The Role of Middle Power–NGO Coalitions in Global Policy: The Case of the Cluster Munitions Ban
| Author | Matthew Bolton,Thomas Nash |
| Published date | 01 May 2010 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2009.00015.x |
| Date | 01 May 2010 |
The Role of Middle Power–NGO
Coalitions in Global Policy: The Case
of the Cluster Munitions Ban
Matthew Bolton
London School of Economics and Political Science
Thomas Nash
Cluster Munition Coalition
Abstract
Medium-sized wealthy states – middle powers – and
global civil society networks are increasingly joining
forces to influence the global policy agenda on issues
of international law, justice, humanitarianism and
development. These middle power–NGO coalitions
use the comparative advantages of both state and
nonstate actors in synergistic partnerships. States
represent the coalitions’ interests in international
negotiations and conferences, provide donor funding
and offer diplomatic support. For their part, NGOs
gather on-the-ground research, provide technical
expertise, lobby governments, mobilise public
opinion and generate media publicity. This article
uses the case of the campaign to ban cluster
munitions, culminating in the 2008 Convention on
Cluster Munitions, to examine the organisation,
efforts and impact of such middle power–NGO
coalitions.
Policy Implications
•In a globalised and privatised world, global policy
making requires a mastery of ‘network diplomacy’
– the negotiation of a wide range of relationships
with state, NGO and commercial actors.
•Within this context, coalitions between middle
power states and international NGOs are becom-
ing increasingly influential in the creation of
international law and humanitarian norms.
•These coalitions are most effective when they
create strong linkages and partnerships between
these states and civil society actors at all levels
(officials, parliamentarians, politicians, etc.) based
on their comparative advantages.
•Since these coalitions lack significant coercive hard
– military and economic – power they are more
likely to succeed in their global policy goals when
they reframe the debate, gather and publicise cred-
ible data, shift the burden of proof and use both
backroom and public media persuasion.
•NGOs contribute most to such coalitions when
they are able to present a unified front across a
diverse range of civil society actors, when they are
inclusive of and driven by those directly affected
by the problem they are seeking to address and
when they maintain some independence from
their government and other donors.
Marginalised, respectively, by stultifying bloc politics and
limited resources or access, both middle powers and NGOs
had little impact on global policy during the cold war. Key
issues of international concern – such as peace, security and
disarmament – were tightly controlled by the superpowers,
which coerced and cajoled smaller states to fall in line
behind their respective protector. However, in the last two
decades, medium-sized states and global civil society have
had an increasingly vocal and influential role in shaping
global public policy on landmines, international criminal
justice, child soldiers, disability rights and conflict dia-
monds. Given middle powers’ interest in a stable and pre-
dictable international arena, tying down belligerent great
powers with international norms, laws and institutions, it is
unsurprising that they have found common cause and pro-
ductive partnership with international NGOs that are
interested in the same things.
This article examines the increasing role of networks of
middle powers and NGOs in influencing, shaping and
setting the global policy agenda, by focusing on the Oslo
Convention. This treaty, signed by some 100 countries in
Global Policy Volume 1 . Issue 2 . May 2010
Research Article
172
2010 London School of Economics and Political Science and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Global Policy (2010) 1:2 doi: 10.1111/j.1758-5899.2009.00015.x
To continue reading
Request your trial