Transcript Document
Wanting What WENs? Observations on Ontogeny of Multinational Wildlife Enforcement Networks William Schaedla Ecolloquium Never apologize, mister, it’s a sign of weakness. ― John Wayne When the WENs? The early days… 2 October 2004 ― Thai Prime Minister Taksin Shinawatra calls for a Southeast Asian Regional Law Enforcement Network to Combat Nature Crimes 1 December 2005 ― AEG-CITES meeting votes to create the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Wildlife Enforcement Network (ASEAN-WEN) When the WENs? Reproducing the model 22 May 2008 - South Asia Nations Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN) 5 September 2010 - Red de Observancia y Aplicación de la Normativa Silvestre para Centroamérica y República Dominicana (ROAVIS) Cash as cash can 2004 - State Department scoping grant to WildAid (now FREELAND) and TRAFFIC USD 50,000 2005 - USAID funding for the ‘ASEAN-WEN Support Program’ to WildAid (now FREELAND) and TRAFFIC USD 5,000,000 New Geographies 2010 (11) US State Department grant to Support for the South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN) to TRAFFIC USD 450,000 US State Department grant for Assessing Feasibility of an Andean Wildlife Enforcement Network to TRAFFIC USD 50,000 US State Department grant for the Central American Wildlife Enforcement Network (CAWEN) to TRAFFIC USD 300,000 Exciting new focal areas 2010 - US State Department grant to Build ASEAN-WEN Capacity to Combat Illegal Trade in Marine Turtles and other Marine Species awarded to TRAFFIC USD 120,000 Reprising familiar roles 2010 (11) USAID grant ‘Combatting Illegal Wildlife Trafficking in Asia’ Asia’s Regional Response to Endangered Species Trafficking (ARREST) awarded to FREELAND USD 8,000,000 Enforcement, Partner… 2011 USAID grant for the Bhutan, China, India and Nepal launch of Project PREDATOR to INTERPOL USD 600,000 2012 USAID grant to create Project Predator links with the South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN) to INTERPOL USD 720,000 So, what’s the point? Whither the locals? Uneven national uptake and ownership Some countries marginalized or excluded Communication and engagement uneven Cross-cultural follies Messaging right? Working through existing regional trade agreements can moot criticism of partners Opposition to US Government ‘interference’ Inappropriate attire Sub-optimal or wrong agency leadership WEN participation a mechanism for alleviating international criticism on other fronts NGO-ing the focus Priority setting by outsiders Dependence on publicity as a motivator Civil society organizations become interlocutors with international bodies like INTERPOL, the World Customs Organization, and (to a lesser extent) CITES NGO-ing how to get along Countries in conflict with NGOs declining participation NGO disunity and turf-wars detrimental to ownership transfer, engagement by external bodies Dubious securitization Drive towards common-denominator goals can sideline country motivation to participate Current WEN arrangement places a premium on high profile species and commodities External connectivity INTERPOL, CITES Enforcement, World Customs Organization, all invited to early planning, but then left outside the funding stream. (Not addressed until USAID grants to INTEPOL) Non-WEN countries other than the US largely absent from meetings, discussions . Internal connectivity Some existing Mechanism for communication ignored – either because of ignorance or by choice . Forced use of languages the outside funding and implementing agencies can understand. We are all full of weakness and errors; let us mutually pardon each other our follies - it is the first law of nature. ― Voltaire Thank You