Hunter, Alan

Coventry University Pure Portal

Turning point. North-south dialogue Hunter, A.  Published version deposited in CURVE February 2012  Original citation & hyperlink:  Hunter, A. (2009) Turning point. North-south dialogue. The Journal of corporate citizenship, volume 34 : 41-44. http://www.greenleaf-publishing.com/default.asp?ContentID=16   Publisher statement: This is a Greenleaf Publishing Limited article.   Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.       CURVE is the Institutional Repository for Coventry University http://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open  Aizlewood’s Mill, Nursery Street, Sheffield S3 8GG, UKTel: +44 (0)114 282 3475    Fax: +44 (0)114 282 3476info@greenleaf-publishing.com   http:// www.greenleaf-publishing.comS U S T A I N A B I L I T Y  •  R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y  •  A C C O U N T A B I L I T YThis PDF is governed by copyright law, which prohibits unauthorised copying,distribution, public display, public performance, and preparation of derivative works.titleauthor(s)available inissuedatepages issnmore details North–South Dialogue Alan Hunter The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 34 Summer 2009 41-44 1470-5001 www.greenleaf-publishing.com/jcc34   © 2009 Greenleaf Publishing Limited  JCC 34 Summer 2009 41Turning PointNorth–South DialogueAlan Hunter Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies, Coventry University, UKthere is a world of differencebetween a dialogue and a monologue. Theformer is imbued with the ideas of shar-ing, mutuality, maturity and learning; thelatter, with ideas of lecturing, preachingand self-absorption. Another way to termthe two modes would be ‘conversation’compared with ‘instructions’. Unfortu-nately, dialogue is difficult to achieve inany situation where there is power imbal-ance. Characteristically, power-holdersare able to dominate space and access toplatforms; they may set agendas, manipu-late resources and exclude critics. Powerimbalance is almost always reflected inunequal communication, at micro-levels,for example, within families, and at themacro-levels of international politics. For much of the 20th century, therewere several important dialogue deficits inthe international arena. Perhaps the mostglaring was between men and women. Inthe vast majority of countries, and usuallyuntil very recently or still now, publicdebate has been dominated by males.Another was between the colonial powersand the colonised populations. Commu-nication, such as it was, comprised for themost part directives formulated in metro-politan (usually European) capitals andimplemented in colonised regions of theworld. This one-way traffic was somewhatoffset by the formation of colonial elites,for example in countries such as India andEgypt. A significant number of young peo-ple, usually the sons of families that hadbecome wealthy by association with colo-nial rulers, gained access to Western edu-cation, sometimes at the most prestigiousinstitutions such as Oxford University orthe Sorbonne. Many of them became in-fluential in the de-colonisation processesthat took place after the Second WorldWar. And a third was between elites andnon-elites within all countries, but espe-cially developing ones, which often had anon-democratic government, a controlledpress and little freedom of expression. A simple grid (Fig. 1) might illustratehow some of these points looked in earliergenerations.I believe the trends illustrated in Figure1 are currently undergoing a massive trans-formation. There are many reasons forthis transformation; to highlight threebriefly: one is the shift of economic power,education and advanced technology fromthe West to Asia; another is the complexof interactions loosely called globalisation;and the third, possibly the most impor-jcc34hunter.qxd  17/9/09  12:52  Page 41alan hunter42 JCC 34 Summer 2009tant, is the explosive growth of Internet-based communication. The recessions of 2008 and beyondhave probably speeded up a phenomenonthat was already under way: wealth pro-duction, and to a significant extent tech-nological skills, are spreading well outsidethe traditional rich countries. By far thegreatest number of doctors, engineers andIT experts in the coming century areexpected to be from India and China;manufacturing and software engineeringwill also be centred in Asia; banks andfinancial institutions will have extremelyimportant bases in the Arab world. Withglobalisation, there will be a continuedblurring of international boundaries, in allsenses. People and goods will move more,and more quickly; transactions will beinstantaneous; supply chains ever moreintegrated. And current developments onthe Internet-based media will make tradi-tional journalism virtually redundant. Nolonger will elites simply convey ‘news’ topopulations via a handful of newspapersand traditional TV stations. There are nomore ‘gate-keepers’ who determine whatinformation will or will not be made pub-lic or given prominence. Instead, in everycountry, a huge number of ‘citizen-jour-nalists’ cover events as they happen, withmobile phones, blogs and an ever-grow-ing array of techniques. These days, everyperson can be a journalist, a pressure-group activist and a consumer of report-ing—sometimes brilliant, sometimesskewed and inflammatory—at the click ofa mouse. It is true that there is still the dig-ital divide, but it is being bridged everyday, and I think before another generationhas passed a large proportion of theworld’s population will have some kind ofinstant access to whatever is then the lat-est incarnation of ‘networked communi-cation’.So, by the early years of this century,some of the restrictive practices had beenresolved or at least mitigated in manyplaces. However, there is often a time-lagbetween new realities and old structures.Perhaps a key example is the continuing‘Atlantic’ domination of international or-ganisations: for example, the BrettonWoods complex of massive financial insti-tutions. Sometimes, developing countriesmay have nominal or formal equalities ofexpression, but analysts find that in real-ity the institutions still ‘speak’ essentiallyAnglo-American idioms. Superficially,but still importantly, they demand fluencyin the English language and associatedskills of report-writing, committee man-agement and so on. Advanced degreesfrom major Western universities are vir-tually a prerequisite for any appointment.At a deeper level, the modes of operation,the networking and the unspoken rulesare all deeply embedded in the cultures ofNorthern Europe and North America. Dia-logue within such institutions or betweenthem and in-country agencies acrossmuch of the world will inevitably tend tobe one-way traffic. One of the most absurdmanifestations of this, left over from theSecond World War, is the composition ofthe UN Security Council’s permanentmembership: three seats for the US, theUK and France, representing a combinedpopulation of about 400 million; no seatsfor India, Brazil and Nigeria, representinga population of about 1.4 billion (and inci-dentally no state with a majority MuslimWestern elites Some interactivity, but usually onWestern terms, institutions andlanguages‘The rest of the world’ elitesTop-down communication to Top-down communication toWestern populations Little communication ‘The rest of the world’populationsFigure 1 traditional lines of communicationjcc34hunter.qxd  17/9/09  12:52  Page 42JCC 34 Summer 2009 43north–south dialoguepopulation out of a world Muslim popula-tion of some 1.2 billion, and no state fromSouth America and Africa combined).How can all this translate into practicalsuggestions for North–South dialogue atevents such as the conferences organisedby our Applied Research Centre in HumanSecurity; or more generally, events thataim to address global issues that impactboth North and South, such as climatechange, ethical supply chains, human rightsand war.First it seems to me painfully obviousthat conference organisers in the North, ifthey are interested in achieving inputsfrom the South (if not equal inputs, whichseems a dream at present), would have todevote a serious amount of energy to mak-ing it happen. First, airfares, hotels andinternal travel are often far more expen-sive, as a proportion of personal or insti-tutional income, for delegates from theSouth than for those from the North. Sec-ond, even assuming that sponsorship isavailable, delegates may face pressuresfrom workplaces that do not want to re-lease them. Third, and especially for travelto the UK, visas are increasingly problem-atic, so that guest speakers may requireconsiderable visa support: official invita-tions, letters to consulates, proof of fund-ing and so on. That is just to help peoplereach the target event.In many ways, an even more challeng-ing, and perhaps rewarding, process isactually getting the most mutual benefitfrom visitors from the South. Patience andconsideration on both sides is often needed.For example, countless individuals aredoing wonderful work in appalling condi-tions in many conflict zones: perhaps con-flict resolution, victim protection, emer-gency aid or other roles. Their experiencesand first-hand knowledge are usually farbeyond those of Western observers. Yetthey may be unused to presenting in pub-lic, especially in a foreign language, andmay not have the technical apparatus oflaptops and videos that make for a con-ventional ‘lively’ presentation. It is some-times worth remembering also that visi-tors from difficult situations are oftencaught in a complex of emotions. Theymay find Western cities unbearably afflu-ent, smug and self-centred. They may feelthat lip-service is being paid to interna-tional human rights, while arms exportersare supplying repressive regimes. I had ahumbling experience one day, when I tooka visitor out for a lunchtime meal, a smallaffair of pizza and French fries. After fiveminutes looking at his plate, the gentle-man (a well-qualified individual) brokedown in tears. I asked why, and he told me: My wife and my mother have not hada meal like this all year. I feel a com-plete failure because I worked as hardas I could, tried everything I knew,and still I could not provide enoughfood for my family. I just can’t eatthis.Nor, on the other hand, should we beled into thinking that everything is muchbetter in the West, and that we are doinga favour to a less affluent person by pro-viding a ticket. One Brazilian told me thatevery time she steps into a tube train inLondon, she feels very sorry for the peoplethere; especially white people, who, to hereyes, either look irritated, or in a hurry, orsad. They don’t look at each other. Nobodysmiles. As she said, in Brazil maybe mostpeople are poor, but at least they smile ateach other, make an effort to communi-cate, help each other to get through theday. Finally, my hope is that a totally newdynamic will make the old grid redundant.New and old elites, and a significant pro-portion of the world’s population, whetherthey like it or not, seem to be headed for abrave new world of instant personal andprofessional transactions, with people ofany class, language and location. The gridbecomes more like a circle (Fig. 2)—opento anyone with the interest and some mod-est resources. I assume that, among thisvast group of people, communication willbe at least relatively democratic and open,hopefully sometimes challenging as wegrow opportunities to ‘Speak Truth toPower’. The framework for more produc-tive and wide-ranging conversation is inplace. jcc34hunter.qxd  17/9/09  12:52  Page 43However, and it is a big reservation, wewill always have to remember that, despitethis encouraging widening of access, weshould foresee an equally huge number ofpeople who will have no access to this kindof optimistic scenario; who will continueto live under severe threat of conflict andstarvation; whose human security and lifewelfare are absolutely miserable. At thesame time, the natural environment andthe climate will continue to deterioratemassively, probably to a point where largenumbers of humans, not to mention otherspecies, are close to destruction. Probablythe new forms of dialogue will be the onlypossible avenue to the creativity and com-passion that are urgently needed. Alan Hunter is Professor of AsianStudies and Director of the Centre forPeace and Reconciliation Studies atCoventry University. He has publishedwidely on contemporary China andIndia, with a focus on philosophy, peacestudies and the emerging discipline of human security. u Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies,Enterprise Centre, Coventry University, CoventryCV1 5FB, UK! alan.hunter@coventry.ac.uk< www.coventry.ac.uk/peacestudyqalan hunter44 JCC 34 Summer 2009Interlocking virtual worldsUnforeseeable changesInfinitetransactionsTravel andeducationInternetTechnologyMobilityBusinessFigure 2 new opportunities for dialoguejcc34hunter.qxd  17/9/09  12:52  Page 44

Turning point. North-south dialogue

https://pure.coventry.ac.uk/ws/files/3978168/hunter1.pdf

Turning point. North-south dialogue

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Coventry University Pure Portal