Skip to main content

Dazed Diplomacy


It’s the final day of the CPD and we’re far behind. To give you sense of exactly how behind we are, the commission traditionally goes through at least three readings of the text before a consensus is reached. As of this morning, the second reading has not even been completed. Furthermore, the ‘operational paragraphs’ which contain the important legislative clauses, have barely been touched. Yesterday night the negotiations lasted until 10:30pm and the delegates left the hall with a tangible sense of frustration.

The problem is two-fold. The facilitator of the negotiations from the Philippines is being incredibly inefficient. The negotiations are moving forward at a snail’s pace and tolerating long irrelevant soliloquies discussing, for instance, the exact definition of internal migration. A Brazilian delegate posed the question if her personal move from downtown to uptown Rio would be considered internal migration. Unfortunately, it was not uncommon to see such personal, or irrelevant discussions dominate the floor. It is evident to many here that the commission does not have the time or capacity to ponder such futile discussion and has resulted in this serious time-crunch. Yet some delegates can’t seem to adopt a diplomatic approach during this CPD.

Another, more drastic predicament, is the inability to find a consensus on SRHR. The commission is visibly divided about the issues. Certain delegations such as Argentina, champions of the sexual health rights, won’t budge on the language. Other delegations are united to remove any language referring to the rights. It seems that conservative delegations are grouping together SRHR, sexual rights, sexual orientation and gender identity rights, sexuality education, and anything health related to sexuality and health all under the same heading. Without these important distinctions, they emulate the important issues that requires specific, precise attention and language.  And, yet other delegations seem to be attempting to persuade the commission that treating language about SRHR is entirely irrelevant to the topic of migration...

Today is judgment day. Because time is running out, we are expecting the chair to propose their own draft to reach a consensus. This would mean we could, unfortunately, expect minimal language on SRHR. However it will be resolved, we are not losing sight of how important our work here is and continue to press on for our sexual and reproductive rights here at the CPD.  

-Vincent & Stefan
Labels:

Comments

Austin Ruse said…
The problem you are experiencing is SRHR fatigue. Delegates are weary of this obsession. So what you are seeing increasingly is resistance. Face it, after a quarter century and hundreds of millions of dollars you have failed to advance your agenda even one syllable! This debate is so over...

best,

Austin Ruse
President
C-FAM
April 26, 2013 at 8:41 PM
Austin Ruse said…
A clear win for pro-lifers. Pro-aborts did not get any new language. Moreover, the call for "safe abortion where it's not against the law" can only be a call for more abortion clinic regulation.
April 27, 2013 at 11:03 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Women’s Rights Caucus Statement – Protect Women and Girls by upholding the Beijing Declaration

  The Women’s Rights Caucus, representing over 900 feminist advocates from around the world, urges you to oppose the proposed US draft resolution entitled  “Protection of women and girls through appropriate terminology.” Despite the title, we do not feel protected nor represented by this initiative. Download this statement as pdf.   Download this statement in Spanish.   On the heels of the first-ever recorded vote on the agreed conclusions of the annual meetings of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, and in complete disregard of the significant opposition their proposal got in the negotiation room, the United States has circulated a new resolution proposal which attempts to falsely state that the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action agreed that  “gender” was defined as “men and women”. It attributes to annex IV of the Report of the Fourth World Conference of Women a meaning that was never agreed by Member States, effectively rewriting th...
Post a Comment
Read more

ARTivism for Change: Creativity as Resistance at CSW69

Artwork "Who can I trust with my story?" from ArtVism in Uganda During the 69th CSW, the Our Voices Our Futures (OVOF) consortium organised a creative ARTivism for Change space where bold protest sign-making, intimate film screenings, and thought-provoking feminist dialogues blended together. Over two days, March 12 and 13, 2025, artists, activists, and allies transformed the space into dynamic real-life canvases of empowerment, solidarity, and cultural and political resistance.   In the main space of the Blue Gallery participants engaged with various stations, including Button Making , Journaling with Art , Drawing , and Protest Sign Making . Participants moved between activities, creating powerful messages of resistance and hope. The creativity extended beyond the activities themselves. Access Denied The ACCESS DENIED campaign , initiated by WO=MEN, was set up to be a photo installation. It highlights the deep gap between the inclusive vision set forth at the 1995 Beijing ...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Beat back the radicals!"

“We will beat back the radicals and we will fight all their falsehoods and we will help as best we can all the faithful UN delegations trying to help the unborn child. But, the Friday Fax and our presence at UN headquarters is not free. In fact, it is terribly expensive. Would you be able to make a sacrificial donation to our work of $500? $100? $50?” This quote is from a newsletter of an American based organization working to stop any agreement at the UN that might possibly be understood to mean that women can have a choice in their  reproduction. It is quite ironic to see the violence in the language, beat back the radicals, from a group who are working at the UN meeting devoted to ending Violence Against Women. Being here at the UN makes you feel in your body and soul that maintaining and advancing freedom of choice for women (and men) is a battle and not everyone fights fair. Some of our Dutch civil society friends attended a panel in which the two main speakers where ...
4 comments
Read more