The Asian-African Summit -- a postscript

The Asian-African Summit -- a postscript

Meidyatama Suryodiningrat, The Jakarta Post, Bandung

The 'true' Bandung Spirit came alive on Sunday. But only after
the leaders and delegates of the Commemorative Summit had already
left the West Java provincial capital.

Locals were barred from approaching the vicinity of the
commemoration throughout the weekend. However, an hour after the
conference closed on Sunday afternoon, the floodgates opened.

Thousands flocked the fabled Merdeka Building - the venue of
the 1955 and 2005 summits - as if reclaiming something that had
been taken from them. The throngs continued till late evening.
The old reminisced. Parents recounted to their young the stories
of the conference they read in the morning newspaper, while women
picked flowers from bouquets left from the morning's proceedings.
Flash bulbs popped as visitors incessantly posed for pictures.

After the pomp and ceremony of the morning's procession, the
outburst of enthusiasm in the evening was refreshing. Their
passion a reflection of what the Bandung Spirit really meant -- a
sense of belonging and togetherness among peoples.

It was a natural feeling that seemed deficient during the
formal summit meetings.

Delegates, particularly officials from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, should be commended for their hard work in drafting
thorough documents that were adopted by the leaders. But a
'spirit' cannot be manufactured, nor live within the contained
space of a highbrow declaration.

The Asian-African Summit seemed to neglect the participation
of the very people the leaders were supposed to be so concerned
about. The people who embodied the soul of the spirit leaders so
grandly toasted.

Security these days dictates higher vigilance. But shunning
the people, as happened in this Bandung summit, defeats the
contemplative nature of the event.

There are other examples of how an elitist outlook prevailed
during summit events, both in Bandung and Jakarta.

There were few channels in which civil society -- the true
stakeholders of the Asian-African spirit of cooperation -- were
allowed to channel their aspirations. The Indonesian government,
as usual, encouraged business interactions but little else.

A group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) - such as the
Institute for Global Justice, Infid and the Christian Conference
of Asia - which held week-long gatherings with international
counterparts in conjunction with the summit received, according
to them, the cold shoulder from the government when trying to in
some way correlate their activities with official proceedings.

While the nature of the summit tried to be inclusive by
inviting developing countries from outside Asia and Africa, and
giving their representatives a podium to speak on, the obsolete
outlook of officials who consider that they have a monopoly over
the people's voice continues to prevail.

These experiences typify the dogmatic characteristics of many
regimes in Asia and Africa that are still reluctant, or simply
just don't bother, to listen to their subjects. Not surprisingly,
this gathering of Asian and African leaders is regarded by some
civil society groups as simply a means to propagate neo-liberal
doctrines.

With designs afoot to institutionalize Asia-Africa
cooperation, it is well worth suggesting that a parallel second
and third track of engagement be encouraged to complement future
meetings between the two continent's leaders and ministers.

The second track would consist of leading think tanks and
opinion makers (including the media) in Asia and Africa with the
aim of providing alternative policy recommendations and visions
for officials. The third track would consist of civil society
groups that can forward general proposals and papers that
correspond to grassroots sentiments.

It is the second and third track who are the real heirs of the
Bandung Spirit. In the long run the network established through
these two alternative tracks will be the strongest component of
Asian-African cooperation.

The development of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations's (ASEAN) second track - through a network of regional
think tanks known as ASEAN-ISIS - and its eventual acceptance by
ASEAN leaders, is a model that could be emulated. During ASEAN
meetings, second track representatives are often allotted time to
present their proposals.

While still in the formative stages, a third track within
ASEAN is also being developed by gathering independent NGOs from
the 10 member states.

It is important to note that the state should not sponsor
these alternative tracks. Doing so would be tantamount to
exercising control over their activities. The state, by its very
nature, cannot prevent itself from censoring participation and
discussion.

What is important is for governments to acknowledge these
alternative tracks as partners in their endeavor to widen cross-
continent cooperation. To allocate time to hear their pleas, and
accept with sincerity both criticism and recommendations.

They say that the business of government is too important to
be left to government alone. For the past 50 years the
governments of Asia and Africa have had mixed results in
consolidating the Bandung spirit. Without the direct
participation of its peoples there can only be, at best, another
50 years of continental lethargy.