Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 19

GLOBAL

STUDIES
THE

JOURNAL
Volume 4, Issue 4

Globalizations and NGOs in the Americas: New
Diplomacies in Argentina and Mexico
Antonio Alejo

www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com

com>. criticism or review as permitted under the applicable copyright legislation.commongroundpublishing.com/software/ . research.com/ First published in 2012 in Champaign. supported by rigorous processes of criterion-referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary. USA by Common Ground Publishing LLC www.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL http://www. Illinois. please contact <cg-support@commongroundpublishing. For permissions and other inquiries. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study. the author(s) © 2012 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground All rights reserved.globalstudiesjournal. THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL is peer-reviewed.com ISSN: 1835-4432 © 2012 (individual papers). no part of this work may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGPublisher multichannel typesetting system http://www.CommonGroundPublishing. ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is published.

We show the diversity of expressions of the globalized Americas that emerge from NGOs. Civil Society. Interestingly. but most importantly. NGOs Diplomacy. Argentina. http://www. New Diplomacy reveals innovative spaces where governments. these practices have not been exclusively deployed on local agendas as the research demonstrated (Alejo. Civic Bi-nationality and Indigenous Diplomacy.) How do local and global actions interact in civil societies in the Americas? 2. Galicia. With the multiple case study method. The article seeks to posit the emergence of transnational practices of NGOs within various states in the Americas. as opposed to a permanent supranational activism around the world. Mexico). This paper aims to present a typology of the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas as “NGO Diplomacies.com . Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing. 2011). It can be argued that such a shift in their practices not only has allowed some civil society actors to contribute to processes of democratization. Americas T HE CONTEMPORARY SOCIOPOLITICAL transformations in the Americas. international institutions and non-governmental actors interact and develop sociopolitical transformations within the State. has defined in some of them their modus operandi too: “going from protest to policy influence” (Alejo. Universidad de Santiago de Compostela. Global Politics of the South. parallel to a social cohesion breakdown product of profound and long standing socio-economic inequalities. Brazil. as they try to gain influence though multi-scale. Spain Abstract: This article presents the results of PhD research on the transformation process of NGO practices in the Americas with regard to the incipient development of local/global scales.g. these actors have displayed a growing interest in achieving influence in national governments and in international agencies as well as in public policy definitions through innovation in their resistance or protest repertoires.” Civil society actors in the Americas are contributing to the development of new institutions and public policies to redefine the relations between governments and societies in a globalized world. The research analyzed four NGOs that focus on human rights and indigenous rights in Argentina and Mexico. strategies and discourses on civil society actors. Keywords: Globalization. Under conditions of globalization.Globalizations and NGOs in the Americas: New Diplomacies in Argentina and Mexico Antonio Alejo. New Diplomacy. In this sense. The analysis focused on the political dimension of globalization and assumed that the study of NGO practices in the Americas is not limited to showing how to “resist” or “protest. permanent interaction in agendas. this research tested a hypothesis and offers a perspective from which to study the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas.globalstudiesjournal. have instigated changes in civil society actors’ scope of action. Using the method of multiple case studies from collective action dimensions (political structure opportunities. states. The research presented in this paper sought to answer the following questions: 1. Issue 4. institutions and societies are changing as part of a global frame. 2011). 2012. including a renovated relevance in world politics of some Latin American countries (e. this paper attempts to shows how NGOs adapt their organizations and discourses to be more effective. ISSN 1835-4432 © Common Ground. complex multilateralism.” These NGO Diplomacies can be split into the following sub-categories: Citizenship Diplomacy. mobilization structures) and connections with identity. All Rights Reserved.) What kind of The Global Studies Journal Volume 4.com/. Antonio Alejo.

Either from the transnational collective action (Della Porta. The numerous studies of social movements and NGOs acting in both global and at the international arenas have sought to explain contention. we examined a well-balanced 184 . global civil society (Keane. Kaldor. In particular. we found an incipient development of a permanent local-global interaction in agendas. First. in this paper we prove how NGOs in the Americas contribute to creating and developing new institutions that redefine the relations between governments and civil societies. 2010) Following Appadurai’s (2007) views on “protest” on how it is not enough to analyze the complexity of non-governmental actors acting in the transnational arenas. these analyses has contributed to a critical analysis of the processes and dynamics generated in collective action. We studied the repertoires and discourses of NGOs from Argentina and Mexico and characterized their transnational practices as “NGO Diplomacies. structures. 2007). “contentious politics” is a relevant research perspective on social movements. Icaza 2004. To develop our position and clarify our point of view we observed three elements. Rutch 2003.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL strategies do civil society actors develop to obtain their goals in a globalized world? 3. mobilization structures and frameworks of interpretative analysis. Smith. 2010). the case of Americas’ collective action has been predominantly analyzed in the form of resistance and protest (Saguier. 2011. it focuses on the study of non-governmental actors influencing foreign policy. in this research project the dimensions of collective action were applied. Keck and Sikkink. 2007. Then. networks and their discourses in the globalized Americas. 2003. 2005) or altermundism (Wieworka. opportunities and obstacles in which some NGOs interact and develop their strategies. by applying the dimensions of collective action. when we see the large academic production on globalization’s affects on politics and societies in the Americas. However. Thus. We took a multi-causal approach with an interconnected perspective on political opportunity structures. Keck and Sikkink 1998. We analyzed the context. Von Bolöw. protest and resistance against the ideological and socio-economic consequences of capitalism and its different expressions under the idea of globalization. achieve their goals and carry out their activities. in this paper we analyze the transformation of the practices of NGOs in the Americas. social movements for global justice perspective (Della Porta. the words “protest” or “resist” dominate the analysis and reflections on how citizens and social actors experience their everyday associative life in a globalized world. With these variants. Pereyra. We support the proposal with “New Diplomacy” perspectives. 2008. we considered identity as a dependent variable. 2004.” We then divided these diplomacies into four categories: Citizenship Diplomacy. In analyzing these practices and organizations. economic and political structures only suppress societies and their collective expressions. Icaza 2004). As a result. strategies and discourses. this research proposed an alternative analytical gaze that without denying the critical analytical contributions of the protest views. the mobilizations of civil society actors look as if they only organize and create discourses against capitalism. Global Politics of the South. Civic Bi-nationality and Indigenous Diplomacy. 1998. we offer a typology with which to analyze the diversity of globalized NGOs in the Americas. However. international and global agendas. This project represents an innovative academic approach in which actors in civil societies and governments develop sociopolitical transformations within the globalized Americas. Pleyers.) How can the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas be identified as part of a global politics? Frequently. 2008. Thus. Tarrow 2005. globalization and the system. Grimson. Brysk 2009. structures. As we said.

formal and informal. we used a multiple case study. and connected with the last point. social movements. 2007: 195). corporations. there are always cultural frames and historic approaches already in existence within the social context (Heclo. The argument in this research is that globalization’s processes are not limited to interconnections and interdependence on supranational levels. Rather. In observing the practices of NGOs in the Americas as part of a global frame. The second element is the transnational perspective. multilateral diplomacy. There are many intense discussions and debates about definitions. Civil society actors. they promote a vision of how to organize societies and politics. they have “perceived opportunities. and global agendas. civil society. mobilization structures and interpretative framework analysis: “Action and institutional context. In our research. For the actors. With this method. in this case NGOs. New Diplomacy and NGO Diplomacy. This interconnection is given by identity because the analysis of the relation between actions and structures is incomplete without political discourse. tested the hypothesis. and others) involvement and impact in nation-states foreign policy. relevance and the effectiveness of the global perspective in analyzing and to explaining 185 . mobilization and political opportunities structure are interconnected and in permanent feedback” (Máiz. Thus. we do not see actors as static. it is important to clarify the main concepts that we have developed as part of our research. their actions and activities are permanently flexible and dynamic. dynamic processes at work. The study of globalization around the world is taking many paths and has many possibilities for academic research and approaches. This research sought to develop an analytical perspective that contributes to the study on non-governmental actors (NGOs.ANTONIO ALEJO and combined application of methodological dimensions that enabled us to understand the grade of complexity of this phenomenon. In this sense. this means. we emphasized the interconnection between political opportunity structures. the paper is divided into three parts. The first part of this paper deals with the definition of the main concepts for this research: globalization. as well as local interactions that pass through regional and national levels. there are multi-scale. The second includes evidence of the political opportunity structures.” When people take action. NGOs and their practices evolve as part of a global frame. the local-global interactions are not hierarchical. Despite this study focuses on NGOs as relevant 20th century and early 21st century organizational formats. Studying the transnationalization of NGOs repertories and narratives. objective or evident in the data. The third and last part consists of a proposal to observe the transnational practices of NGOs in order to analyze such practices as a new kind of diplomacy. in no way it is assumed that civil societies are morally virtuous and kind-hearted in a constitutive and natural way. 2010: 98). trade unions. which is offered as a point from which one can observe the evolution of the transnational practices of NGOs into a kind of diplomacy in the Americas in a globalized world. deeply analyzed the cases and formulated a research position: the emergence of New Diplomacy in the Americas as part of a globalized world. mobilization structures and discourses from the contexts and cases studied as part of the PhD research. the political opportunity structure is not neutral. scope. In order to make this point. This paper seeks to show the perspective of New Diplomacy. Before presenting the evidence and results of the research. we highlight the non-governmental actors’ contemporaneity and capabilities to readjust to a context of global politics. Finally. Here there is a dynamic global structure at work. The global is constituted within the nation-state. express several political projects. we developed my perspective. concepts.

2005). 2007a. One of these transformations is the opening of a mechanism for civil society actors who try to influence international politics. foreign affairs and global agendas either from within their states or from within multilateral institutions. 2002. Rossi. and the new framework of multi-level policymaking by public and private actors. discourses and actors. Riordan: 2004. 2007. Giddens. 2010. Their activities must be noncommercial. Thakur. Copper. Due to the complexity of the globalized world. 1998. 2007. it now refers to an interconnected circuit of institutions. 2007. To observe how globalizations operate on different scales at the same time. which involves and transcends national. et al. where the influence of public life has a transnational code that still recognizes local. conflicting or contrasting. An NGO can be defined as any group of persons that regularly and formally establishes relationships with others for the purpose of collective action. Academically. McGrew. 2006: 535). 2007. 2006: 438). visions. In this sense. Ritzer. political projects and public sense. There are changes in the appearance of governance. common. the fundamental factors that determine the work of NGOs on the transnational level are in the nature of their goals (Willetts. 2011. there are deep challenges to attend to in the institutions. In terms of academic perspectives. 2010. However. Bisley. all the time trying to effect change nonviolently in the public arena. As a result. 2008. we analyzed sociopolitical transformations in the Americas. With legitimate autonomy. In this paper we focus on the political dimension and assume that the State. characterized the transnational practices of NGOs as NGO Diplomacy and exposed the institutional conditions for the emergence of such practices and diplomacy as a matter of global policy and multilateral diplomacy. Heine. New Diplomacy is frequently used to show historical transformations in diplomacy and explain changes in relations between societies and states around the world. 2010). values. pressure and deliberation. New Diplomacy has a relationship with the displacement of the center of power. its institutions and societies are changing within a larger global frame (Sassen. This occurs through dialogue. Hocking. we are not thinking of an innovative phenomena created by globalization. we must first say that traditionally there is an important distinction between NGOs that work on supranational levels and NGOs that develop their activities on national or local scales. Held. To discuss NGO Diplomacies. processes and dimensions (Jones. national. in our analysis this is not an effective distinction. Scholte.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL the contemporary world from a social sciences perspective. 2007). Very often these factors can be similar. Atalay. non-violent and they must not be carried out in the name of a government (Willetts. In civil society individuals and groups are aggregated. 2007. From the academic perspective. With this theoretical dialogue and through New Diplomacy. NGOs are most commonly separated into the categories of local.: 2011). There is a permanent tension between principles. they interact and make their demands known and claims heard. the emergence of transnational perspectives and activisms supposes multi-scale mobilization dynamics. the idea of civil society has taken on new connotations with sociopolitical dimensions. Beck. Langhorne: 2011. the progress of global studies has established theories. national and international organizations. negotiation. 186 . When we say New Diplomacy. Moomaw: 2010. we understood the global “as a process (or set of processes) which creates transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity and interaction. practices. Maley: 2008. international and transnational policy regimes” (Global Policy. administrations and theories of diplomacy (Hamilton. Sassen. Sloterdijk. regional and global scales. Muldoon.

The creation and evolution of these supranational mechanisms and policies are expressions of the transformation of states and the adaptations of governments for the incipient infrastructure of globalized states within the Americas. global agendas and foreign affairs issues. actors and discourses around diplomacy agendas. we analyzed the implementation of two public policies that the Foreign Affairs Ministers from Argentina and Mexico created to promote the involvement of civil society actors within international politics. and the North American Leaders Summit. From the point of view of “complex multilateralism” it was possible to describe a sociopolitical process wherein civil societies and governments are shaping global affairs today (O’Brien in Smith: 2008). The political structure opportunities that we found include an “opportunity window” for non-governmental actors who want to participate in international issues. the Civil Society Forum (continental). the next step is to show the evidence with which we characterized the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas. governments and supranational institutions. recently. In this sense. diplomacy 187 . As part of this multi-scale institutional context within the states. To observe NGO Diplomacies originating from Argentina and Mexico. foreign affairs and global issues are part of a complex interaction between institutions. these countries and actors have relevant expertise in policies that might be better appreciated in other countries from the South than in countries in the developed world (Heine. humanitarianism and health. In diplomacy agendas. 2011). and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Liaison Office with Civil Society. NGO Diplomacies have found influence as a natural channel for the work of public actors. non-governmental actors (not only NGOs) have promoted agendas related to poverty. [the] environment and. 2011: 247). 2008: 280). human rights. Hein says that few countries and actors from the developing world have the resources for South-South cooperation. political parties or interest groups represent sectors of societies and they are advised frequently. diplomacy and foreign affairs agendas as matters of the state and the governments that represent states. Langhorne. human rights and the environment (Hamilton. These policies are: the Civil Society Advising Council in Foreign Affairs and the International Commerce and Worship Ministry. The diplomacies of NGOs do not represent the official positions of states. Within this point of view. the Civic Meeting at the Ibero-American Summit (bi-regional). which had no mechanism for North American civil societies. Somos Mercosur at the Mercosur Summit. Since then. Evidence of the Transnational Practices of NGOs and the Emergence of New Diplomacy in the Americas While analyzing the structural opportunities for the emergence of transnational practices on the part of NGOs. Caribbean and European Union Summit (bi-regional). we followed the argument of Heine (2008) regarding the challenge of diplomacy in middle powers. in Mexico. including: the Meeting of European-Latin American-Caribbean Civil Society Organisations at the Latin America. Next we reviewed the institutional spaces for dialogue between civil societies. anti-globalizations movements” (Willetts. NGOs have worked on issues like “women rights. in Argentina. we developed a multi-scale institutional context in which we studied the actual conditions of formal mechanisms for civil societies in different summits that discuss issues related to the Americas. With this theoretical approach.ANTONIO ALEJO NGOs began to be recognized as actors in global politics in the 1970s. The NGOs that are involved in international politics. This perspective is contrary to realistic international relations that define international politics.

The NGOs selected for the purposes of this research are considered early risers (Tarrow.Sub-regional No institutional participation mit NO Government Office for the Promotion of Civil Societies to Participate in Foreign Affairs Ministers Country Foreign Affairs Ministers Public Policy Argentina Foreign Affairs. Focusing on the origins. we consider the emergence of what we characterize as NGO Diplomacy in the Americas. suggested alternatives and acquired motivations to act. we expose the complexity of transnational actors (Appadurai. Box 1: Complex Multilateralism and Global Policies Institutional Mechanism in a Complex Multilateralism for Actors of Civil Societies in the Americas Supranational Mechanism Level Institutional space for Civil Society Participation Opening Latin America. In this sense.YES ur” North American Leaders Sum. 2007) that seek to play on an effective role and maintain a global perspective. Caribbean and Bi-regional European Union Summit Civil Society Organizations of YES Europe Union-Latin America and Caribbean Meeting Ibero-American Summit Bi-regional Civic Meeting YES Americas Summit Continental Civil Society Forum YES Mercosur Summit Sub-regional Social Summit “Somos Mercos. The analysis proved that complex multilateralism in the Americas is weak and frequently seen as irrelevant. The mobilization structure has allowed organizations to deepen their goals and directives. the NGOs have analyzed how their organizational and discursive strategies influence public agendas. For ex- 188 . 2004) in the sociopolitical transformations of the Americas. With this institutional context. we exposed challenges for societies. objectives and repertoires of NGOs in Argentina and Mexico. With the study of the transnational practices of NGOs. We detail below the evidence of some kind of diplomacy with few select NGOs. but the processes are working and are part of a global evolution in the Americas. All the NGOs selected for this study were founded as a result of and played part in the transition to democracy or the democratization processes in Argentina or Mexico. International Commerce Civil Society Advising Council and Worship Ministry Mexico Ministry of Foreign Affairs Liaison Office with Civil Society Civil society actors have developed strategies based on how they perceive their current context.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL agendas and global matters from within their states but with a global standpoint and a transnational perspective. They have constructed their own perspective of the world. governments and states in the Americas within a global framework.

It appeared in the context of deep social tensions in Argentina two years into the financial crisis known as “el corralito. The organization’s repertoire includes: democratization in Argentina. In 1979. The organization’s repertoire includes: the promotion and defense of environmental.ANTONIO ALEJO ample. Initiative Merida). Frente Indígena Oaxaqueño Binacional. create spaces for cultural interaction between different indigenous communities. influence on foreign affairs and international political agendas in Argentina. influencing foreign affairs and international political agendas in Mexico. Its repertoire includes: Intercultural Argentina for the distribution of territory and wealth. Justice Law for Migrants Rights in USA. the organization includes indigenous people from Baja California and Guerrero. Now. 189 . social and cultural rights. Mexico. economic. the promotion of solidarity and respect between nations and indigenous people. CELS publicized the human rights violations that had occurred in Argentina throughout the dictatorship. and a strategic lawsuit in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. and the promotion of an intercultural perspective to recognize the fundamental rights of indigenous people in Argentina. The organization’s main objectives are to: promote citizen participation in public issues. local action became increasingly important and Equipo Pueblo was one of the first NGOs in Mexico to be interested in commercial trade. monitoring Mexico’s relationship with North America (NAFTA. ethnic tourism. in the1990s. El Buen Vivir and Plurinational State. CELS was founded by members of the Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos and Madres de Plaza de Mayo. influence public policy on basic rights. the promotion and defense of economic. promote legal reforms that help to consolidate democratic institutions. The FIOB was created in the context of the celebration of the “500 hundred years of encounter between two worlds” and the emergence of Zapatismo in Chiapas. promoting the transnational Mexican voice in the USA as well as the right not to migrate. Equipo Pueblo emerged in 1977 with the support of catholic leaders and several Mexican organizations. promote solidarity and provide support for indigenous peoples of Oaxaca. The Organización de Naciones y Pueblos Indígenas en Argentina (ONPIA) emerged in 2003. the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) was founded in 1985. the differentiation between Hispanics. influencing public policy processes from a human rights perspective. The main objectives of the organization are to: condemn the violation of human rights. TSPPNA. Its main objectives are to: support indigenous migrants in California. influence on the judiciary. celebrating the Guelaguetza for migrants in California. It was organized by indigenous migrants from Oaxaca. In those years the PRI was a hegemonic party in Mexico. Its repertoire includes: providing protection for migrants in Mexico. and promote the defense of human rights for vulnerable social groups. social and cultural rights. USA. Within Mexico. Its main objectives are: the recognition of its own vision of nations and indigenous people. in part due to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ visit to Argentina.” and its creation is relevant to the emergence of indigenous activism in the region. Mexico among its members. Latinos and indigenous migrants in USA. This organization was created as a grassroots organization. especially with North America. strategic lawsuits against international financial institutions. and monitoring the relationship between Mexico and the European Union. demand a culture of human rights and an influence on public policies that deal with human rights and democracy issues. However. guide the dialogue between civil society actors and governments. The FIOB is the result of the evolution of another organization first created in 1992. the promotion of human rights in Mexico City. Frente Indígena de Organizaciones Binacionales (FIOB) was founded in 2005. Mexico to California.

In this way. these NGO Diplomacies emerge as part of the sociopolitical transformations occurring on the continent. The categories and typology of NGO practices can be found below.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL claims for damages on behalf of nations and the original people in Argentina. articulating local actions on national and international scales. For this NGO Diplomacy. Citizen Diplomacy is characterized by three elements: 1. The geopolitics and global activism of those concerned with the Global Politics of the South has changed.) It looks to modify those contexts. when faced with a neoliberal model. The defining issue for the Global Politics of the South is the denunciation of human rights violations. protect and execute environmental.” With a weak institutionalized infrastructure for the globalized Americas.e. This type of NGO Diplomacy looks to influence public policy processes and seeks to make the State recognize and respect basic rights. This NGO Diplomacy directs its actions to require that the State observe its duty to respect. in addition to formal diplomacy on the part of governments. political and cultural globalization processes are on depth and economic globalization is working under the hegemony of multinational financial and economic elites. It also promotes institutional and legal reforms to improve the quality of democratic institutions in an effort to change conditions for the most vulnerable sectors of society. The conclusions of the research are at the same time a proposal to study the transformation of the practices of NGOs in a globalized world. participation in international forums and summits is relevant because it is an opportunity to try to influence public agendas. It boasts expertise and the capacity to promote alternatives. In this sense. as well as the globalization of social struggle and solidarity.) The verification that economic. Actors have “perceived opportunities. and it demands to be consulted on these issues. we characterized the transnational practices as kind of “NGO Diplomacy. Organizations from the South are increasing legitimate. opportunities and capacity to influence international political decisions that impact populations. This type of NGO Diplomacy. That means creating a channel for the participation. NGOs create organizational and discursive strategies to try to influence foreign affairs issues. demands a State that favors citizens over investments. In this sense. 3. there must be other forms of diplomacy that originate with citizens. 2.) There is the necessity for dual implementation. social and cultural rights. political influence refers to citizens’ efforts to influence policy processes through persuasion and by putting pressure on governments. climate change and natural resources. companies and other entities with the capacity to make decisions that affect public agendas. This NGO Diplomacy shows an interest in trying to influence international politics and foreign affairs agendas. For citizen diplomacy there is an international context characterized by exclusive economic globalization. NGO Diplomacies: A Typology for the Research of Transnational Practices in the Civil Societies of the Americas We have mentioned identity as the connector between political opportunity structures and mobilization structures. international politics and global agendas.” In this sense. economic. i. the monitoring of international politics and foreign affairs is a strategic task for NGOs because traditionally citizens are not consulted on these agendas. With the analysis based on the repertoires and discourses of the selected NGOs. and now they debate with international organizations and civil 190 . international financial organs. creating a counterweight against the hegemony of the State.

However. community associations. local and community economic promotion or trying to influence policies by participating in consultative councils for migrants in government offices. (Migrants’ work and philanthropy is discussed below. it seeks vertical accountability from the government. Indigenous Diplomacy looks to improve the everyday life conditions of indigenous people and the sociopolitical situations of their communities. Civic Bi-nationality gives a frame to explain the actual actions that create the migrant organizations. For this type of NGO Diplomacy. and it confronts private and public institutions on an international level. Bada: 2009). and the education and training of indigenous people. indigenous rights groups. provincial and national. The concept of Civic Bi-nationality was developed by Fox and Bada (2009). This type of NGO Diplomacy looks to develop local economic and political processes and demands rights for migrants within the society of migration. The main goal of the Global Politics of the South is not to participate in activism around the world.ANTONIO ALEJO society actors from the developed world. It is interested in changing the everyday conditions in the places of origin and looks to influence the design of integral public policies through an innovative campaign: “The Right Not to Migrate. there is a risk in not acting on the global scene. This organization seeks the recognition of indigenous rights and defends migrant rights. unions. Indigenous diplomacy 191 .) As we said. Civic Bi-nationality simultaneously seeks to gain influence in the country of migration and the country of origin. natural resources. This concept refers to “practices that are engaged both with US civic life and with migrant communities and countries of origin” (Fox. For these transnational practices. At the same time. Civic Bi-nationality can be observed in hometown associations. inter-cultural identity. national and international. business associations and civil rights organizations (Bada. This type of NGO Diplomacy represents nations. the perspective is simultaneously local. The relationship between migrant communities and their countries of origin produces a trans-local civic engagement. In this sense the internal and external strategies are complementary. Indigenous Diplomacy seeks to recover territories of indigenous communities and nations and inspire communities to take action to defend those territories. while this kind of diplomacy might take advantage of globalization. NGO Diplomacies are characterized by their interest in influencing public policy. We studied one specific case of an organization that presents a complex dynamic since it attempts to deal with at least two social groups in two different countries. the actor is actually weakened by a lack of global action. such as local electoral processes. Fox: 2009). So the actor belongs both to international migrant movements and the struggle for indigenous rights around the world. These actors define themselves on the basis of their transnational voices. faith-based organizations. This type of NGO Diplomacy is concerned with the following issues: indigenous rights. community media. The Global Politics of the South is not looking to the global arena to gain advantage or partake in the opportunities that this scale offers. This type of NGO Diplomacy monitors the actions of states in terms of foreign affairs and human rights agendas and seeks to publically influence and defend citizen rights. Thus. communities and indigenous organizations on a multi-scale level: municipal. this NGO Diplomacy looks at the external issues that have to be connected with the internal agendas within states.” In addition to fighting for indigenous rights. Rather. it is aware of its negative effects. globalization is an inexorable fact. non-profits. it also seeks to influence the migrants’ country of origin through different strategies. Thus. the organization now promotes the idea that migration should not be the only alternative for indigenous people. we expose this transnational practice in the global frame under the idea of NGO Diplomacy in the Americas. Building on their work. churches.

and it engenders and maintains friendly relations with related actors on a multi-scale basis. This New Diplomacy is the result of interactions between actors. The tools of globalization should be used by indigenous people. Box 2: Interaction for the Emergence of New Diplomacies in the Americas Here. The tensions and cooperation between civil society actors. direct democracy. cultural diversity. For this kind of NGO Diplomacy. in this research we did not look at transnational or global activism 192 . the original inhabitants’ struggles are crucial to contemporary issues related to globalization like racism. Since Indigenous Diplomacy goes beyond the nation-state. discourses and institutions. From this perspective. indigenous movement reveals a political process in which globalization is on the side of indigenous people and nations. From this perspective.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL works to protect the cultural heritage and intellectual property of indigenous nations and communities. territory. peoples and communities.” In this way. Currently. we expose the emergence of New Diplomacy in the Americas. governments and multilateral institutions built this New Diplomacy. gender equality and migration. Indigenous Diplomacy holds that since natural resources are located in indigenous territories. such resources belong to the indigenous people. only now it has a “capitalist face. external actors are extracting these resources without any benefit to the indigenous communities. It appeals to indigenous solidarity across nations. For the indigenous people the lack of recognition of their culture supposes countries without culture. countries must rescue the cultures of indigenous peoples since without them those countries could never have come into being and now then would not have strong cultures. it is necessary to talk about geopolitics and international politics. Thus. globalization has always existed.

2010: 2). The Americas. incomplete. but it is hard to organize their participation (Langenhoven Van. These societies are not waiting to face the things that have happened in other parts of the world. with their regional complexity. constitute a changing part of the global framework. New Diplomacy is an evolving. It is important to recognize that the involvement of citizens is an innovative contribution to multilateral development. Rather. 193 . 2010: 267). As an incipient process. The evidence shows a moment where the State is not well equipped to face the challenges of globalization (Falk. we determined how NGOs in the Americas develop transnational practices to build a global perspective in their strategies and goals. 2010: 137).ANTONIO ALEJO in many countries at the same time or envisage a global civil society with a permanent supranational activism around the world. new set of rules that makes traditional diplomats and many governments very uncomfortable (Moomaw.

A Radical World Order Challenge: Addressing Global Climate Change and the Threat of Nuclear Weapons. Cambridge University Press Langenhove. LSE. Jones. October. Della Porta. Andrew.0. USA. La sociedad civil global. Cooper.). Hocking. Cambridge. Langhorne. Kaldor. theory and administration. Barcelona. Alianza Editorial. McGrew. Michael. (2007). Hamilton. Ediciones Katz. (2011). Issue 3. (2007a). respuestas a la globalización. (2005). _______ (Edits. Routledge. Worlds Apart? Palgrave Macmillan. The transformation of Multilateralism Mode 1. The life and death of Democracy. Berghahn Books. Buenos Aires. Global Policy. (2002). Paidós. (2009). Thakur (Eds. De la tribu a la aldea Global. Berlin Perspectives. Cambridge. Grimson. Paidós. Polity Press. Editorial Statement. William. España. (2007). University of United Nations. Routledge. Global governance and diplomacy. ¿Qué es la Globalización? falacias del globalismo. Brian. International and Regional Studies. Cooper. In. Globalizations. London. Keane. Prometeo Libros. Andrew. (2008). Paradigm Publishers. Beck Ulrich. Global Policy Volume 1. Barcelona. Fox. Richard. La identidad en Democracia. Tusquets. March-June Vol. Brysk. Arjun. Cambridge. UK. The practice of diplomacy. Mary. On the Manner of Practising the New Diplomacy.7. Keith. (2007). Polity Press. (Ed. Alejandro. Worlds Apart? Palgrave Macmillan. Una respuesta a la guerra. (2008). Cambridge. (2010). _______. Jonathan. Its evolution. Tusquets Editores. (2010). Donatella. Falk. Bilsey. 2nd Edition. Globalization. (2010). (2010). (2010). Andrew. PhD Thesis. _______ (2003). Cambridge. Rosalba. España. Brian. Alison. Movilización y activismo en clave transnacional. Global Civil Society? Cambridge. Luk Van. Wiley-Blackwell. The dark side of globalization. Richard. (2009). The global justice movement. London. Maley (Eds.). University of Warwick. Nick. Bada. Pereyra. Civil Society. key thinkers. Barcelona. Cross-National and transnational perspective. Civil Society. (2008). (1998).). Migrant Civic Engagement. (2010). (2007). William. Ediciones Bellaterra. Anthony. (2009). Globalization Theory. California. Polity Press. Barcelona. Seminario Os sentido(s) da(s) cultura(s) Consello da Cultura Galega. David.THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL References Appadurai. Ensayo sobre la geografía de la furia.). Heine. Pensar institucionalmente. 2nd Edition. LSE. Polity Press. John. (2011). Jorge. Held. (2006). Os movementos sociais e a sociedade civil: de como os emerxentes conflitos sociais cuestionan as perspectivas adoptadas polas ciencias sociais. voces locales. Rethinking globalization. Consecuencias de la Modernidad. Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Palgrave Mcmillan. Maley (Eds. USA. USA. Ramesh. Anthony. Conflictos globales. Heine. Beyond the great divide. redes transnacionales y relaciones internacionales en América Latina. Santiago de Compostela. Simon and Schuster. Hugh.). Hocking. Heclo. Gutmann. Amy. Icaza. Approach and controversies. Buenos Aires. (2009). Polity Press _______ (2006) Dictionary of Globalization. Center for Global. Xochitl. Jorge. 194 .). Globalization/antiglobalization. Edwards. (2008). Civil society and regionalization exploring the contours of Mexican transborder civic activism. El rechazo de las minorías. _______ (Ed.0 to Mode 2. Sebastian. (2004). (2008). University of Santa Cruz. Giddens. Global governance and diplomacy.

Key concepts and major debates. Méndez. Sydney. Juan. http://fletcher. Transformaciones políticas y cambios socioculturales. Marcelo. (2010). estados y orden internacional. Los movimientos sociales: de lo local a lo global. Ino (Ed. Westerview Press. New York. La Democracia en América Latina. Della Porta. Ariana. PNUD Moomaw. Frontiers of globalization research.) La incidencia política de la sociedad civil. Ramón (ed. 195 . Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales. Sociedad Civil y la Calidad de la Democracia. Pedro. En. Margaret. Argentina. (2008). Santiago de Compostela. Acuña. Universidad de Santiago de Compostela. et al (Eds. Una sociología de la globalización. Riordan. (2004). Ediciones Katz. Peter. Polity Press.html Muldoon. Cambridge University Press. The new transnational activism. Para una teoría filosófica de la globalización. Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. Sikkink. Zeynep.. Von Bülow. El análisis de marcos: una metodología para el estudio de los movimientos sociales. Kumarian Press. Cornell University Press. (2009). Jackie. Rowman and Litllefield Publishers. Globalization: A critical Introduction. Benjamin. (2010). Dieter. Smith. Fondo de Cultura Económica. Scholte. Cambridge. Shaun. Civil Society and the Politics of Trade in the Americas. The New Diplomacy. Social movements for global democracy. Marisa. En. Atalay (Eds. La Diplomacia. En. Sloterdijk. Los movimientos sociales. (2004). William. Ithaca. Marcelo. Ronalds. Willey-Blackwell. Vacchieri (Comp. Francis. USA. Transnacionalización y globalización de movimientos sociales. Pleyers. Tijerina. Paul. Anthropos Editorial. George. Oxford. (2010). WP 137/04 Sassen Saskia.ANTONIO ALEJO Leiras. The New Diplomacy. movilización y discurso. USA. Indianismo y nacionalismo en Bolivia: estructura de oportunidad política. Rutch. creating the next generation NGO. Pleyers. México. La incidencia de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil en las políticas públicas. John Hopkins University Press. Territory. CSGR. Ritzer. Harold. 2nd Edition. (2004). Mestries. from medieval to global assemblages. Donatella. Sydney. Ediciones Siruela.). En el mundo interior del capital. Convergence in the making: transnational civil society and the Free Trade Area of the Americas. (1998). New York. (2011). (2007). Rossi. (2008). The change imperative. Sergio. Activist beyond borders. Máiz. Tarrow. Advocacy networks in international politics. Readings in globalization. Construcción de Europa. democracia y globalización. Cambridge. (1998). Siglo XXI. Keck. Theoretical and methodology approaches. (2005). Madrid. (2003). (2005). Autonomías locales y subjetividades en contra del neoliberalismo: hacia un nuevo paradigma para entender los movimientos sociales.). James P. The new dynamics of multilateralism. (2007). Geoffrey.edu/multilaterals. En VVAA.). Madrid. international organizations and global governance. Transnational protest and global activism. Cambridge University Press. En. (2007). Pricenton University Press. Saguier. authority. Ibarra. Building Transnational Networks. rights. Zermeño (Coordinadores). Madrid. diplomacy. Hacia una democracia de ciudadanas y ciudadanos. Geoffrey. Springer science and + Business media.).tufts. Tarrow. Jr. Ciudadanía y derechos indígenas en América Latina: población. México. USA. (1948 1ª Reimpresión). Carlos. The University of Warwick. Nicolson. (2010). UK. (2010). USA. Máiz. El debate conceptual sobre la democracia. En. The Fletcher School. 3ª reimpresión. (2009). Kathryn. Antonio. Palgrave Mcmillan. Jan Aart. (2007). Rivas. Ramón. Buenos Aires. _______ (2006). Trotta. (2005). Perú.

received a PhD in Contemporary Political Process from the University of Santiago de Compostela. and dimensions. (2012) From invisibility to recognition in a society of migrants. Sánchez Díaz de Rivera. collective action. Spain. The indigenous peoples in Argentina. Baylis. institutions and discourses. Identidades. and global agendas in Argentina and Mexico. John. México. Oxford University Press. Universidad Iberoamericana. desigualdades y globalización. ITESO. Alejo’s areas of research interest include: globalizations: theories. civil societies: actors. An introduction to international relations. globalización e inequidad. (2011).THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL Wiewiorka. 196 . The construction of Global Governance. Smith (Eds. Alejo’s recent Publications include: (2012) Globalizations and New Diplomacies in the Americas. En. The role of the Alaska natives in the struggle for oil. political processes and democratization in the Americas. (2007). Transnational actors and international organizations in global politics.). The Globalization of World Politics. The implementation of public policies for the inclusion of civil societies in foreign affairs agendas. Willetts. In. Peter. processes. Oxford. María Eugenia. international politics. Non-Govermental Organizations in World Politics. (2012) Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and its future. PhD. Identidades. Routledge. Steve. Michel. About the Author Antonio Alejo Antonio Alejo. _______ (2006).

Zayed University. .GlobalStudiesJournal. Urbana-Champaign. St. USA Jan Nederveen Pieterse. South Korea Lena Jayyusi. United Arab Emirates Iain Donald MacPherson. Augustine. House of Lords. University of California. UK Thomas Pogge. University of Illinois. United Arab Emirates Mark Juergensmeyer. Santa Barbara. Melbourne. Instituto de Ciências Sociais. Member. Pusan National University. Trinidad Manfred B. Abu Dhabi. Steger. USA Please visit the Journal website at http://www. Seoul. USA Timothy Shaw. Busan. Brazil Fazal Rizvi. Seoul National University. USA Bill Cope. Zayed University. Universidade de Brasília.Editors Jan Nederveen Pieterse. Australia Gustavo Lins Ribeiro. Calgary.com for further information about the Journal or to subscribe. University of Illinois. University of California. Columbia University. Hull. University of Calgary. Urbana-Champaign. Santa Barbara. University of the West Indies. New York. RMIT University. University of Hull. Institute for Social Development and Policy Research. South Korea Habibul Haque Khondker. UK. Santa Barbara. USA Editorial Advisory Board Jin-Ho Jang. USA Seung Kuk Kim. Brasília. University of California. Canada Bhikhu Parekh. Abu Dhabi.

. non-hierarchical and constructive nature of the peer review process. the Conference will be held at Moscow State University. publishing cutting edge books in print and electronic formats. United Arab Emirates and in 2010. or simply submit a paper for peer review and possible publication in the Journal. members of non-government organisations. annual face-to-face conference interactions. The third major publishing medium is our news blog. constantly publishing short news updates from the Global Studies Community. Brazil. Publishing The Global Studies community enables members to publish through three mediums. held annually in different locations around the world. The inaugural Conference was held at the University of Illinois. in which community members can submit a video and/or slide presentation with voice-over. the Conference was held at JW Marriot. Busan. public administrators. policy makers. In 2011. Publication proposals and manuscript submissions are welcome. in 2009. Rio De Janeiro. Conference Members of the the Global Studies community meet at the Global Studies Conference. You can also join this conversation at Facebook and Twitter or subscribe to our email Newsletter. Those unable to attend the Conference may opt for virtual participation. each selected for its particular place in the dynamics of globalization. peer reviewed journal and book series—exploring the affordances of the new digital media. as well as major developments in globalization issues. enabling authors to publish into an academic journal of the highest standard. members can enter a world of journal publication unlike the traditional academic publishing forums—a result of the responsive. First. by participating in the Global Studies Conference. South Korea. the Conference was held at Pusan National University. Chicago in 2008. and in 2012. the Conference was held at Zayed University. educators and research students. The community interacts through innovative. The Global Studies Journal provides a framework for double-blind peer review. The second publication medium is through the book series On Globalization. Dubai. as well as year-round virtual relationships in a weblog.The Global Studies Community This knowledge community is brought together by a common intersest in the dynamics of globalization in the world today. Online presentations can be viewed on YouTube. Moscow. Russia. Members of this knowledge community include academics.

Diversity-Journal.Museum-Journal. Website: www.Book-Journal.com DIVERSITY The International Journal of Diversity in Organizations.Sustainability-Journal. Cultural.com/journal DESIGN Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal Website: www.com/journal/ UNIVERSITIES Journal of the World Universities Forum Website: www.com RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY The International Journal of Religion and Spirituality in Society Website: www.Management-Journal.com/journal/ ARTS The International Journal of the Arts in Society. Wellness and Society Website: www. Website: www.com MANAGEMENT The International Journal of Knowledge.com SPACES AND FLOWS Spaces and Flows: An International Journal of Urban and ExtraUrban Studies Website: www. Economic and Social Sustainability Website: www.com HEALTH The International Journal of Health. Website: www.SpacesJournal.ScienceinSocietyJournal.com For subscription information please contact subscriptions@commongroundpublishing.com BOOK The International Journal of the Book Website: www.com CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT The International Journal of the Constructed Environment Website: www.Technology-Journal.Arts-Journal. Knowledge and Society Website: www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com MUSEUM The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum Website: www.Learning-Journal.com .com UBIQUITOUS LEARNING Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal Website: www.Humanities-Journal.ConstructedEnvironment.Universities-Journal.com TECHNOLOGY The International Journal of Technology.com IMAGE The International Journal of the Image Website: www.ubi-learn.com FOOD Food Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal Website: http://Food-Studies. Culture and Change Management. Communities and Nations Website: www.Climate-Journal.com SPORT AND SOCIETY The International Journal of Sport and Society Website: www.com SCIENCE IN SOCIETY The International Journal of Science in Society Website: www.com CLIMATE CHANGE The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses Website: www.com SOCIAL SCIENCES The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences Website: www.Religion-Journal.OntheImage.HealthandSociety.com/journal LEARNING The International Journal of Learning.Design-Journal.SocialSciences-Journal.com/journal/ GLOBAL STUDIES The Global Studies Journal Website: www.com/journal SUSTAINABILITY The International Journal of Environmental.sportandsociety.com/journal HUMANITIES The International Journal of the Humanities Website: www.Common Ground Publishing Journals AGING Aging and Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal Website: http://AgingAndSociety.