NGOs are an Effective Force in Processes of Conflict Resolution and Healing: Discussion and Analyses - Article Example

NGOs are an Effective Force in Processes of Conflict Resolution and Healing: Discussion and Analyses Introduction NGO is an acronym for non-governmental organisations, managed by independent parties or legal parties that operate completely independent of government to achieve their mission and goals. NGOs typically maintain objectives to secure fundamental human rights, establish industrialisation in developing countries, secure the liberties of specific groups of individuals, or work toward promoting or developing sustainable environmental practices. NGOs often take advantage of their influence with various digital, televised or print media sources as a promotional tool for expanding knowledge or criticism against government or non-compliant social systems as an educational tool for expanding their agendas. Resources, operationally, are typically mobilised through contributions, campaigning and fundraising, as well as through procurement of grants and contracts from private investors that believe in the NGO agenda and mission (Hulme 1994; Lewis 1997). The non-governmental organisation maintains distinct advantages in autonomous operations and purpose as they are often free of the regulatory and sanctioning bodies of government, such as the United Nations or various factional states internationally. One such example is the U.S.-based American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) that maintained a budget in 2000 of over 550 million USD, guaranteed by campaigning, membership dues from citizens subscribing to AARP services and products, and grants from various international institutions (Jewish News Weekly, 1999). The goal and mission is to advance the social, medicinal, and educational needs of individuals over the age of 55, thus specialising in being an advocate for middle-aged and elderly populations. AARP is a master in public relations methodologies and also in developing various services that are independent of, but also partnered with various governmental legislation to enhance service delivery in health care and education. This NGO, however, is not regulated by government and therefore maintains the ability to create any agenda it deems appropriate to secure the liberties and knowledge of older citizens internationally. Most NGOs seek to create incremental and small-scale changes associated with its agendas over time and typically operate in structured hierarchical organisational structures to facilitate proper management and distribution of human capital expertise and resources (Iriye 2004). They are often structured much like corporations in terms of being top-down or decentralised group-minded systems to ensure that practices toward goal attainment related to agenda is properly managed, controlled and evaluated. Having described the concept of NGOs and their function in society, the question as to whether they are considered effective forces in conflict resolution and healing can be determined. One who is evaluating NGOs might indicate that, due to their generalised agendas for human welfare improvement, development and social programmes, they would be a viable force to remove conflict restraints that cause difficulties in securing human rights or environmental sustainability compliance (among other agendas). However, there are those theorists and pragmatic governmental figures that consider NGOs to be detrimental to effective conflict resolution and even a nuisance to establishing social and legislative order across the world. This report highlights the opinion of various NGOs from multiple parties in society and government, as well as those who support non-governmental organisation agendas, to determine whether they are viable forces in conflict resolution and healing across the globe. Support for NGO activities Several currently operating NGOs include Earth Charter, Good Neighbors International, The League of Women Voters, Women’s Federation for World Peace, and Legacy International (to name only a few). Simply by brand or design, these NGOs would seem to be dedicated in expanding women’s rights, securing environmentalism and promoting better governance through citizen welfare support. These NGOs and others like them, when aided by information technology, media and more efficient international knowledge exchange forums manage to work as a medium for promoting society’s knowledge of environmental and social externalities, thus being able to apply considerable public relations pressure to corporations and government to persuade support for mission and agenda (IISD 2012). It is in direct response to these pressures that corporations are beginning to alter their philosophies on environmentalism and the establishment of corporate social responsibility, swaying from a shareholder-based philosophy of business to a stakeholder-based concept that considers issues of urban development and social improvements through charity and volunteerism. NGOs often achieve their goals of persuading corporate officials to build CSR function by sending campaigners into the international communities with targeted literature aimed at consumers and shareholders to assert these pressures. By changing the attitudes of various actors that support healthy profitability, NGOs can influence change by persuading investors and consumers to adopt the values associated with NGO agendas. In this type of scenario, non-governmental organisations and their membership serve to actually create conflict between business and investment holders and consumers in order to achieve long-run results of corporate support for their mission. NGOs and campaigners for these agendas have a unique opportunity to resolve conflict, after serving as its catalyst, by intervening to discuss methods of restructuring business or charitable donations after applying pressure to business leaders and executives. They establish healing as moderators of self-induced conflict production, thus achieving ultimate healing associated with their agenda for urban renewal development or social changes. In another scenario, one should consider the United Nations, an organisation launched in the 1940s to serve as an arbitrator and legislator to secure the interests of a growing global community of states involved in free trade agreements and to establish international law in the best interests of all member parties. The United Nations is considered to be an idealist political regime maintaining a fundamental principle of effective international relations development (Stanford University 2010). The United Nations considers issues of amnesty, legislative construction, and inter-dependent coalition development to improve the economics and social order of existing member nations. It also serves as a forum for arbitration and criticism whereby member or non-member representatives can express their own unique national agenda for consideration by global players. A recognised ambassador to Uganda, Nathan Irumba, recently expressed considerable dissatisfaction with the United Nations for imposing regulations and sanctions that were depleting the influence and economic strength of the Ugandan government. Offered the ambassador, “We are simply asking for fair and equitable rules that would take into account our development needs and allow us to participate fully in the trade system. But instead we risk being pressured once again into accepting rules we don’t need and can’t afford” (Irumba 2002, p.3). The Ugandan representative was referring to various legislation imposed by UN leadership that served to undermine the interests of the Ugandan state in relation to human rights and social order. In response, several human rights NGOs began working closely with the Ugandan leadership to create rural development systems to provide better sustainable social welfare programmes and systems rather than relying on international support from the United Nations. These NGOs provided resources for aqueduct development, work programmes and education for the impoverished, and thus provided a forum by which to resolve conflict between governmental sources that continued to erode effective establishment of welfare provisions for the Ugandan poor. Without their intervention or resource expertise, Ugandan representatives would have had no recourse but to comply with over-priced demands imposed by the force of the United Nations and succumb to unrealistic demands for responsible government that were necessary for inclusion membership into the United Nations. In this case, the NGOs served as public relations support for Ugandan agenda and also as spokesperson ambassadors within the international community to mediate policy disagreements. The NGOs were the only viable force for development and conflict resolution available for this government regime that was being pressured by UN authorities. In this case, the NGO is performing legitimate rights to appeal to governments to exhibit accountability (Edwards 2003). Also related to United Nations influence, in 1974, the wording in various UN doctrine as it pertains to women’s rights was weak and open to interpretation in a way that served to sanction the role of women in international society equitably and justly (Tinker 1990). Ad hoc efforts on behalf of NGOs during this time period ensured, through the application of pressure, that such wording in legislation and international contracts were more sustainable for women’s rights and the female agenda (Tinker). A great deal of lobbying on behalf of NGO representative membership occurred by using media and the UN as a platform for public education about the plight of the women’s agenda that ultimately led to reduced male-dominated bureaucracy across the world and provided language that guaranteed inclusion and equality for females. During this period in history, many individual organisations designed to promote women’s rights were finding rejection and confliction within the UN and could not gain influence to satisfy their equity agendas. Speakers representing NGO interests openly and publicly expressed their discouragement and dissatisfaction with male-dominated governmental systems using media and UN influence and thus were able to act as negotiators for the creation of bilateral policies where leaders had once dismissed smaller caucuses with this agenda. In this sense, the NGO acts as an efficient conflict resolver and healer through pressure, arbitration and promotion of specific causes and thus heal individuals who had once been damaged by an inability to promote effective changes associated with equity or justice for their agendas. NGOs serve as the delegated consciousness of society, exerting their moral authority through a variety of pressure tactics and presence that is supported by, usually, ample resource budgets. NGO budget capabilities generally allow for voracious and routine advocacy work that has a rather in-your-face methodology in order to secure their intended objectives and outcomes. Unlike smaller caucuses and government-related organisations, NGOs can establish travel itineraries to follow governmental leaders on diplomatic missions, organise social protests with literature to promote agenda to onlookers, or any other activity that publicises what the organisation is attempting to accomplish. At the same time, the non-governmental organisation recognises when society has become dissatisfied with governmental bureaucracy and unjust political tactics and therefore resolve conflict by demanding accountability from these statesmen actors according to the will of international populations in society. They ensure transparency and equity in government by attaining the status of steward for human needs and thus are able to effectively manage conflict between government and the constituency angered or frustrated by improper leadership (Gregoire 2000). Healing, then, is facilitated by achieving results for the social agenda and the needs of the people and by opening proverbial doors of communication between governmental players and the people through transparency and accountability measures to re-establish or develop consensus-based systems of democratic government. Morgenthau (1978) offers that many political actors in democratic societies will improperly balance moral imperatives such as social freedom against the moral philosophy of national security and longevity. NGOs ensure that such balances exist and that the needs of political power attainment or state security do not supersede the human rights agenda and thus establish further justice by assisting in repairing moral integrity for the people. In contemporary society, many representative political actors adopt neoliberalism principles of governance, whereby the interests of corporate organisations are put ahead of the welfare of the people. Boas and Gans-Morse (2006) describe neoliberalism as the promotion of free trade, open market establishment, and securing the independence of non-regulated corporate powers through deregulation. The neoliberalist movement justifies corporate interest protections through Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand theory, suggesting that stimulating growth in business and offering government spending toward this agenda will, in the long-run, maintain positive economic consequences for consumers and general society. Whether democratic, monarchical or fascist/communist leadership, those who support neoliberalist philosophy tend to gain power and authority through corporate associations and thereby negate the short-run, immediate needs of general society. NGOs that work against corporate interests or demand corporate social responsibility use campaigning methods and public media promotion of unjust or corrupt regimes and businesses in connection with government to illustrate to the people that neoliberalist concept is eroding social welfare. Media influence, in this case, reverts the corporate agenda back to social welfare, thus resolving the conflict of neoliberalism principles. Healing occurs not through direct consultation or coaching from the NGO, but through outcomes that are achieved by exposure, however the end result is the same and the NGO is the catalyst for these reforms or improvements in policy formation and political tactics. Arguments against effective NGO practice Jessica Matthews, a respected political theorist, negates the healing power and conflict resolution of NGOs, aligning them allegedly with corrupt and unethical tactics to elicit social, corporate or environmental changes. In Foreign Affairs, Matthews wrote, “For all their strengths, NGOs are special interests. The best of them ... often suffer from tunnel vision, judging every public act by how it affects their particular interest” (Matthews 1997, p.6). This theorist is attempting to persuade society that non-governmental organisations have a singular focus of securing their own influence in society and media, essentially using their specialised agenda as a sort of front for power attainment ambitions. She equates NGO leadership and membership as unjustified character and integrity judges that actually create unproductive conflict as a matter of securing higher funding or membership to improve standing politically and socially. This theorist believes that NGOs tend to often distort the truth of what is actually occurring between various international actors as a means of gaining support, thus invalidating knowledge exchange and the relevancy of their agenda outcomes. Since NGOs are not regulated by various policy trade-offs, they are not allegedly held accountable for these improper assessments or false promotions and thus, long-term, create more problems in society by dividing various actors in politics or general society when no such division exists. One such situation like this occurred between several NGOs dedicated to promoting the rights of people in the Middle East between 2007 and 2008. NGOs attempting to act as mediators or educators about the Arab-Israeli conflict were producing false representations and reports calling for international support for immediate action against Israel for supposed war crimes against humanity and without justification through actual presence of the NGO membership in this region or with eyewitness testimony from Arab citizens involved in Arab-Israeli conflict scenarios (Bell 2008). As a result of these reports, the international community was receiving inaccurate assessments of the imperative of intervention calls in this conflict, creating a one-sided and distorted social view of Israeli ethics and abuse of power. The NGO, in an effort to secure its own influence internationally, used biased rationale to report on issues that were directly linked to its intended objectives and agenda and sacrificed honesty to attain these goals at the expense of Israel and the rest of the international community. Another example of this style of NGO governance and tactics occurred with Amnesty International which publishes numerous reports to educate society about issues related to human rights abuses. The organisation, rather than creating multi-lateral reporting on multiple issues, tends to dismiss certain abuses from its publications that do not fall within its agenda. For instance, failing to report on violence by military actors against the protestors or rape occurring outside of its intended jurisdiction of study or arbitration (Campaign Free Tibet 1996). As such, the quality of reporting and integrity of Amnesty International is called into question for failing to create balanced reporting. When NGOs such as this remain silent about certain abuses, but emphasize others related to mission, it ensures more support for fundraising and campaigning by not disturbing potential charitable contributors who would otherwise have reservations about the role of Amnesty International in more complex militaristic or violent environments. Conflict is not resolved in this fashion, rather it is created between governments and statesmen, as well as investors in the cause, by not attempting to assist others who are also receiving abuses to their human rights. It suggests a favouring type of philosophy of reporting and action that reduces the validity and reliability of the Amnesty International operations for fundraising and thus provides no healing for non-targeted groups that would benefit from Amnesty International support, funding and membership interventions. Conclusion The research evidence and theorist perspectives of NGOs cast both doubt and support for the viability of NGOs to be considered effective conflict resolvers and also promote healing in government, business and society. NGOs clearly establish methods to secure funding that is allocated toward intervention tactics during social and political scenarios and also to ensure education and development in regions that require assistance without bureaucratic complications caused by government. Regardless of their intention to improve influence in international society or whether to enhance politically-motivated authority, the very design of most NGOs is the promotion of social welfare and environmental sustainability. The very nature of NGOs as a resource for intervention, mediation and publicity make them excellent conflict negotiators and promote healing through accomplishment and positive agenda-related outcomes. These factors, more than those which attempt to portray NGOs as being power hungry, inaccurate, or otherwise unethical seem to outweigh negative assessments of their conflict resolution abilities or healing potentials. Not all NGOs have been called out on the proverbial carpet for inaccuracy or the creation of unnecessary conflict, thus it would seem that most NGOs are adept, structurally, financially and management-wise, to ensure that agenda results are correlated with the actual needs of people as a primary objective. It should be said, then, that NGOs maintain considerable influence and arbitrating power between government and the people, as well as corporate interests, to secure a better lifestyle for all international players. Influence in media sources, as a number one persuasion tactic, gives non-governmental organisations considerable clout in serving the interests of the social majority and helping those who need assistance from corruptive or ineffective governmental systems and policies. NGOs are efficient in conflict resolution, despite some membership and agencies that distort or abuse these powers for their own benefit, and are able to promote real and positive changes to government and social policy through their actions. They promote healing through direct membership interactions and also through outcome performance that leads to long-term positive results for the majority of society. They are competent and reputable sources for mediation and conflict negotiation that should be largely applauded for their agenda and dedication to bettering society and politics. References Bell, A. (2008), Is Israel bound by international law to supply utilities, goods and services to Gaza?, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. (accessed August 1, 2012 at http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&TMID=111&LNGID=1 &FID=378&PID=0&IID=2037) Boas, T.C. and Gans-Morse, J. (2006), Neoliberalism: From new liberal philosophy to anti-liberal slogan, Studies in Comparative International Development, 44(2), pp. 137-160. Campaign Free Tibet. (1996), Database of NGO reports presented to the UN Committee on Tibet. (accessed August 1, 2012 at http://www.crin.org/docs/resources/treaties/crc.12/China_CFT2_NGO_Report). Gregoire, C. (2000), The role of governing boards in fostering accountability, The International Not-for-Profit Law, 2(3). Hulme, D. (1994), NGOs and social development research. In Booth, D. (ed) Rethinking social development: Theory, research and practice, London: Longman. IISD. (2012), The rise and role of NGOs in sustainable development, International Institute for Sustainable Development. (accessed August 2, 2012 at http://www.iisd.org/business/ngo/roles). Irive, A. (2004), Global Community: The role of international organisations in the making of the contemporary world, Berkeley: University of California Press. Irumba, N. (2002), (Speech) Mission of Least Developed Countries, South Bulletin, 33(15), April. Jewish News Weekly (1999), Poll shows power of AIPAC drops slightly, 19 December 1999. Lewis, D. (1997), NGOs and the state in Bangladesh: Donors, development and the discourse of partnership. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 11(1), pp. 33-45. Matthews, J. T. (1997), Power shift, Foreign Affairs, Jan-Feb, Iss. 232. Morgenthau, H. (1978), Politics Among Nations: The struggle for power and peace, 5th ed. New York: Alfred A Knopft, pp.4-15. Stanford University. (2010), Political realism in international relations. (accessed August 1, 2012 at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism-intl-relations/) Tinker, I. (1990) Persistent Inequalities: Women and world development, Oxford. Read More