8:52 AM / Posted by calvin / comments (0)

Non-Governmental Organizations: Effective?


This shall be the 3rd installment to the series Globalization and Politics. Today’s essay shall cover the rise of Non-governmental Organizations, otherwise known as NGOs. NGOs form a critical part of the globalization of politics. Why so?

Globalisation, as early as the 20th century, gave rise to the importance of NGOs. At that point in time, many around the world perceived international organizations like the United Nations or the World Trade Organization as being too centered on the interests of capitalist states. The United States of America, as well as the other 4 member states which possess veto powers, only reinforced this ideal. As such, the rise of NGOs, many political scientists believe, serves to counterbalance this trend. NGOs are mostly considered apolitical in nature, with minimal to no hidden agenda. As of today, there are 40 000 over NGOs in the world. Many of which are actively involved in humanitarian crises or 3rd world developmental schemes. Examples include the International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC).

As NGOs are apolitical in nature, many tend to be receptive to the idea of having NGOs amid a conflict to arbitrate peace talks or dialogues. Like international relief agencies, NGOs focusing on conflict resolution respond to major failures on the part of the international community to deal effectively with global problems. NGOs facilitate up to date extensive fact-finding missions, engage in dialogue with a wide range of groups involved in conflicts, map out strategies for defusing conflict and galvanise action by national governments and international organisations to help stabilise tense situations. Situations in Burundi, Northern Uganda, Southern Sudan, Darfur, DRC and Rwanda provide examples of where NGOs have played a decisive role in heading off major conflicts 1. On top of NGOs are not overwhelmed with bureaucracy which is the biggest door stop to the efficacy of the United Nations. Such international agencies and governments often have institutional and political limitations that hamper their effectiveness in situations of enormous complexity and delicacy. As such, NGOs tend to responded swiftly to any crises present. After the 6 hour all clear zone after the Sichuan Earthquake, the IFRC stepped in immediately, mobilizing humanitarian workers to provide aid and rescue efforts to the region. In 1995, it was estimated that around 14 million people were refugees and some 23 million people were internally displaced. This provided fertile grounds for the rise of NGO activities in this area. In most cases, NGOs responded more effectively to these crises as the international organizations and states grapple with the issue of humanitarian intervention. Their operations have helped changed lives during and after conflicts 2.
In a nutshell, NGOs are perhaps the most sought after organizations in the world due to this efficiency in handling conflicts and humanitarian crises. It’s apolitical nature with no hidden agenda, allows it to enjoy great public support, with numerous people advocating their various causes. Hence, it’s not surprising how NGOs are able to have a steady source of funding for their humanitarian missions.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0ana8YL377goP/610x.jpg


IFRC Picture
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_the_IFRC.svg/800px-Flag_of_the_IFRC.svg.png

NGO picture
http://www.gambianow.com/news/files/ngo.jpg




1. NDUNG’U WAINAINA. 2006. Role of NGOs in Conflict Prevention Control. [online] United States of America. Global Policy Forum. Available at:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/aid/2006/0502conflict.htm. [Accessed: 09 August 2008]
2. BEN OFOSU-APPIAH. 2008. Making NGO’s more effective and Responsive in a Globalized World. [online] United States of America. Global Policy Forum. Available at: http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/intro/growing/2008/0328ngoglob.htm. [Accessed: 09 August 2008]

Labels:
8:47 AM / Posted by calvin / comments (0)




One of most visible sign of the globalization of politics is evident in the establishment of the United Nations. The United Nations is an international organization that aims to ensure collective peace and security, providing assistance to humanitarian crises in the world. In the short history of the UN, some have argued that the UN has failed in its duty to uphold its intended objectives and aims. Also, some argue how the UN is filled with so much bureaucracy that undermines its effectiveness as an international body.

The most poignant example of UN’s failure to achieve its intended objectives and aims would nevertheless be the Rwandan genocide. Till today, it remains the stark reminder of the need for prompt and decisive international intervention. When the killings began on 6 April 1994 , the UN deployed peacekeeping troops to preserve peace and security. Later in light of the escalating violence, the UN Security Council voted unanimously to withdraw their peacekeeping troops. In a just a few days, thousands of Tutsis had been murdered. Yet throughout the carnage, the UN studiously refrained from labeling the mass killings as Genocide. Had the term been used, the UN would have been legally obliged to intervene, according to Article 1 of the convention on the prevention and punishment of genocide , which was adopted by UN. This is a prime example to demonstrate how UN has failed in achieving her intended aims.



Also, the UN suffers from a bloated bureaucracy, in which seniority is not linked to ability, resulting in painfully slow decision-making and operational failure in such crises as Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. Some UN organisations, such as UNESCO have been viewed as so corrupt, countries such as the USA and the UK have withdrawn from them , while the US Congress has long withheld part of the dues it owes to the UN in protest against corruption and money-wasting.

There are also institutional problems associated with the General Assembly and the Security Council, whereby GA resolutions with widespread support can be stymied by a single veto from one of the Permanent 5 . This has led to unilateral action by countries such as the USA and organisations such as NATO, undermining the authority of the UN, and to a lack of credibility for the UN in dealing with issues such as Israel and Palestine, where the USA among the P5 has strong interests. For example, in the United States of America, the establishment of the Clinton doctrine allows US to forcefully intervene to prevent human rights abuses, with or without the authority of the UN Security Council.

In a nutshell, the UN has shown itself to be a “tired” organization – worn-out from all its institutional problems and bloated bureaucracy. Indeed, the UN has been inefficient in the past, evident in operational failures in Bosnia and Rwanda. However, our saving grace is to know that UN’s actions are evolutionary. UN has succeeded in Kosovo in 2001, ending genocide swiftly, despite failing in 1994.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Picture


http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/canada-magazine/issue16/site/images/refugees.jpg
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/media/images/UN-LOGO%20copy.jpg



Mark Doyle. 2004. BBC News Online, United kingdom. BBC. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1288230.stm. Date Accessed: 2nd August 2008

United Nations 1948. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. [Online]. University of Minnesota. Available at: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/x1cppcg.htm. Date Accessed: 2nd August 2008

UN Chronicle. 1984. United States informs UNESCO of intent to withdraw - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. [Online]. United States of America. Available at: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1309/is_v21/ai_3117890. Date accessed: 2nd August 2008

Wikipedia Admin. 2008. United Nations Security Council veto power. [Online] United States of America. Wikipedia. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power. Date accessed: 2nd August 2008

Charles Krauthammer. 1999. Clinton Doctrine [Online]. United States of America. CNN.com. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1999/03/29/doctrine.html. Date Accessed: 2nd August 2008

Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)