The new diplomacy plays an integral role in our global society, it is a clear reflection of our modern world and how we have attempted to integrate, develop and forge new relationships.
The new diplomacy creates a place for non-state actors and the public to get involved in various issues whether they be economical, humanitarian, environmental or social. These wide spread global issues need to be challenged multilaterally by a collective of states, as NGO’s and other private organisations tend to have raw knowledge concerning many of these problems. They are able to bring about strategic plans to combat various issues and in doing so have reformed international policy making.
To be frank…the role of theses non-state actors is vital to the work and the progression of the political leaders, however, Just as most things in life the very nature of the NGO does have it cons as well as it pros.
NGO leaders are not accountable to anyone and are not selected by its members, this is a grey area within the NGO “could” lead to bad practice that may go unnoticed.
In addition another matter facing the NGO is the lack of transparency in regards to their finances, as charitable organisations they do rely on donations from members and other external individuals or organisations so it is important to be assured that the funds are being used for good.
NGO’s are very single minded and passionate about the cause they are fighting for, so I believe that finances raised are usually used for good. But it is this single mindedness that Brown refers to as “undemocratic, unrepresentative, unaccountable, and irresponsible”.
Brown raises an interesting argument. He believes that NGO’s do play an integral role, within the same breath, he also believes that they are too “diverse, particularistic, and chaotic, to formulate, adopt, and implement policy on their own”.
This maybe one of the few issues with NGO’s, there is no official form of managing such organisatons and this could be a major problem, I think for the most part, NGO’s generally fulfill their roles very well. If institutions such as the United Nations were in total control of all NGO’s I think a power struggle would manifest, yes guidelines should be and have been set for all NGO’s to adhere to in order to promote an all round good practice.
“Many NGO’s…. previously welcomed into the UN system have criticized the accord as threatening the integrity and mission of the UN”.
Brown. E. Bernard, 2001, pg: 17
This is to me is a fundamental feature of the new diplomacy, smaller individuals coming together to organise a non governmental group in order to resolve problematic issues faced by society. Its about being able to take a stand and having the freedom of choice to do so whilst attempting to make the world a better place….very utopian I know, but this is the way I see the NGO, a replacement for traditional power politics.
“The increased importance of the private organizations and interest groups is also a normal feature of modern political systems”
Brown. E. Bernard, 2001, pg: 10
There are different variations of the new diplomacy, which have reformed the negotiation process totally, however the old diplomacy is still very much so relevant in today’s politics. The old diplomacy was in many respects rather ridged where as the new diplomacy (even though it has its own misdemeanors) is open to suggestion and willing to experiment with new ideas on how to develop and sustain international relationships and tackle international problems such as debt relief, crime and environmental issues amongst many others, anyone and everyone can be a game player, but of course there are always certain limitations.
To conclude, NGO’s and private organisations are a very important part of the new diplomacy. However, I believe that it goes beyond this. The new diplomacy is about new age thinking where everyone to some degree, can participate in the shaping of our world, with old diplomacy this was not possible. Causes that are for the people, by the people have a stronger hold in assisting the government to sustain the needs of the people it is representing. The work of NGO’s shed a bright light for political leaders of what the real problems are and challenge those in power to develop better channels to aid communities and combat conflict. The world just would not be the same without them.
New diplomacy is creative in pulling out all the stops, it even uses celebrities as ambassadors to bring particular causes to the forefront in order to gain strong public support and following.
(This link is a interesting read, it talks of our modern day diplomats in the celebrity form)
http://www.cigionline.org/articles/2008/03/stars-shine-diplomatic-circuit
Bad Practice of NGO's:
http://www.friends-partners.org/CCSI/resource/sins.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3502733.stm
It's interesting how you outline both the advantages, in terms of civil representation in the conduct of diplomacy, and disadvantages, lacking legitimacy, transparency and accountability, of NGOs. As you seem quite in favour of the promises of the "new diplomacy", what do you think about the areas where the "old diplomacy" still prevails? For example in power politics. Or for example the fact that embassies and especially their consular services are becoming more important in terms of identification for their citizens(passport etc). These are still areas were the state and its diplomat are the main actors. Do you think this will change over time or will NGOs remain in a vital, but only supplementary position?
ReplyDeleteYou made some critical points of Non state actors becoming independent and influential but, does that not mean that, The power of statecraft is been replaced with the power of Non state actors? which in my view might become too powerful in the case of Congo where,attrocities are kept under the table by UN peacekeepers and NGO's in exchange for natural resources.
ReplyDelete