<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Subject: </th>
<td>[DEBATE] : Kamal Lahbib on Cosatu-WSF Dispute</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Date: </th>
<td>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 12:50:39 +0200</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">From: </th>
<td>peter waterman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:p.waterman@inter.nl.net"><p.waterman@inter.nl.net></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Reply-To: </th>
<td>debate: SA discussion list <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:debate@debate.kabissa.org"><debate@debate.kabissa.org></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">To: </th>
<td>debate: SA discussion list <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:debate@debate.kabissa.org"><debate@debate.kabissa.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<pre>[Peter Waterman says: A further letter, in French, of specification from
Kamal Lahbib, in which he underlines that his (previous?) letter was 'a
personal contribution to the debate'. I regret there is here no English
translation but am confident that those seriously concerned with the
matter will be able to find a translator. The present letter was
addressed to the WSF International Committee.]
Find the Google translation below...
Now read on...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject:
Re: [Wsfic_fsmci] Letter from WSF Liaison Group members
From:
"lahbib" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lahbib_2006@menara.ma"><lahbib_2006@menara.ma></a>
Date:
Tue, 31 Mar 2009 09:47:41 -0000
To:
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br"><wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br></a>
Cher(e)s ami(e)s
Je ne voudrais pas que ce débat soit bati sur des malentendus
1. Dans ma lettre qui est *une contribution personnelle au débat*, il
n'est pas question de soutenir ou de ne pas soutenir la monarchie. C'est
une question qui n'a pas du tout sa place dans ce débat. La monarchie est un
choix qui relève du peuple marocain. Nous parlons de politiques
étatiques et gouvernementales d'enjeux démocratiques et les
gouvernements de la région qui sont tous impliqués dans le blocage de la
résolution du conflit au Sahara n'ont pas pu dépasser leurs intérêts
étroits pour proposer une solution qui va dans le sens de l'unité du
Maghreb. Ce sont les peuples de la région qui paient le prix de la crise
(en armements, en fermeture ds frontières, en exacerbant une culture de
haine entre les peuples...).Quoiqu'on puisse dire, le Maroc reste
aujourd'hui l'unique endroit de la région où il s'est avéré possible de
tenir le processus du FSMaroc et du FSMaghreb (la Mauritanie a refusé,
l'Algérie n'a même autorisé la tenue du Forum Social Algérie et la
Tunisie nous a presque interdit une réunion de 25 personnes du Comité de
Suivi du FSMaghreb, quant à la Lybie, il est impensable d'y faire
quoique ce soit, les membres de toute association non autorisée sont
passibles de peine de mort). L'Etat marocain, même si nous ne sommes pas
d'accord avec sa politique, a mis à notre disposition toute la
logistique (université, transport...)nécessaire sans jamais interférer
ni dans l'organisation ni dans le contenu. La liberté de ton et
d'expression a surpris plusieurs participants(e)s venu(e)s d'Afrique,
d'Europe et d'Amérique. Nous avons payé le prix fort pour ces acquis que
nous comptons non seulement sauvegarder mais élargir. Il s'agit d'une
lutte à mener contre les nostalgiques des années de plomb et les
intégristes de tous bords qui veulent restreindre nos libertés
individuelles.
2. Sur cette question du Sahara, la majorité des peuples de la région
sont pour une solution qui va dans les sens du regroupement et non du
fractionnement, dans le sens d'une résolution pacifique du conflit. Bien
des Etats
fédéraux existent en Europe mais personne ne s'en offusque. L'Union
Européenne s'est mise en place malgré les divers régimes qui la
constituent. L'attachement de l'Europe aux valeurs démocratiques ne
l'empêche pas d'avoir des pratiques raciales et de chasse à l'homme en
ce qui concerne les migrants.
3. Lorsque nous avons organisé notre première rencontre sur la
thématique de la résolution du conflit, ce n'est pas le gouvernement qui
nous a posé problème, mais les tendances politiques chauvines qui se
sont manifestées
pour empêcher la rencontre y compris dans la gauche marocaine.
4. Nous ne sommes pas tous d'accord sur une même position (y compris les
sahraouis entre eux, la notion de parti unique est un mythe) mais nous
travaillons à dégager une alternative aux diverses propositions. Nous
pensons tous que la solution est dans la construction maghrébine, nous
respectons les diverses positions et nous sommes convaincus que l'espace
de dialogue et de débats instaurés, dans le respect mutuel, est en soi
une victoire contre le chauvinisme étroit, contre la culture de
l'exclusion, contre la dérive grave des guerres et des conflits ethniques
5. Les membres du CI devraient comprendre la complexité de la situation
et nous aider à dégager des solutions alternatives et non nous imposer
une solution qui ne tient compte que d'un point de vue. Le mouvement
social dans la région est partagé sur cette question parce que ses
composantes se cramponne et campe sur des positions d'exclusion de l'autre.
J'espère vivement que la réunion du CI se tienne dans la région (et seul
le Maroc est en mesure aujiourd'hui de l'acceuillir), que nous puissions
avancer sur l'élargissement sur le monde arabe, que nous puissions
renforcer notre ancrage social, que nous puissions renforcer les liens
traditionnels avec les mouvements sociaux de l'Afrique pour faire aux
grands défis de la crise, des guerres, des fondamentalismes de tous
bords et de l'autoritarisme pour un monde meilleur. Nous espérons que
cette réunion nous permette aussi d'apporter notre contribution à la
réussite du prochain forum social mondial qui devrait se tenir en
Afrique et nous voulons témoigner notre appui, notre solidarité et notre
engagement au pays qui va nous acceuillir sachant qu'aucun des pays du
Maghreb ne se porte candidat pour cette échéance.
Mes amitiés
Kamal Lahbib
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
Cher (e) s ami (e) s
I would not want this debate to be built on misunderstandings
1. In my letter which is * a personal contribution to the debate *,
there is no question of supporting or not supporting the monarchy. It
is a question that has not any place in this debate. The monarchy is a
choice is of the Moroccan people. We are talking about state policy and
governmental issues and democratic governments in the region that are
involved in blocking the resolution of conflict in the Sahara could not
see beyond their narrow interests to propose a solution which is in
line with the unity of the Maghreb. These are the people of the region
who pay the price for the crisis (in arms ds in closing borders,
exacerbating a culture of hatred among peoples ...). Whatever may be
said, Morocco remains the 'unique place in the region where it has
proved possible to keep the process FSMaroc and FSMaghreb (Mauritania
refused, Algeria has even allowed the Social Forum held from Algeria
and Tunisia has almost banned a meeting of 25 people from the
Monitoring Committee of FSMaghreb, for Libya, it is unthinkable to do
anything, the members of any unauthorized association are liable to
death penalty). The Moroccan State, even if we do not agree with his
policies, has put at our disposal all the logistics (university,
transport ...) and never needed nor interfere in the organization or
content. The tone and freedom of expression has surprised many
participants (s) come (s) from Africa, Europe and America. We paid a
high price for these assets that we intend to not only protect but
expand. This is a fight against the nostalgic years of lead and
fundamentalists of all stripes who want to restrict our freedoms.
2. On this question of the Sahara, the majority of the peoples of the
region for a solution that goes in the direction of reunification and
not the subdivision, in the sense of a peaceful resolution of conflict.
Many States
Federal exist in Europe but nobody offended. The
European Union has taken place despite the various regimes that
constitute it. The commitment of Europe to democratic values does not
prevent it from having practical and racial manhunt with regard
migrants.
3. When we held our first meeting on the theme of
conflict resolution, this is not the government that we have had
problems, but trends chauvinistic policies that have arisen
to prevent the meeting including the Moroccan left.
4. We do not all agree on one position (including Saharan countries,
the concept of single party is a myth) but we are working to identify
an alternative to the various proposals. We all think that the solution
is in the construction maghrébine, we respect the different positions
and we believe that the dialogue and debate launched, in mutual
respect, is in itself a victory against the narrow chauvinism, against
culture of exclusion, against drifting serious wars and ethnic
conflicts
5. The members should understand the complexity of the
situation and help us to identify alternative solutions and not impose
a solution that takes into account only one point of view. The social
movement in the region is divided on this issue because its components
clings and sticks to the positions of exclusion of the other.
I
sincerely hope that the meeting of the IC is held in the region (and
only Morocco is able to accommodate aujiourd'hui), we can move forward
on the expansion on the Arab world, that we can strengthen our anchor
social, that we can strengthen the traditional links with social
movements from Africa to the great challenges of the crisis, wars,
fundamentalism of all stripes and from authoritarianism to a better
world. We hope that this meeting also allows us to make our
contribution to the success of the next World Social Forum to be held
in Africa and we wish to show our support, our solidarity and our
commitment to the country who will welcome the knowledge that none of
Maghreb is a candidate for this deadline.
My friends
Kamal Lahbib
----- Original Message -----
*From:* WSFIC_FSMCI <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fsmci@forumsocialmundial.org.br"><mailto:fsmci@forumsocialmundial.org.br></a>
*To:* <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br">wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br"><mailto:wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br></a>
*Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2009 7:08 PM
*Subject:* [Wsfic_fsmci] Letter from WSF Liaison Group members
Dear Members of the IC:
The Liaison Group which is entrusted with the job of organizing the
next IC meeting has been approached by one of the members of the
International Council, i.e COSATU, the South African trade union,
objecting to the venue of the venue of the next meeting ie Rabat,
Morocco. They addressed a letter to the LG with their objections.
(see attached).
The LG found itself in a peculiar position since it is only an
implementing body and is not empowered to change IC decisions after
the IC meetings. The structure of the social forum does not allow
for representative bodies, and there is no methodology as yet for
changing IC decisions between meetings except to discuss it on the
list and getting concurrence of all the members of the IC.
The LG contacted the local hosts in Morocco and communicated the
objections raised by COSATU. The Moroccan organizations responded
from their side (attached). One of the main objections raised by
COSATU comrades is the fact that Morocco is still illegally
occupying Western Sahara, and it would like to express its
solidarity with the Sahrawi people. The Moroccan host organizations
have clarified that they do not support the monarchy or the
occupation and a number of Sahrawi organizations are supporting the
meeting and they have participated in the Maghreb Social Forum that
was held in Morocco.
Unfortunately although COSATU was present in the last IC the
representatives had to leave early and could not express its
objections in the meeting. But they did discuss their objection with
other members of the IC.
The IC’s decision to hold the next IC meeting in Morocco is a
considered one. The reasons were as follows: a) it is very important
to expand the social forum process to the Arab countries; b) The
Maghreb Social Forum is doing important work of south-south
expansion toward the Mashrek countries on behalf of Expansion
Commission and they took the responsibility to organize, on the same
days of IC, a very important seminar towards preparing an Arab Forum
including movements from Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Middle
East countries: c) because the Moroccan organizations are
independent, they oppose government policy, and they have created a
space of dialogue for just peace with Sahrawi people.
If there was more time available the points raised by COSATU could
have been discussed on the list before the IC meeting beginning May
6^th . But there is not enough time. This does not mean the
discussion cannot be continued during the IC meeting and before and
after.
We hope that all this and the clarifications given by the Moroccan
comrades will satisfy friends in COSATU, that they will also
participate in the IC meeting in Rabat (May 6-9th) and place their
views. Their presence in this meeting is crucial, not just because
of the issues they have raised, but also because the meeting is in
African continent and COSATU is an extremely important part of the
African movements as well as the International Council.
COSATU has asked that guidelines should be drafted as to where
meetings of the IC can or cannot be held. It would be useful if they
or other organizations should indeed work on such guidelines.
Discussion on such guidelines could be included in the agenda of the
next IC and continued thereafter.
Please refer to the letters which have been attached here
In solidarity
Members of the Liaison Group:
Chico Whitaker, Gina Vargas, Moema Miranda, Raffaella Bolini, Hector
de la Cueva, Ana Maria Prestes, Alexandre Bento, Wilhelmina Trout,
Jose Miguel Mederos, Changgeun Lee, Meena Menon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wsfic_fsmci mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br">Wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.rits.org.br/mailman/listinfo/wsfic_fsmci">http://listas.rits.org.br/mailman/listinfo/wsfic_fsmci</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avg.fr">www.avg.fr</a>
Version: 8.0.238 / Base de données virale: 270.11.32/2030 - Date:
03/30/09 08:40:00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wsfic_fsmci mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br">Wsfic_fsmci@listas.rits.org.br</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.rits.org.br/mailman/listinfo/wsfic_fsmci">http://listas.rits.org.br/mailman/listinfo/wsfic_fsmci</a>
--
* 'Needed: A Global Labour Charter Movement', ESF Malmo Update: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.netzwerkit.de/projekte/waterman/gc">http://www.netzwerkit.de/projekte/waterman/gc</a>
* 'Challenging Empires: The World Social Forum. (2nd Edition, 488 pp). Ordering: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.blackrosebooks.net/wsf.htm">http://www.blackrosebooks.net/wsf.htm</a>
* 'Back in the (Ex-) USSR': <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://zope2.netzwerkit.de/RusRepLatest.pdf">http://zope2.netzwerkit.de/RusRepLatest.pdf</a>
* 'Recovering Internationalism; Creating New Global Solidarity', <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/6439.html">http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/6439.html</a>
* 'Prague 1968: "Workers of the World, Forgive Me!"', <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.tni.org/archives/waterman/prague1968.pdf">http://www.tni.org/archives/waterman/prague1968.pdf</a>
* 'A Union Internationalism for the 21stC', <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.plutobooks.com/cgi-local/nplutobrows.pl?chkisbn=9780745327563">http://www.plutobooks.com/cgi-local/nplutobrows.pl?chkisbn=9780745327563</a>
* 'International Labour Studies in the UK’, in "Work Organisation Labour and Globalisation", Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 180-200. <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.analyticapublications.co.uk/">http://www.analyticapublications.co.uk/</a>
</pre>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
**********************************************
Office :
CACIM
A-3 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024, India
Ph / Fx : +91-11-4155 1521 [O]
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:madhuresh@cacim.net">madhuresh@cacim.net</a> [Work]
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.cacim.net">www.cacim.net</a> / <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.openspaceforum.net">www.openspaceforum.net</a>
Residence :
32-D, DDA Flats, Masjid Moth, Phase I, New Delhi 110 048
Ph : +91-11-2624 2140 (R), +91-98-18 905316 [Mobile]
Email : <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kmadhuresh@gmail.com">kmadhuresh@gmail.com</a> [Personal]</pre>
</body>
</html>