The realistic point of view that international relations are only ruled by states is definitely passé. The states are no longer a black box. The increasing number and impacts of civil society influences not only the national sphere but also the international arena. This development has its impacts on diplomacy. Diplomacy is no longer state‐centric. Non‐state actors like non‐governmental organisations (NGO) and multinational corporations (MNC) play a significant role in international relations. Some scholars even state that they are more important than states. (Cooper/Hocking 2000:362) We can assume that certain NGOs and MNCs are definitely more relevant than some states. The fact that some MNCs earning capacity and financial resources are higher than the one of states has a lot to commend this assumption. In a ranking of states and MNCs by size of earning in 2005‐2006 the twentieth is Wal‐Mart with $288 billion after Sweden with $321.4. Beside Wal‐Mart there are British Petroleum ($285.1 billion) and Exxon Mobil ($270.8 billion) which are in the ranking before states like Turkey ($268.7 billion) and Austria (25. / $262.1 billion). In the top fifty are fourteen MNCs and in the following fifty up to place one hundred there are thirty‐six MNCs and only fourteen states. It’s the contrast to the top fifty and with a total look on the top hundred there are fifty percent states and fifty percent MNCs. These numbers illustrate well the huge impact of non‐state actors in global and national governance.
Table of Contents
New relevant actors in international relations.
Definition NGO
NGO diplomacy – managers or diplomats?
NGO diplomacy – methods and tools
Case study: The Ottawa Process
Conclusion and lesson for the future
Objectives and Thematic Focus
This paper examines the evolving role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in international relations, specifically analyzing how they leverage diplomatic strategies to influence global policy-making. By investigating the intersection of management and diplomatic practices, the work seeks to clarify whether NGO staff act as managers, diplomats, or a hybrid of both, using the Ottawa Process as a primary case study.
- The shifting influence of non-state actors in the international arena.
- Defining the negative criteria and organizational status of NGOs.
- Methodological approaches of NGO advocacy, including hallway diplomacy and public mobilization.
- The role of transnational networks in successfully negotiating international treaties.
- The unique "diplomatic manager" strategy employed by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL).
Excerpt from the Book
Case study: The Ottawa Process
The next part of the paper deals with the example of a NGO campaign: the banning of landmines. The banning of landmines was a long process initiated by NGOs from all over the world. The Mine Ban Treaty was a major success by NGOs and a huge and new step in NGO diplomacy. We now examine the development and point out the main elements of the NGO diplomacy which made it to such a remarkable success. In March 1999 the Mine Ban Treaty became binding international law and was therefore more rapid in becoming international law than other comparable treaties. (Kmentt 2008:18) Today, more than three-quarters of the states joined it. The big weakness is that the powerful states like the US, China, Russia and India didn’t sign the treaty yet but anyway it is a noteworthy result of NGO diplomacy. What are the key points of the campaign and which role do the manager skills play we described above?
In October 1992 the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) was created in New York by three US-American, one French, one German, and one British NGO. These national NGOs created a transnational network and decided to fight for a ban of landmines, for aid and financial support of mine victims, and for mine clearance. ICBL started to raise public awareness for the topic and won other NGOs as supporters of this aim. In May 1993 the first ICBL conference were convened and more than fifty NGOs participated. At this point we can speak of a big transnational network. It is more a transnational network than an international organisation because each member NGO of ICBL started its own national campaign to mobilise national public awareness and support and to advise the mass media on the topic of landmines. All the NGOs maintained contact to each other and exchanged their experiences.
Summary of Chapters
New relevant actors in international relations.: This chapter outlines the decline of state-centric diplomacy and highlights the growing importance of NGOs and multinational corporations as significant, non-state players in global governance.
Definition NGO: The chapter establishes a negative definition of NGOs, distinguishing them from state institutions, liberation movements, and profit-driven corporations.
NGO diplomacy – managers or diplomats?: This section explores the functional overlap between NGO staff and traditional diplomats, questioning whether these leaders should be classified as managers or diplomats.
NGO diplomacy – methods and tools: The chapter details six primary methods used by NGOs to influence policy, ranging from hallway diplomacy and public opinion mobilization to direct consulting within international organizations.
Case study: The Ottawa Process: This section provides a detailed analysis of the ICBL campaign, illustrating how transnational networks successfully navigated diplomatic channels to achieve the Mine Ban Treaty.
Conclusion and lesson for the future: The final chapter synthesizes the findings, suggesting that "diplomatic manager" is the most accurate term for NGO staff, while noting the remaining challenges regarding their formal status in international law.
Keywords
NGO, Diplomacy, International Relations, Ottawa Process, Mine Ban Treaty, ICBL, Non-state actors, Global governance, Advocacy, Hallway diplomacy, Transnational networks, Multilateralism, Policy-making, Civil society, Diplomatic manager.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary subject of this paper?
The paper focuses on the changing landscape of international relations, specifically the increasing diplomatic influence exerted by non-governmental organizations.
What are the central themes discussed?
Key themes include the definition of NGOs, their diplomatic strategies, their structural independence from states, and their capacity to influence international policy through specialized advocacy.
What is the core research question?
The research explores the professional identity of NGO staff involved in international politics, specifically asking whether their functions align more closely with traditional diplomacy or corporate management.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The work employs a descriptive and analytical approach, utilizing a case study (the Ottawa Process) to observe and evaluate the practical strategies and diplomatic effectiveness of NGOs.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body examines the rise of non-state actors, defines the parameters of NGOs, identifies specific diplomatic tools (e.g., hallway diplomacy), and evaluates the success of the landmine ban campaign.
Which keywords define the research?
The research is characterized by terms such as NGO diplomacy, international policy, trans-national networks, and the hybrid role of the "diplomatic manager."
Why is the "Ottawa Process" considered a landmark case study?
It is highlighted because it represents a rare, successful example of an NGO-led transnational network effectively collaborating with state governments to create binding international law.
How does the author characterize the term "diplomatic manager"?
The author suggests that NGO staff are essentially "diplomatic managers," combining the professional efficiency and strategic planning of management with the relationship-building and representational duties of diplomacy.
What challenges do NGOs face in international diplomacy?
The main challenges are the lack of formal voting authority in international organizations and a dependence on the willingness of individual states to grant them access to negotiations.
- Quote paper
- Dominik Naab (Author), 2010, NGO-Diplomacy – Manager Diplomat, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/197756
