International NGOs, State Sovereignty, and Democratic Values

For centuries, international diplomacy was predominantly an affair of states. Neither private actors nor even parliaments had much influence on the goals that governments pursued abroad, the commitments they undertook, or the extent to which their behavior conformed to their international commitments. This environment was ideally suited to the shifting alliances of balance of power politics, and to the doctrine of unconditional sovereignty that governments (especially dictatorships) have always found convenient. During the mid- to late-twentieth century, though, a new set of actors-international non-governmental organizations ("NGOs")-began to assert their voice in international diplomacy. As a result, both inter-governmental organizations like the United Nations and the foreign ministries of individual states are now increasingly accustomed (however reluctantly) to the presence of NGOs wherever diplomatic agendas are being set, foreign policies implemented, treaties negotiated, and compliance monitored. After summarizing the nature and activities of international NGOs, this paper responds to the two principal forms of skepticism typically engendered by their increasing salience in international diplomacy. First, I rebut the analytical claim that NGOs are like the background noise of world politics-present, and perhaps annoying, but inconsequential. I then contest the normative claim that the activity of NGOs threatens the processes of popular accountability that sustain representative democracy. Instead, I argue that NGOs have been effective in helping to place certain conditions on the exercise of state sovereignty, and that this effect has advanced, rather than undermined, democratic values worldwide. However inconvenient this development may sometimes be in the short-term, the American people and government should recognize that the spread of international NGOs is helping to create an international order that is consistent with America's long term interests in the rule of law and respect for human rights throughout the international system. I. THE NATURE AND ACTIVITIES OF INTERNATIONAL NGOs International NGOs are private organizations whose membership and support come from more than one country and whose political activities cross national borders. NGOs are thus distinct from supra-national and inter-governmental organizations, such as the World Trade Organization or the UN, which are created by states. (Some NGOs have formal "consultative status" at inter-governmental organizations, which allows them to participate in certain activities without voting, while others frequently provide counsel to national governments.) The definition also excludes other types of non-state actors, such as multinational corporations or crime syndicates motivated by a quest for profit, and missionaries who are motivated primarily by a desire to "save souls." Some observers would exclude any non-state actor that uses violence in pursuit of its goals. International NGOs typically derive their influence from two sources. First, they often gain legitimacy by identifying with the language and purposes of international law. For example, while Amnesty International has hundreds of chapters and thousands of individual members worldwide, it does not rely on electoral pressure to accomplish its aims. Instead, it bases its campaigns on the general principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was approved by the UN General Assembly in 1948, plus additional international and regional conventions related to human rights. Some of these documents explicitly endorse the monitoring functions of NGOs. The legitimacy that international acceptance has conferred upon these documents enables Amnesty International (and other human rights "watch groups") to pressure states for compliance. The second typical source of NGO influence is their expertise regarding actual economic, environmental, political, or social conditions, including states! …