decent Work’, TLC is not engaging? TLC has always provided support for these activities, but our perspective is that we must remain firmly anchored to fighting corporate greed and suppression of Freedom of Association.

FREEDOM of ASSOCIATION For twenty years, there has been no ‘Global Campaign for Freedom of Association’. Yes, within the campaigns for CSR, Fair Trade and Decent Work there are calls for FoA, but there has been no actual campaign for FoA, and we are suffering because of this reluctance to tackle this core issue directly - the only road to ensuring the establishment and implementation of effective Labour Law. During the 2 years of preparation for the 2004 Play Fair at the Olympics Campaign, at meetings in Cambodia, Brussels and Bangkok, southern partners lobbied hard for the inclusion of FoA at the core of the Campaign, and the Campaign organising committee did manage to raise the issue of FoA with 3 key actors from the North: Global Union, Oxfam International and CCC, but the engagement of Global Union in the 2004 campaign was disappointing.

TLC has been consistent in proposing that a global campaign must be organised to demand that every government on the planet ratify the ILO’s core conventions on Freedom of Association (ILO 87 and 98). The proposal has not been picked-up by partners in the North, and there is need for analysis of why not. The common reason given is that the issue of Freedom of Association is not interesting enough to (mobilize) northern consumers! Does this mean that the freedom of workers in the South to defend their rights, present their demands, form unions and fight for a decent life is not interesting enough to people in the North? No, that cannot be true. What it does say is something, or much, about the approach (in the North) to building North-South partnerships. TLC’s position is that Corporate Codes of Conduct are important but cannot replace, and must not be allowed to replace, the universality of global law as

8

determined by the United Nations and the body of ILO conventions. These need to be strengthened not weakened. The ‘topic’ of CSR must not be allowed to suck-out the vitality of the grass-root movement for social justice. CSR cannot be allowed to parasitize the civic space that grass-root movements all over the world have fought to establish - the civic space that is essential to the maintenance and development of democratic.

movement - civic space in which our essential, critical, cross-sectoral exchange of thoughts and ideas can take place. If we sell-out on the efforts of the workers and labour activists that struggle for human rights and dignity - on the land and at shop-floor level, we will never witness global justice. Too much attention to CSR can de-rail all human effort to defend human rights.

Social Solidarity Economies North-North, East-West, South-South and North-South The ‘International Forum - Globalisation of Solidarity’ (LUX09), Luxembourg 22- 23 April, was focused on Social Solidarity Economy (SSE). SSE is a powerful name, and SSE could provide models of organisation to help break clear from the domination of giant corporations. With Fair Trade representing only 1% of the EU market, SSE could greatly facilitate the struggle of ‘little people’ in North, South, East and West to find the way forward. There were over 600 activists participating, most from French-speaking countries in the North and in Africa, maybe 200 from Africa. There were about one hundred from Latin America (mainly Brazilians). The smallest group was from Asia - about 20 people. Asia is a newcomer to the SSE network but has accepted the challenging task of hosting the next international forum on the ‘Globalisation of Solidarity’ in 2013. Having been introduced to SSE by John Samuel from Action Aid, LUX 09 was a great learning experience - about the achievements of North-North solidarity and attempts to open up a North-South SSE dialogue. In my view LUX 09 brought to the forefront several difficult issues which are considered by many of us from the South to be of central importance, issues that were to some extent reflected even in the organisation of the forum Delegates from the North were school teachers, municipal officers, representatives of small businesses, social movements, NGOs, politicians and trade unions, a quite cross-sectoral assembly. From the South there came mainly small entrepreneurs and representatives of cooperatives,

many of whom came with hopes of gaining market access to fair trade and social solidarity markets; many brought products to display – and some to sell. The presentations from the North were mainly about ‘going local’ and ‘going eco’ and ‘trading within the city’, about consuming less and eliminating consumption of non-renewables. There were a few presentations from the North about re-employment and job creation with state subsidies (unemployment packages). The workshop on ‘networking within SSE’ was a little ironic. Presentations from the North showed the impressive level of penetration of high-tech communication technologies to households and individuals. Presentations from African partners showed the exact opposite - why SSE is moving so slowly. Many African sisters and brothers who want to participate in SSE networking activity live in remote villages without electricity. If there is electricity, internet access is unreliable. SSE in Quebec was presented by a few key persons from RIPESS (Réseau Intercontinental de Promotion de l’Economie Sociale Solidaire), one of the main organisers of the forum, which has (I think) some 250 participant co-ops giving service to nearly 300,000 people. As a pioneer of SSE, RIPESS seems to present us with an encouraging example of how work with SSE could take us from the oppression of corporate supply chains.

9

At LUX09, the design of the programme and activities was clearly the work of the large Northern organisations. 50-70% of invited speakers at the workshops were from the North, especially from Quebec and Luxemburg (the host). Also in the plenary sessions there were far too few speakers from the South. To be able to move forward together, the powerful organizations from the over-developed North need to be more considerate when designing these forums - by giving more attention to achieving a balanced North-South agenda. In the light of the principles inherent in the term Solidarity, the SSE forum raised some key questions: 1. Is the under-lying purpose of the SSE forum to produce and implement economic models to reduce the gap between rich and poor, or is it just another means to develop mechanisms that can assist the over-developed life-styles of the ‘democratic’ North from going into deeper crisis? 2. In some cases the social movements and models of co-operation between small-scale entrepreneurs that are emerging within the concept of SSE in the North are already impressive, and we in the South have much to learn from SSE development in Europe and Canada. But consciously or unconsciously people tend to underestimate the gaps in North-South understanding and what must be done to prevent SSE thoughts, expectations and practices - in North and South - from evolving along pathways too different to be compatible. To ensure this does not happen the movement in the North must ensure that participants from the South are participant in planning and made comfortable so that they can say what they think.

People in the North may know but seem to forget that in most countries in the South the great majority of the population is still living below ‘the thin red line’, still struggling, in most cases in the absence of any real social welfare, to establish even their most basic democratic structures. 3. How can the concept of SSE be developed into models and tools that enable North and South to work and move forward together on equal footing in struggle against the forces of destruction? Although positive in itself, the Fair Play and Fair Trade project packaging that is designed in the North is tending to divert attention from the essential struggle of the South to establish real democracy. I did not attend all sessions, but the SSE forum in Luxembourg seemed to over-look or by-pass obligation to support grass-root struggle for democracy in the South - as if such obligation had somehow faded into history. This was what I experienced at most of the meetings I attended in Europe. Where is the solidarity we talk of? Is all life to be ‘corporatised northern-style’? Are we allowing ourselves to be sucked into some screwed-up vision of ‘corporate citizens for corporate democracy’? Surely not, human resistance there must be and human resistance there is. For SSE to work, the SSE movement in the North must seek to become more interested in and more attentive to the struggle for democracy in the South, and become more active in looking for ways to become more directly engaged - in struggle for democracy in the South. That is what will make SSE live.

The Voter’s Uprising in Thailand In attempting to respond to the political chaos in Thailand in April this year, some weeks of my time in Europe were given to writing the article ‘The Voter’s Uprising that is changing perceptions in Thailand’, an early version of which was distributed at the OECD conference on Gender, Development and Decent Work in Paris at the end of April.

Preparation of the article proved to be a difficult but important experience, an exercise in un-masking the reasons why we, the Thai, have been and remain so fearful of challenging the status-quo - the autocratic structures that have kept Thailand in an oppressive and sometimes murderous political framework since the Second World War: phenomena which cannot be ignored when attempting to develop North-South solidarity.

10

How to clear the political ambience in a country where, for decades, the task of twisting the minds of the people has been the consistent, main objective of a string of military juntas? How to establish democratic governance in a country where people have all but lost their ability to distinguish between universal principles of right and wrong? What kind of revolution is needed to ensure that the burning embers of frustration do not become uncontrollable fires of violence?

Learning about Oxfam’s shops 18-28 March, 2009, BELGIUM Tom Matthijs, Asia Project Coordinator for Oxfam Solidarity, and myself kept adding to our programme and, by the end of a very full ten days, everyone was exhausted. Our visits in Belgium to many Fair-Trade shops and Oxfam Solidarity shops (that also sell things like second-hand books and computers) gave much inspiration for our fund-raising and out-reach activities in Thailand, and to our ideas for setting-up similar kinds of shops in our industrial zones, with direct supply from local, organic farmers and producers – alongside ideas for e.g. small coffeeshops where workers can rendez-vous and chat.

Within TLC we have been discussing how to move forward to a ‘TLC Foundation’! Usually, when we attempt to sell our publications we end up giving them away for free at workshops, or to workers participating in our Labour Right Caravan’s etc. It is now important for TLC to explore ideas and models for starting second-hand shops in Thailand - in cooperation with Oxfam and Fair Trade networks. We have talked with some unions in Thailand about how to sell educational materials - so that unions can raise some money and so that TLC’s (printing / admin) costs are covered. It is also important for us to learn from Oxfam Solidarity and the Fair Trade movement about their business praxes.

Moving beyond North-helps-South to sustainable solutions Sometimes debate between North and South can be painful, especially between poor activists that are working at maximum capacity to help each other, have high respect for each other and are essentially good friends! Many northern activists lead a highly conscious lifestyle, work on a mainly voluntary basis and are obliged to take on other work just to sustain a basic living standard. Few have a car, many live in squats, collectives or share flats, and most are vegetarians. Activists from the South must also look in upon themselves. Blaming every misfortune on colonialism is not good enough, not sexy and thoroughly bad when used as a means to selfempowerment. Blaming NGOs is not sexy either. In the South our own blame-games are often a

hindrance, limiting our capacity and ability to analyse our problems accurately and design strategies that can take us forward. The constant crisis in Thailand’s economy - exportoriented economy - is obviously closely linked to the constant crisis in Thai politics. The stupidity of promoting manufacturing based on cheap labour without investing in education for sustainable development is becoming increasingly apparent as the cycles of global recession in capitalism become more frequent. The current socio-economic and political chaos in Thailand is opening-up new debate around the question of what kind of economy we want - and what, for the good of the majority of the population, does sustainable development really mean in Thailand and, likewise, for peoples all across S-E Asia.

11

•

Since 1932 Thailand has had to face 21 military coups - 9 of them successful. It has had to deal with 18 constitutions and 27 Prime Ministers.

•

Thailand was a founding member of ILO in 1919, but it was not until 1993 that Thailand managed to establish a Ministry of Labour. In the 16 years since then Thailand has had 19 labour ministers. The first Labour Protection Law was enacted in 1998. These are facts which provide a starting-point for looking into why labour organisation in Thailand is so weak and why action to ratify and implement ILO Recommendations (and many other aspects of international law like CEDAW) remains pathetic.

For more than 70 years parliamentary democracy in Thailand has been hopping around with it’s feet tied, one hop forward one hop back and then down again - in some kind of a tragic ‘dance with the generals’.

International uphold principles like freedom of association (See: http://www.triumphunion.blogspot.com/), it means in effect that we are allowing corporate power to ridicule our struggle for global justice.

It is high-time in the South that countries stopped competing with each other over who can provide the cheapest labour and the most attractive incentives for foreign corporations. The old mantra that GDP growth strengthens people’s ability to fight for democracy is not what the people experience.

Consumer movements in Europe and the USA have made, and make, great contributions to the struggle of workers in the South, but activists in the South have become weary of attempting to respond to short-term campaigns with big goals that are largely designed to satisfy political trends in the North.

We need fresh political analysis and fresh political energy to be able to move forward to establishing sustainable economic activity. To be able to generate the new, political energy we must step-out of archaic political frameworks. We need and must strengthen grass-root solidarity across the South and with our sisters and brothers in the North.

Campaigns that shift focus every other year are especially exhausting. They make it seem as if western donor-organisations are, like TNCs, more concerned with fast turn-over and a flexible base of sub-contractors (grant recipients) than they are with eliminating human suffering. ‘Choose your partner according to your needs’ is a neo-liberal ethic. In any case, our problems will not be fixed if everybody is looking for short-cuts and fast returns.

We need government that has the guts to make corporations accountable for their decisions and actions according to clear-to-all universal codes for governing human conduct. If our whole global movement cannot make run-ofthe-mill, foot-loose corporations like Triumph

We repeat constantly our request to the North: please give more attention to consulting with the South before launching campaigns in which you expect the South to cooperate.

North and South in partnership What does it mean when North organisations say they are for partnership? Normally it means ‘We invite you to joint the campaign we lead. This is the list of work we think is important. This is the money we have decided to allocate. These are the outcomes we expect’. It means all key planning decisions have already been taken: what group of people or aspect of governance or corporation is to be the focus, what testimonies are to be selected from where, what demands are to be forwarded, what results are expected to appear in the log-frame. I remember a heated debate with one union in New York around 2002. They wanted TLC to organise workers in Thailand to support their campaign in the USA.:

12

‘Thank you, we would like to work with you in a participatory process’, says the activist from the South. ‘That’s why we invite you here’, answers a big voice in a big smile. ‘But this is not a participatory process. You’ve already decided what we must do!’, says the activist, refusing to submit. ‘We are for participation. That’s why we talk to you’, comes the answer, from a bigger boss with an even bigger smile. And the result? They turn their attention to another NGO. Global organisations in the North have inherited and become accustomed to having power to pick-andchoose. TLC is constantly having to stand-up to remind people that real change cannot be achieved through abandonment of the bottom-up approach. We believe in Global Solidarity, and respond to every call for solidarity, but working with the global organisations is often problematic. If a national NGO feels the need to draw attention to an issue by saying ‘our problem is this’ there is a high risk that the problem will be pushed aside as a ‘country-level issue’. At the end of the day, after all ‘participatory discussion’, the global campaign goes on as planned, without change, aiming at targets pre-set in the North. ‘Another fashionable fast-food campaign’ we mumble as we fly off from Europe with heavy, brooding thoughts. A year or two years later we are back in Europe sitting in yet another ‘participatory consultation’ conducted by a facilitator who is employing all possible professional means to ensure that everyone delivers in 1 to 3 minute sound-bites. Another global campaign is being designed, for our benefit, and we have 1.5 days, or 3 at most! We attempt to make sense, but our voices in the extreme, time-dominated process, attempting to condense in a foreign language a multitude of problems, are often a bit shaky, and it often feels as if more attention is being given to monitoring time than to listening to our message. Grass-root organizations in the South must struggle to overcome huge personal and practical difficulties. Few grass-root NGOs have the resources to engage skilled linguists etc., and it takes time to motivate workers to respond to new demands initiated somewhere far away in the North. Any NGO in the South that is doing it’s work well risks being inundated by requests to participate in campaigns originated in the North - to collect data, host researchers, respond to endless requests for this and that, as if they were just another link in the North’s supply chain. Most NGOs in the South have to face the full spectrum of injustices on a daily basis. Few if any can work on just one particular issue. Most are, at one and the same time, fighting for social justice at every level - for democracy in the absence of democracy, for gender sensitivity in the absence of sensitivity and for the means to maintain their own critically important independence from corrupt, autocratic, administrative authorities. If we cannot move the moon in three years, we wait to hear that it is, according to high-paid evaluators (usually from the North), our failure. Most of these evaluators have never participated in the activities they are sent to evaluate, or have only cursory first-hand experience. They tell us that they understand and respect our work, but inform us that they are obliged by circumstances beyond their control to shift the focus of their policy. In short this means ‘Go find yourselves some other sponsor’. In many cases, what this means is that, if an NGO is vulnerable in terms of commitment, in attempting to find a new sponsor, it may decide to compromise it’s principles. And so the rot continues to grow. Most grass-root rights activists in the South - in Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Cambodia and Vietnam, work a seven-day week. The same goes for all workers. All work a 10-16 hour day. TLC will continue to focus on Freedom of Association. We have a nine year log of non-stop struggle for FoA, during which time we have enjoyed and been proud to have been able to ‘sub-contract’ our own form of professionalism to assist (and legitimise) the work of various northern organisations in Asia.

13

Some of us must draw the line in front of corporate capitalism or all will be lost.

Problems with the ‘Log Frame approach’ As pressure from consumer movements in the North to respect human rights in the South became more effective, the tactic of the TNCs was to announce that they will do their best to monitor the infamous labour practices of their suppliers and subcontractors and, in the early 90ies, they came up with a wonderful thing called ‘Corporate Codes of Conduct’. The tactic spread like wildfire. However, as corporate globalisation and the ‘raceto-the-bottom’ intensified and TNCs searched for the cheapest possible production bases - using vast financial assistance from corrupt, national agencies in the form of tax exemptions and subsidies (public money), what the poor people of the South actually experienced was not improved working conditions, but the laying-off of millions of elderly and/or unionised workers and the unaccounted for closure of thousands of factories. All around the world, workers that attempted to defend their rights were ignored, dismissed without compensation, taken to court, beaten-up and threatened with their lives.

To date, the emergence of this much accredited wave of corporate Codes of Conduct has produced far more brutality than benefit. Over 90% of the world’s goods are still produced by workers who know nothing about CoC and, vice versa, 90% of consumers still don’t care. All around the world, when workers who do know something about CoC request fair treatment, they are most commonly subjected to punitive measures. The log frame approach is used extensively around the world as a means to assess the work and results of the recipients of development aid. Not surprisingly, the approach usually drifts towards assessment and evaluation of short-term results and quantitative expectations. The failure of the log frame approach, as applied by development aid agencies to strengthen the impact of investment in the rights-based approach, is easy to see by looking at the 20 year progression from the failure of Corporate Codes of Conduct to the failure of Corporate Social Responsibility to failure to attain Millennium Development Goals.

From CoC to CSR and the UN Global Compact In the geo-political vacuum created by capitalisms inability to come-up with any solution to the multitude of increasingly severe problems it has generated, including growing poverty, most highlevel policy-makers have begun to cling blindly to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), which has started to function as an apology for the failure of the United Nations and Bretton Woods institutions to adopt and evolve along a rights-based trajectory. CSR represents an amorphous, spineless, compromise that sucks-up donor agencies that have lost their integrity and can no longer maintain their organisations without support from TNCs. Can CSR be the answer to the world’s problems? Can pressuring partners in the South to fall-in behind CSR lead the world to sustainable development? How does CSR translate in practice? It means that leading brands, while continuing to compete on the publicity market in terms of the amount of money they supply to sporting events etc., are allocating a little more than before to charity work - as an additional means to divert public attention from the ugly reality in their southern sweat-shops, where

wages and social welfare are kept as minimal as possible - so that ‘the show can go on’ undisturbed. In 1999 the UN announced it’s own CSR dialogue with the TNCs, and in 2000 presented the world with the UN Global Compact, along with a concept called ‘corporate citizenship’! Is not the UN undermining it’s own authority? Has the UN become desperate? In 2009 this Global Compact stated that since 2000 over 8,700 companies have ‘made a commitment’ to implement the principles of the Compact and communicate their progress to their own stakeholders on an annual basis. Failure to communicate progress can lead to being de-listed. About 400 companies have been de-listed thus far. About 6,400 companies in over 130 countries are now affiliated to the Compact. Maybe it would be a good thing if all corporations did sign-up to the principles of this Compact, but take the example of Thailand, where the focal point of the UN Global Compact is the Employer’s Association of Thailand. Thailand is world famous for it’s successful union-busting strategies and only

14

1.4% of the national labour force (half a million of 36 million) is unionised – a world record. If Principle 3 of the UN Global Compact states that “Businesses should uphold the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining”, how come the UN and the ILO say nothing when Employer’s Associations such as are found in countries like Thailand assume the lead role. For 20 years the most basic demands of the Thai Labour Movement to make Thailand ratify the core labour conventions on Freedom of Association have been opposed by the Employer’s Association of Thailand. Are the UN agencies promoting the Global Compact allowing corporations to wash their hands in the golden bowl? Expecting the Employer’s Association of Thailand to uphold labour rights is like ‘asking the dog to watch the meat’. Has the UN and the ILO capitulated to corporate power? Under the CSR codes of the OECD that were introduced at the end of 1970’s, most of the cases that have been brought by southern unions against

unfair practices are ‘still pending’. OECD procedures are far too bureaucratic to be able to respond to the needs of the millions of oppressed workers. Although OECD guidelines could be a powerful mechanism for justice they have been largely discredited by their inefficiency, both in the North and the South. Some global unions still cling to them. The most ironic reflection of all human rights initiatives is the blue-eyed enthusiasm around the Millennium Development Goals. This UN ‘mission impossible’ was launched in 1999 by all UN member states - to eradicate poverty in 15 Years - by 2015. There is no Hollywood enemy called ‘Poverty’. The enemy lies within the United Nations and the glass walls of capitalism, which is why UN officials have so much difficulty explaining the MDGs. A recent assessment launched by Ban Ki-moon warns that . . ‘despite many successes, overall progress has been too slow for most of the targets to be met by 2015’. With 6 years to 2015 poverty is increasing not decreasing.

Corporatisation Capitalism is currently in a desperate struggle with itself, and attempting to persuade us that it is has learnt some lessons, will be more careful with natural resources, and treat poor people as people, but capitalism thrives on human weakness, on greed and desire for more. We seem to be drifting towards some kind showdown between the trans-national globalists that are pushing for trans-national economies-of-scale and the strengthening of Walmart-type business models, and regionalist who see long-term value in respecting cultural and biological diversity. Movement to non-elect, hierarchical, corporate, capitalistic global governance is, obviously, not the way forward. Concepts like ‘right to wealth’, ‘trickledown effect’ and ‘minimum wage’ belong to the 19th century, and the concept of ‘corporate citizenship’ belongs, obviously, in the same bucket.

The current drift to incorporation of global NGOs and unions into a global corporation of corporations can only lead to a dead end. We need global co-operation for sustainable development between eco-geographic regions that are oriented to achieving sustainable management of their own resources and to developing their capacities to provide for the basic needs of their own people. One of the main objectives of the struggle for global justice is surely to ensure that the rules of the global market, and what is traded on the global market (by sustainable, regional economies) are decided by the elected representatives of elected regional parliaments.

Global unions The strength and significance of the ILO is that it is the only institution in the UN body with a tripartite structure in which representatives of workers have some voting power - through the global and national unions. The world needs local, regional and global unions to counter-balance misuse of power by state authority,

corporations and other mafia. Since foundation TLC has worked constantly to build relations with and between unions at all levels. In Thailand the full range of global unions is present: the ITUC, ICEM, IUF, IMF, UNI, PSI, ITGLWF and ITF, and sometimes they help launch campaigns to expose violation of workers rights but, despite all of

15

this, the union movement in Thailand remains extremely weak. In manufacturing it is the huge electronics and textile and garment sectors that have most difficulty to establish a basis of effective cooperation with the global unions. Most workers in these sectors are non-unionised women at the bottom of the pyramid that are still quite easy for the bosses to manipulate. Who to blame? For a start the anti-union policies of the neo-liberal Asian approach to export-oriented industrialisation. Cooperation between the union movement and NGOs is better than it was when TLC started in 2000, but unions have an old habit of claiming sole ownership of the workforce, even when the great majority of the workforce is not unionised. With their claims to ‘legitimacy’ they often attempt to discredit

NGOs that work hard to defend worker’s rights, which NGOs must do when unions are nowhere to be seen, or fail to perform. The times when non-active unions have attempted to discredit the really important work of the labour rights NGOs are too frequent to count. Unions frequently accuse NGOs of riding on the backs of suffering workers in order to be able to write finance applications. With the union movement so weak, labour rights NGOs tend to not want to discredit the big brother unions, but they could easily return the accusations if they wished. TLC works with unions all the time. Most of our time goes to supporting workers, especially women workers, who need and want to unionise. We respect democratic unions.

CLIMATE CHANGE

How much do labour activists know about climate change, the Kyoto protocol and carbon trading? And about how all this impacts on the labour movement? I was fortunate to have been able to participate in the Climate Camp in London on 1 April. I had very little knowledge, but now I’m learning and, after listening and searching for information on climate change and the ‘climate market’, what little I have learnt is already shocking enough. The environmental devastation and human suffering caused by capitalist-induced climate change provide

huge new opportunities for the advanced capitalist world to promote agro-industries, biofuel production and sell high-tech solutions to the South. For the South it means fresh opportunity to profit by short-changing the struggle for worker’s rights, democracy and sustainable development by selling carbon quotas to the

16

unsustainable economies in the North, in other words by selling-out the rights of the people of the South, also of the North, to determine through democratic process, their own pathways to sustainable development.

Revolution that took-off in the 1960ies. Carbon trading has emerged as a desperate, and thereby doubly destructive, attempt by lost capitalist economists to hoodwink people into believing that all is under control, alles ist gut.

Around the world, the common sense of the citizenry is being suffocated and drowned through the imposition of this type of insanity, which is engineered far from the chambers of their own parliaments.

Who wants to live in a world where epidemics and disasters are welcomed as new opportunities for making profit? The swine-flu scare in Thailand has given a huge boost to private sectors hospitals: when a mother brings her child for swine-flu treatment she must first queue half a day and then pay 400 Euro, which, for many women, is equivalent to 3 months of wages.

To a large degree climate change is a product of the misconceived thinking of the so-called Green

Partnerships beyond the old patron-client syndrome Global donors like holistic strategy, but like it less when their lesser partners also want to uphold a holistic approach. Global donors like to imagine it is only they who hold the blueprint for development, and they like it best when their small partners feed them information that strengthens their own global strategy, structure, management and status. When they say ‘we support bottom-up, grass-root empowerment’ what they mean is stay down. To be able to wage successful war on poverty and climate change we must all go to the point, to core issues. In our current work for a book on Gender and Trade I have begun to better understand the urgency of our need to find the way forward – to free grass-root people, organisations and society from manipulation from above. Many can talk about what is wrong with the world and many have ideas about which way to go and what should be done, but progress is painfully slow because facing the meaning of sustainable development means facing our own weaknesses.

and failures. Sustainable development requires fundamental changes in our attitude to life, especially with regard to our individual expectations concerning material wealth and comfort. One key issue that I discussed with many of the organisations I met with in Europe was how to bring the attention of everyone to the many unsolved problems of the endless, raw, on-going, exploitation of poor women in Asia. OXFAM Solidarity, WIDE, Action Aid and CAW are supporting the 100 Year Anniversary of International Women’s Day in 2011, which provides a major opportunity for women’s groups across Asia to bring gender inequality issues to the attention of their governments. Following-up on the Thailand Women’s Forum in 2007, in January 2009 TLC organised a forum on Asian Working Women in Solidarity and, with sponsorship from Action Aid Asia is continuing to build cooperation with women’s groups in Thailand and across Indo-China in preparation for IWD 2011.

CLOSING WORDS Five months in Europe has given me time for reflection, to think, debate and evaluate TLC’s activities, time to clear my backlog of written work, and more time than before to experience the European way of life, including time to peep-in a little upon organic farming in Europe. These days, farming families make up only 4% of the EU population. Several organic farmers told me that across Europe 400 000 farmers are pushed out of their farms every year. The organic farmers I met said that although they are relatively poor they don’t feel poor. Some work as part-time activists, unionists and artists. Most make time to read, campaign and engage in

active struggle for global justice. They enjoy life, feel fortunate and have no thoughts that being a small farmer is anything to be ashamed of. In contrast, small farmers in the South feel themselves at the bottom of their nation’s economic hierarchy. They are looked-down upon as dumb peasants by Asia’s new urbanites, and made to feel that their work is undignified and shameful. The ability of Asia’s small farmers to maintain selfsufficient life-styles is being destroyed by contractfarming and the growing impacts and pressures from agri-industry and agri-business and their parent corporations, which force small farmers into

17

cycles of accumulating debt and, as in Europe, off the land. As the holders of indigenous agricultural knowledge, as producers of organic food, as stewards of the bio-diversity of the landscape, as upholders of rural traditions, small farmers have only real reasons to be proud of their occupations, and basic, common sense demands an answer to a basic question . . What good reason can neo-liberal capitalists give for attempting to annihilate small-scale farmers? They don’t have any good reasons. neo-liberal capitalists have ‘interests’ - to own and control land, to own and control the means of production, the food market and the profit. And what is the impact of their interests? Nothing but increasing disease, poverty, suffering and environmental destruction, accompanied by rising levels of fear, paranoia, terrorism, loss of freedom of expression, increased public surveillance and militarism. For decades millions of humiliated, small farmers have been bundling what they can into whatever transport they can find to head into the cities - in hope of something. The cities of the South are now jam-packed with people that a few years ago were self-sufficient. There is no way that the authorities in our mega-cities can ensure the physical and mental well-being of these migrants. The exodus from the land must be halted, and labour activists in both South and North must broaden their perceptions and perspectives, and investigate and learn to better incorporate the issue of the de-population of the land into their strategic discussions, analyses and agendas. Many of my friends show surprise or astonishment when they hear me talking about organic farming. Are you no longer a labour activist they ask! Extinguishing and substituting small-scale farming with mono-culture agri-industry commanded by multi-national corporations has no logical connection to the eradication of poverty. On the contrary, all evidence points in the opposite direction - to increasing poverty, slum conditions, risk of epidemics and a whole bunch of negative impacts reflected in negative climate change.

The issues of the landless and soon to be landless small farmers cannot be held separate from the issues of the millions of workers labouring in the industrial zones. The corporation’s race to exploit the poorest of the poor was encouraged and supported by the geopolitical power-brokers of the West, and sold to governments in the South as a model that leads to prosperity. For hundreds of millions of workers in the South it has been a fast track to slavery - in many aspects worse than imperial colonialism. Mass market manufacturing is dependent on its ability to maintain a continuous supply of cheap labour. The agri-industry - the ‘food for the world industry’ - wants small farmers off the land, wants the land levelled and wants the young blood of the land for serving their conveyers as cleaners, cutters, packers and branders. By attempting to engage in dialogue with global brands, NGOs in the North, imagining that they can turn devils into angels, have been loosing critical time. In the South NGOs have been loosing precious time in responding to calls from the North to provide information and evidence of violations, so that North NGOs can engage with brands and maybe raise awareness of consumers. Such activity, although needed, has been tending to divert energy and concentration from main issues and core demands. In the South we see indications that, with 70% of the southern workforce now swimming around in the informal sector, the circumstances of low-paid workers are sliding backwards. What this says quite clearly is that unions and NGOs must stop squabbling, re-assess their strategies and return to the essential politics of strengthening the labour movement’s power-base, first-and-foremost amongst the workers themselves, and more generally across all sectors. In terms of North-South co-operation this means a budgeting emphasis on bringing experienced, dedicated activists from the North to assist in raising awareness of the millions of workers in the South who need to know about the dangers of corporate power.

18

A few thoughts on the way forward • Where Freedom of Association is barred the road to sustainable development is barred. Without collective solidarity within the working class the road to sustainable development cannot be built. The workers of the world must unite against corporate capitalism to launch a global campaign for Freedom of Association. • Stronger global solidarity is needed between labour activists and ‘consumer movements‘ activists to strengthen and mobilize support for worker’s collectives and cooperatives, so that the regular citizenry North, South, East and West - has constantly increasing possibilities to buy, bargain and barter in fair trade markets. • Legal procedures must be strengthened so that global corporations that cause human suffering, negative environmental impacts and the disruption of due democratic process can be criminalised. For every article produced in the South and sold in the North the labour cost is never more than 1% of the sale price. Of course workers in the South can be paid more, but capitalism is dependent on maintaining a huge pool of cheap, manual labour. • The need to boycott brands from corporations that do not respect international labour law must be given more serious attention. Like union-busting, bankrupting small farmers may be in the interests of capitalism but it is not in the interests of the future of life on the planet. It is in the real immediate and long-term interests of all people, especially working-class people to support small-scale farmers and their efforts to defend themselves, so that they can move forward to the production of clean, organic food and end the migration of agricultural workers into overcrowded cities. Our efforts at reaching-out to strengthen solidarity across sectors and geographic regions are undermined by capitalism’s relocation games - and by the freedom they are given by corrupt South governments and weak unions movements to relocate to wherever labour is cheapest and circumstances most favourable. • It is one of the main tasks of South-South solidarity to put an end to this relocation game, a game which makes workers in the South compete against each other, contributes to border conflicts, builds unnecessary hatreds and breeds fascistic forms of nationalism. To step away from the double-standards, lies, ugly games and domination of global capitalism, the labour movement must develop more effective regional strategies, more regular regional meetings and more effective inter-regional joint-actions. The Solidarity Factory in Bangkok and the La Alameda cooperative in Argentina are recently established worker’s co-operatives that are now joining hands in solidarity across the Pacific, to demonstrate publicly that there are and can be non-exploitative models of production, that can enable local people and communities to step away from the supply chains controlled by trans-national corporations. The members of both cooperatives worked for many years at the start of the global supply chains, cutting and stitching clothes for many famous global brands, until they decided they had been sponsoring TNC supply-chains for long enough. Many groups of workers from all across the South visit these cooperatives to strengthen their own thoughts about how to break free from the big fish - small fish power-play. There are millions of exhausted garment workers in the South in urgent need of support from the global unions and the fair trade movement in the North, to help them break free and start their own cooperatives. In other words, the global unions and fair trade movement in the North need to give far more effort to supporting not only direct trade with worker’s cooperatives in the South - but to helping to establish new cooperatives to strengthen and catalyse resistance against the evil’s of corporate power.

19

MANY THANKS During my stay in Europe I was able to discuss issues with the following organisations: No Sweat, Action Aid, KEPA, the Fair-trade Network, SASK, Social Solidarity Economy Network (Asia), RIPESS (Quebec), European International for Asian Studies (EIAS), Solidar, WIDE, Fair Wear Foundation, Oxfam Fair Trade, IUF, People Global Action, SOMO, Clean Clothes Campaign, Oxfam Solidarity, Labour behind the Label, Trade Union Advisory Council, OECD, Global Labour Institute. There are many people I wish to thank for making my visit to Europe possible, enjoyable and productive. A great thanks to Tom Matthijs and friends at Oxfam Solidarity for all hospitality, and for fast response to urgent requests! A warm thanks to all who gave-up a warm corner of their simple, loving flats: Ineke Zeldenrust , Martin Heason, Kristine Drew, Tom Matthijs and Richard Thompson Coon. Many thanks for support and expressions of concern from: Josef Weidenholzer, Benedicte Allaert, Barbara Brovo, Kolya Abramsky, Dan Gallin, Olivier Demarcellus, Wim Polman, Naomi Adam, Ethel Cote, Sam Marta, Justin Baidoo, Anne De Boeck, Jeremy Anderson, Ginney Liu, Gerry, Heta Niami, Jukka Pääkkönen, Benjamin Quinones jr., all friends at the CCC Secretariat, friends at SOMO, and all friends and individuals not mentioned here who shared their passions and gave solid support. A big warm thanks to our TLC team in Bangkok who have worked hard in my absence to keep TLC functioning well during this difficult time in Thailand. And a big thanks on behalf of all of us to Andrew Little and friends, and to Doris Lee from AMRC, for effective facilitation with the task of developing cooperation between the Solidarity Factory and La Alameda (March – October 2009). TLC was fortunate to have been able to recruit a dedicated, new Office Manager, Patchanee Kamnak, just before I left for Europe. Without Patchanee and hours of skyping and MSN, TLC would be in trouble by now. A special thanks to my host organisations: SOMO, Clean Clothes Campaign, Oxfam Solidarity, Labour behind the Label, Trade Union Advisory Council, OECD and the Global Labour Institute. I wish also to thank the Republic of Finland and the Suomenlinna World Heritage Site for sanctuary and peace for meditation during writing.

Written work completed - on Suomenlinna 5000 miles from base •

The translation of ‘A Single Spark’, a biography of Chun Tae-il, from English to Thai (350 pages). This story of a Korean garment worker who immolated himself in 1970 was first published in Korea in 1983 and translated to English in 2001. After 5-years of sporadic attempts at translating this book from English to Thai it was a huge relief to get the translation completed, and to know that the book will soon be distributed in Thailand.

•

With thanks to the Global Labour Institute in Geneva, I was able to arrange sponsorship and complete arrangements for the combined printing and publication by the Thai Labour Campaign of the translation from English to Thai of two texts - the book ‘Two Souls of Socialism’ by Hal Draper (1966), and an article on the International Labour Movement by Dan Gallin (2005).

•

A report on the London Climate Camp, in Thai, 6 April 2009

•

An article entitled ‘The Voter’s Uprising that is changing perceptions in Thailand’, in English and Thai, 28 April 2009.

•

A letter to Triumph International Labour Union (Thailand), in English and Thai.

•

An Activity Report on Empowerment of Women in Indo-China, in English.

•

This Critical Report on Networking and Solidarity Building in Europe.

Throughout my time in Europe work has been on-going on our 200-page manual for gender activists called ‘The Villager’s Dialogue on Gender and Trade’, which is to be published in December (2009). Work for a concept paper on the ASEAN Democracy Campaign - for discussion amongst concerned organisations in Asia, Europe and around the world is also now on-going.

20

Some personal rewards Visiting an exhibition of a collection of Van Gogh’s night paintings, ‘Colour of the Night’, at the Van Gogh Museum in the Amsterdam was one cheering and unforgettable moment. For years I had waited for an opportunity to visit the British Museum. The BM receives mixed comments from my friends, some like and some hate it. To friends from post-colonial countries the BM is often a symbol of colonialism - of stolen cultural property. On the other hand a professor friend points-out that if the BM did not exist we would have to travel to many countries and still never see as much, and much would by now have been destroyed by civil wars or be hidden in collections of the super-rich. For me, as with millions of other visitors, the collections in the British Museum told me about the fantastic history of civilizations, about the greed of capitalism, about how we arrived at where we are today and how human destruction of civilization has been accelerating during the last 100 years. The entrance to British Museum is free. Thank you! Visiting organic farms in Belgium and Switzerland, and tasting organic seasonal food, was a real reward that I shall share with my organic farming friends when back in Thailand.

21

I promised a few people some recipes, so here is . .

Two Thai recipes ‘Somtum d’Europa’ - for maybe 2-3 people Ingredients: 3-4 carrots, a handful of red radishes, an apple, a big tomato, 1 garlic, 1-2 fresh green or red chilli, palm or brown sugar, tamarind juice (if possible), lemon, and fish and / or soy sauce. Shred and / or fine-slice the carrot, apple and radish. Put garlic and chilli in a big mortar (a ‘Kruk’) and crush and beat a little. Then add a few slices of green lemon or lime, with a small part of the carrot, radish and sliced tomato, and beat a little. Then add sugar, tamarind juice and fish and or soy sauces, and beat a little. Finally, add all remaining ingredients carrot, apple, radish and tomato and gently fold all in together. Taste and adjust taste as required. You can add a little fresh mint etc.

Serve cold as a stand-alone salad or with rice vermicelli. ‘Red tofu curry d’Europa’ - for maybe 3 people Ingredients: Thai red curry paste, fresh medium-hard tofu, coconut milk, carrots, eggplant or similar vegetable, red or green paprika and, say, some green runner beans, and garlic, coriander root, fresh basil leaves, sea salt, black pepper corns, olive (or other) oil. Preparing the curry paste: Place 2-3 garlic, 2 green chillies, 1 or 2 coriander roots, some 10 pepper corns and a little salt into the big mortar, and crush and beat together. Then beat in the red curry paste until all is thoroughly mixed, but it doesn’t need to be smooth and better not. Boil the carrots and eggplant until almost cooked and remove them from the water. Cut the tofu into squares and fry in oil until lightly brown in a wok or pan. Take out the tofu. Add little more oil to the wok or other pot and, when the oil is hot, add the curry paste, palm sugar and sauces and stir fry together. As the mixture stiffens a bit start adding coconut milk while stirring all together gently and continuously.. Turn-in the fried tofu and lightly boiled vegetables. Add more coconut milk according to your judgement! Taste and adjust to your liking, adding more sauce or sugar or whatever. When You think it’s ready add the fresh, thin-sliced paprika and basil leaves. Give all a final stir, remove from heat and serve. Be alert!

22