If the Decade sucks, why have another one?
27 November 2014
I have been working on supporting the rights of Roma and promoting Roma inclusion pretty steadily since 1999. Without a doubt, the Decade of Roma Inclusion has been one of the most frustrating tasks I have worked on. When I put together health service delivery projects for Roma in Kosovo right after the war ended, it was instant gratification: in a relatively short time frame, we could identify a need (TB screening and treatment; maternal health education for Romani women) and take care of it. Immediate need, immediate impact. Years later, working with a legal advocacy group like ERRC, the impact is occasionally immediate (a threatened eviction postponed), but more often, attenuated – we file a complaint, but a court victory is usually at least two years away, sometimes far longer – at the end of that process, sometimes our clients get relief, sometimes not. But after several years we can (sometimes) get a change in law which leads to a positive change in the reality for Roma.
In contrast, the Decade of Roma Inclusion has been a bit like watching paint dry: change is imperceptible. Not the best analogy, actually, because paint actually does dry within a matter of a day or two. In contrast, as we come to the end of the first Roma Decade, the paint is most definitely still wet. The promise of closing the gap between Roma and non-Roma remains largely unfulfilled.
Why does the Decade suck? For much the same reason that all intergovernmental processes suck: the need for urgency in addressing a problem (like climate change, or nuclear proliferation, or poverty) stands in inverse proportion to the speed of the enterprise. Intergovernmental processes are always messy, cumbersome and conservative. They are frequently defined by a race to the bottom – finding the lowest common denominator that will allow a group of governments averse to change to say that they are doing something. Ending poverty and ensuring the protection of rights in Roma communities – who can argue with that?
So why is it taking so long? It is certainly easy to criticize a bunch of government and international organization officials and relatively prosperous civil society activists spending time in fancy hotels talking to each other while many Roma are engaged in a day-to-day struggle for survival. At almost every Decade meeting, someone (usually from Romani civil society) has the good sense to remind us of this stark contrast between what takes place at the meeting and what is going on in the real Roma world. Easy as well to say that the money spent on such meetings would be better spent in Roma communities building houses or paving roads or starting a health clinic.
For the past two years, Decade partners have been involved in a painfully slow discussion about whether the Decade should continue beyond 2015. Decade states that are EU members tend to be at best, weakly supportive, at worst, skeptical: to them the Decade is a burden on top of the additional, new and more politically important obligation imposed by the European Union in the form of the “Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies.” In contrast, Decade states that for now stand outside the EU have endorsed the continuation of the Decade. DG Enlargement has indicated it will provide some funding for it (in addition to the Open Society Foundations, which has bankrolled the Decade since the beginning). Romani civil society also finds the mission of the Decade still to be relevant, even though it has been very disappointed in the outcomes so far.
Why should we have another Decade when the first one sucked? Because the Decade has served a useful, albeit modest, purpose. It has raised awareness of Roma poverty, anti-Roma discrimination and exclusion. It has goaded governments into making political commitments to change the situation, even if these commitments are weak. It has motivated the European Union to create a similar initiative with EU political backing. It serves as a forum for dialogue: in contrast to the EU and Council of Europe/CAHROM initiatives on Roma, the Decade was designed as a forum for exchange between civil society and government, with the result that civil society always has a seat at the table.
Perhaps most importantly, it serves as a modest mechanism of accountability. The Decade is the first process in which governments have been asked to report on their Roma inclusion efforts, and these reports are made public. In recent years, civil society has joined in, producing monitoring reports that are presented and discussed during the Decade meetings. As a result of the Decade’s example, the European Parliament last year agreed to provide financial support to civil society efforts to monitor governments’ Roma integration policies, and the European Commission has begun asking Member States to report, although these reports are still not a matter of public record. The reporting on both sides could be much better of course, but this is a big step forward in accountability. Finally, the Decade is open to all States, not just EU Member States. Moldova recently joined, and Ukraine may join before the end of the year. Thus, the Decade can help spread the gospel of Roma inclusion beyond Member States and Enlargement Countries. The EU Framework could do all these things too, but for various political and bureaucratic reasons, it does not. So there continues to be value in a Roma Decade.
As a means to make the Decade more relevant to enlargement countries, there have been active discussions about moving the Decade Secretariat under the umbrella of the Regional Cooperation Council in Sarajevo. One of the advantages of such a move will be to engage not just the usual suspects in Roma inclusion at the government level, who are frequently well-meaning officials working in ministries addressing human rights with no authority to make and implement real policy changes. It is hoped that the RCC, with its focus on development, will be able to convene ministries of finance, labor and other important players that have up to now been absent from active engagement in Roma inclusion.
Will a renewed Decade of Roma Inclusion work miracles? I am not holding my breath. But let’s keep our expectations modest: a new Roma Decade can help keep Roma inclusion in the eye of the public and of policy makers; it can give officials new ideas about how inclusion can work; it can increase government accountability and provide a space for Romani civil society and government to talk to each other.
So, even if it sucks, sign me up for another Decade – I’m a glutton for punishment!
(Rob Kushen serves as the Director of the Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. However, he wrote this article in his personal capacity, not as a representative of the Decade. )
