Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Over the last 30 years, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have increased tremendously in numbers and power. Yet this “global associational revolution” has also sparked objection and resistance from groups whose interests, beliefs, or ideologies are threatened by NGO campaigns. These countermobilizations have opposed NGOs on such issues as the International Criminal Court, greenhouse gas controls, and family planning. Beyond such ad hoc countermobilizations, broader objections to the NGO form itself have recently emerged. In June 2003, for instance, participants in a widely publicized international conference attacked NGOs for being undemocratic, unaccountable, anti-capitalist, and a threat to the nation-state. Meanwhile, conservative think tanks in major countries have established a loose transnational network to counter NGO campaigns and curtail their influence in world politics. Spearheaded by the American Enterprise Institute and Australian Institute of Public Affairs, the network uses both NGO repertoires, such as websites and conferencing, and NGO framing, such as arguments grounded in norms of sovereignty and accountability--against NGOs.

Together these developments signal the emergence of a transnational “anti-NGO movement.” This paper examines this nascent countermovement to fill gaps in the literature on transnational politics. While numerous scholars have chronicled the rise of NGOs, there has been little research on growing international collaboration against this trend. My paper fills the gap while contributing to three strands of theory on international collaboration. First, I argue that anti-NGO mobilization requires constructivist theory to rethink the “logic of appropriateness” and the “logic of argument.” If NGO movements and countermovements marshal competing norms, “appropriateness” is highly contested. Likewise, if a conservative countermovement questions the very legitimacy of NGO participation in world politics, a “logic of argument” over substantive issues recedes in significance. Second, I introduce a new theory of “transnational countermobilization.” In recent years, the literature on transnational contention has burgeoned, but countermobilizations have been neglected, despite their importance. For its part, the literature on countermovements has focused only on domestic examples and has ignored transnational countermobilizations. Third, I examine implications of anti-NGO mobilization for theories of global governance. In this literature, as Mary Kaldor has recently observed, conservative think tanks are “rarely mentioned” despite being “extremely powerful.” Thus, our perspectives on a postulated “global civil society” are one-sided, and predictions about future prospects may be more optimistic than merited