The DRC will officially start tomorrow. Several web sites and news services have provided detailed coverage of the long preparatory process (see e.g. the links on the right). Unlike most of these well-informed participants, I am less interested in judging the "success" or "failure" of the conference or taking sides. I am interested in studying different standards of success, different perceptions of desirable outcomes, and how government and NGO representatives try to reconcile them.
How do we get from a specific grievance to a general rule? How does a vision of antiracism formulated in a national or regional context translate into a "universal" norm, and how are these norms then channelled back into individual nation states? Should the final result of a meeting such as this (and the whole process it stands for) be a set of general principles that do not mention any individual cases of discrimination/xenophobia or propose substantive explanations for their existence, or is it necessary to include a list of specific problems? How does each of these visions affect the applicability of international norms in national contexts?

By publishing some of my notes online, I am not only following a request by the Moscow-based SOVA Center, which monitors racist and right-wing extremist activities in Russia, but also hoping to get feedback on my observations from more knowledgeable observers.
Any input will be greatly appreciated.
See you tomorrow!