This year’s World Social Forum (WSF) was held in Kathmandu between February 15th to 19th, 2024. It was timely, for democracies are floundering, human rights and social justice movements are losing ground, and powerful new narratives are being advanced to defend the superrich. This WSF brought together civic actors and social movements who are concerned about the shrinking democratic space for the voices of common ordinary people. The representation was more Asian than African, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Europe- an or North American, but nonetheless it was a strong show of collective solidarity. Dalits, marginalized women, ethnic and minority groups, farmers, and people suffering from criminalization of dissent, had five days of constructive conversations on how to build counter-movements and lay the grounds for a more peaceful and just world.
One of the very interesting futuristic discussions, led by Vikalp Sangham, was on reimaging boundaries so that ecological sustainability and livelihood security would be safeguarded. For example, the contiguous ecoresources across the Himalayas are divided into Nepal, China, Bhutan, Pakistan and India. These ad- ministrative boundaries have been a challenge in maintaining the biodiversity, natural resources, the wildlife and the constructive conversations on how to build counter-movements and lay the grounds for a more peaceful and just world.
There was not a single emergent movement as we have seen in earlier WSFs, like the 3rd WSF in Mumbai in 2004, which had a visible impact on global policymaking. However, this 16th WSF did move key issues for- ward. I am thinking of the dozens of workshops that people self-organized. For example: on strategies for curbing caste violence, on the issue of Palestine, on localization and redefining national borders, on participatory democracy, and on developing a nonviolent economy free from (nuclear) arms trade, fossil fuels and big tech.
IMAGINING A NEW WORLD
These workshops were both critiquing the existing system and imagining a new world. For example, there was discussion on the military defense build-up in North Korea; Manipur in N.E. India; Hong Kong and the Pacific rim; and the implications for people’s development in Asia. At the same time, there were discussions on reducing religious-backed violence through communal harmony; building an economy which works toward peace and not war; and convincing governments to be more nonviolent with people and not just expecting social movements to be nonviolent.
One of the very interesting futuristic discussions, led by Vikalp Sangham, was on reimaging boundaries so that ecological sustainability and livelihood security would be safeguarded. For example, the contiguous eco-resources across the Himalayas are divided into Nepal, China, Bhutan, Pakistan and India. These administrative boundaries have been a challenge in maintaining the biodiversity, natural resources, the wildlife and the survival of pastoral and hill dwelling communities. Can we reimagine the Himalayas being governed along ecological lines? Along lines of livelihood security?
One of the re-imaginings in South Asia is the removal of its immigration, customs, and national security infra- structure at the borders, in the same spirit that occurred in the formation of the European Union. This had been the plan of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), but it has not developed. As there are permeable borders between India and Nepal, this is a model that could be extended to other South Asian countries, such as to Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Pakistan, Mal- dives, Bangladesh and so forth. To show this in real-time, two hundred grassroots land activists walked across the border from India to Nepal and along with a hundred rural Nepali farmers, they traveled in a march- cum-bus journey to Kathmandu to represent the common issues faced by farmers and small-land holders. Af- ter reaching Kathmandu, these three hundred people were joined by an- other three hundred women who are housing and land rights activists – all with a common policy agenda. The question that this common march raised was whether the land question should not be discussed in a common forum in SAARC, especially when it is an issue that crosses national borders…?
ABOUT 12,000 ATTENDED
All of these interventions were coordinated by the Nepali WSF Coordinating Committee, made up of mainly youth. They did a masterful job of handling the di- versity, of overcoming umpteen logistical challenges, and of ac- commodating the up to 12,000 people that arrived in Kathmandu for a full week. People who were asked to speak were front-line human right defenders, climate justice advocates, supporters of small-scale agriculture, land ac- tivists, specialists of food security, Dalit rights groups, people concerned about water for life, advocates for gender justice; and all of these groups were backed by inspiring speakers who gave a soft-socialist framing to global problems.
It became evident sitting in the crowd of the WSF that Nepal was an exception, because fewer and fewer countries pro- vide the space for these conversations. One could not see any visible police or army presence; and youth volunteers provided the security and logistical information. There were also few high-level govern- ment leaders. It really had the feel of a “people’s summit”; no one was speak- ing down to the audience. The texture of the organizing gave the impression that “Another World is Possible” and it brought a moment of hope, good-will and a sense of legitimacy to all those recommendations which emerged. In addition, the WSF Coordinating com- mittee passed the torch to the people from Benin in West Africa, who will organize the next World Social Forum in 2026.
This continuity of World Social Fo- rums is in itself an important statement: that it is not only the Economic Forum at Davos that makes major decisions, it is also the People’s World Social Forum – civil society organizations and social movements. This is one place that they can speak freely about how to face the challenges today, and how to create strategies for a new world order.
