Conference Report - 5th Worldwide Security Conference

Last year's conference was a revelation to us. It was then that we realised the views we hold about Iraq, Afghanistan, civil rights and the war on terror were mainstream. Blairwatch isn't an extreme organisation but one that is loudly proclaiming what many are whispering.

What did I learn this year? To be frank very little in the short term. The sessions were too similar, had too many speakers, too little time for questions, far too focused on Arab suicide bombers, full of interminable digressions on how do we refer to terrorists, especially those with origins in the Middle East and Asia.

The use of language is very important but I have two points about this frustrating aspect of the conference:

1. Is the use of language so important that it overshadows a conference like this?

2. What's more important, finding a description of the bad guys or discussing how to stop them?

I didn't see much that was new. In fact I heard a lot that was old and discredited. For example, poverty isn't a major factor in turning an individual into a terrorist (as explained last year by the excellent Louise Richardson author of the essential book "What Terrorists Want") but some speakers repeated this. Many prescriptions to reduce violent extremism were too vague and trite to form any useful contribution, such as “democracy, human rights, and education”.

A lack of a global perspective meant that most speakers were purely speaking from their own perspectives and national experience. Not always a bad thing, certainly there were a couple of examples of working methods to counter extremism, such as the Indonesian use of scholars and internet forums. However most stuck to what they knew from their own experience and the conference suffered from that.

It was too comfortable. I don't think anyone heard anything that was especially challenging or something that got us to think beyond our comfort zones.

Technophobia. The organisers and many of the participants just didn't understand new technology and new media. I can't remember attending a conference where so many people have asked me 'What is a blog?" for many years. The concept of the rise of citizen journalism only rose above a couple of people's radar and certainly was no part of anyone's presentations or thinking. The idea that citizen journalists could help counter extremism seemed to be new, indeed many seemed to be wondering what on Earth I was talking about.

In many arenas, al Jazeera has won the battle over the slurs on its reputation and I wondered if people knew al Jazeera now has an English language channel (populated by ex BBC, Sky and CNN staff). The organisers seemed to be proud that their New Exciting Idea to have a forum for journalists and editors from CNN, FOX, BBC, al Jazeera etc to get together and discuss journalistic ethics.

This session was illustrated by several news organisations coverage of events in Iraq that showed the futility of such a conference.

The media reporting is often NOT decided by an editor but by the political policy of the MEDIA OWNER. Therefore it doesn't matter an iota what an editor thinks in this reality.

The role of Op-Ed pieces in the media wasn't raised and these can often be the very worst of media reporting.

The forthcoming conference is not going to deal with the underlying causes of the rot in mainstream media values. I asked if the media can throw away it's ethics and become a mouthpiece for government policy over something as important as Iraq, how can they claim to have any ethics or values whatsoever? What are they misrepresenting today? Tomorrow?

Needless to say not one of my points was properly addressed. Thankfully several delegates and speakers told me of their approval of my lines of comment, albeit privately.

The East West Institute is about to launch an internet platform to counter extremism. To be honest, I'm concerned about this. I don't think they 'get' the internet and how it can be used and they could easily stay in their comfort zones, within their think tank concepts and circles and defer from doing something innovative and radically disruptive. That said there is an aspect to EWI that does encourage thinking out the box and this project might just fly.

The conference was inspirational and thought provoking. Not so much from the platform, but from the wide opportunities for lively discussion in the halls and foyers, and the discussions were lively and fascinating. This was not just coincidence, but something EWI deliberately built into the programme.

EWI is also a very open organisation, one that encourages critcism and comment and welcomes challenges to their perspectives and thinking. Importantly they seem devoid of the intellectual arrogance and superiority that can so often be found in Brussels institutions.

There were some good contributions from the platform, but many speakers had too little time.

I certainly have a lot to think about, not least on countering extremism. Could Blairwatch - or Son of Blairwatch be in a better position to use the internet to examine counter-extremism, conflict resolution than a think tank? Or is it just too big a project for us?

It sounds arrogant and possibly unrealistic, especially as we have no resources, but we do have things on our side; we know the medium, we have plenty of contacts and although we might not be focusing on policy statements and the like, could we play a role in bringing and connecting the experiences of individuals and those that are under the radar of large NGO's?

Further comment on the Conference is on the Demos Blog - Wow! Two whole bloggers out of 750 people at the event! What does that say about the conference that was supposedly looking at the future?

Finally, I would like to make a suggestion. Next year we, with our colleagues could host an interesting and challenging session on the role of weblogs and new media in the struggle against extremism.

How about it?