THE IMPACT OF NON-STATE ACTORS ON WORLD POLITICS: A CHALLENGE TO NATION-STATES

Kruh Kwabena Isaac [Brooks and Associates] BSc PH, LLB, MSc (UG, GH) Dip, PH (SFU, USA) Cert. Informatics

Introduction

The nation states were traditionally recognized as the predominant actors, in the international

system. However, non-state actors have begun to play an increasingly important place in world

politics since the 20th century. One of the oldest and universally acknowledged actors on the

modern world stage is the state. A state is an organized political community living under a

single system of government. A Political community is referred to as a government responsible

for the citizens under the government. A definition of world politics involving only states as the

actors has been challenged since the late 1960s and the early 1970s, since many other actors

have become way more involved in the process of international politics.

Definition and Characteristics

Non-state actors are individuals or organizations that have powerful economic, political or

social power and are able to influence at a national and sometimes international level but do

not belong to or allied themselves to any particular country or state. According to Pearlman and

Cunningham, non-state actors are defined as “an organized political actor not directly

connected to the state but pursuing aims that affect vital state interests” (Pearlman &

Cunningham, 2011). Other than having characteristics such as having power and the ability to

influence, non-state actors have a base or headquarter in a certain state but their activities will

not only be operating in the state itself but will also be operating beyond the borders of the
state. Actors in world politics, states and non-state actors, per Ryo Osiba (2012) can be defined

as entities which have the following three Characteristics:

(a) They should have overall capacity to decide on their purposes and interests.

(b) They should also have the capability to mobilize necessary resources to achieve these

purposes and interests and be passionate about appealing for global cooperation.

(c) Their actions should be significant enough to influence the state-to-state relations or the

behavior of other non-state actors in the global system.

The growth of so many kinds of non-state actors challenges and even weakens the “state-

centric” concept of international politics and replaces it with a “transnational” system in which

relationships are more complex. These organizations changed the international environment

(Miller, 1994).The proliferation of non-state actors has recently led some observers of

international relations to conclude that states are declining in importance and that non-state

actors are gaining status and influence. Following the traditional classification, non-state actors

are divided into two categories: international intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and

transnational or international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) (Brown, 1995; Miller,

1994). The first group consists of the non-state actors that are created by nation-states. They

are officially documented by government agencies. The second group of non-state international

actors is established not by nation-states, but by certain group of individuals, businessmen and

other societal forces. This group has no legal bonds with nation-states; therefore, they are truly

transnational. Arts (2003) identifies Non State actors to include: Intergovernmental

organizations (IGOs, e.g. NATO, UN, World Bank), transnational corporations (TNCs),
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs, e.g. churches, non-profit organizations, trade unions),

epistemic communities (i.e. networks of scientists and experts) and `others', including criminal

and terrorist organizations.

International Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) are voluntary associations of sovereign

states established to pursue many objectives for which states want to cooperate through sort

of formal structure and to which states are unable to realize by themselves (Miller, 1994).

There are hundreds of IGOs in today’s world which are significant in their respective fields. They

are created by treaties and negotiations which mainly The most well-known case is the

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which monitors the “non-proliferation of atomic

weapons” principle in states whenever any claim is made Powerful states are less constrained

by the principle of IGOs than those who are relatively weak (Ataman, 2000: 152-167). The IMF

and the UN Security Council are two prominent organizations in which some powerful states

direct activities of the organization and impose their principles selectively.

International Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

Non-governmental organizations are institutions that are established by non-state actors or at

least one side of these organizations is not states. There are many kinds of NGOs such as

transnational, government organized, government-regulated and initiated, business and

industry, donor-organized, donor-dominated, people’s organizations, operational, advocacy,

transnational social movements, quasi, and anti-governmental NGOs. NGOs create and/or

mobilize global networks by creating transnational organizations, gathering information on

local conditions through contacts around the world, alerting global network of supporters to
conditions requiring attention, creating emergency response around world, and mobilizing

pressure from outside states.

Terrorist Groups and Drug Traffickers

Their goals are to publicize their grievances and aspirations to international community by

hijacking, assassination, kidnapping and attacking on embassies. International terrorism is “the

most conspicuous and threatening form” of low-intensity violence (Kegley and Wittkoph, 1995).

As long as the state system and the world system leaves some groups or states out of the

system, terrorism will continue to be an instrument of those who are weak. However, strong

states also use “state terrorism” against the powerless groups or states.

Why states are no longer the key actors

Per the traditional perspective, states play the major role in international Politics but after the

World War, communications technology has been on the rise, international division of labor

and the expansion of global trade, a great number of international organizations have also been

established. The international scene has changed due to the forces of globalization. It is now of

importance that states communicate with one other, which influence international political,

economic, military and culture to a great degree. The increasing number of these organizations

is parallel to the increasing levels of political, economic, military and cultural transactions between

individuals, societies and states. These kinds of non-state actors challenge the "state- centric"

perception. By looking at globalization, the proliferation of non-state actors is gaining international

influence and position. They have official document of government agencies. There are several
powerful organizations such as the European Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

and the United Nations.

There are relatively few areas where non-state actors do not play an important role in

international regulations. Some major reasons that make non state actors ever important

include;

1. Security and Defense

At first glance, the fields of defense and security would not include non-state actors. Is this not

a domain reserved for states? No, it is also a field for non-state actors; Al-Qaeda after

September 11, despite their limited territorial sanctuaries, has imposed the terms for the new

world defense policies. After the terrorist attacks in London 2005, the question of Muslim

immigration in Europe has taken a new dimension. Al-Qaeda has perfect command of the

asymmetric methods of combat. International interventions in security do not only have to do

with terrorism. Non-state actors have been able to arrive at the quasi-general prohibition of

land mines. Another example is given by the Sant’Egidio Community, a Catholic organization

founded in 1968 in Rome, which has played a significant role in the negotiation process which

reached the 1992 peace accords in Mozambique or having mediated in Kosovo or Central

Africa. These examples show that for better for worse, for peace or for war, non-state actors

are sometimes better equipped than the states, to facilitate mediations, to ignite or calm

spirits, to build conditions for long lasting organic violence or durable peace.

2. International Cooperation

The role of non-state actors is particularly present in international cooperation. This is

important as underdevelopment is a result of among other things, in adaptation, weakness,

inefficiency or corrupt state administration. In this regard, state international cooperation

supposes that the problem is solved as states work with national administrations in which part

of the problem is the process in itself. Nongovernmental organizations dedicated to

international solidarity which has promoted matters such as the role of social society,

decentralization or evolution of enterprise behavior in dominated countries (third world

countries).

3. The Economy

In economy, for reasons already mentioned having to do with the size and power of the big

transnational enterprises, the essential element is the enterprise itself. In an open global

market, enterprises are the only players capable of mediating between research and final

market products. Policy making at a state or regional level in the United States or Europe are

essential in regulations, but the process of enacting laws should studied closely. The degree of

liberty which the big states have or consider they have in different economic areas, assuring

country and continent prosperity are sometimes very limited. The example of genetic

manipulation shows the synchronization between enterprises and their interests and the Foods

and Drugs Administration (FDA) and their duties on the other.

4. Trade

In the field of commerce, I have already mentioned the example of the big international

solidarity NGOs in reference to agriculture negotiations. Another important field of debate has

been opened: that of intellectual property. Non-governmental organizations have helped the

big countries of the Southern Hemisphere to recognize the importance of generic medicines

and demonstrate the radical immorality of the deaths of thousands of Aid victims through not
having access to treatments because of to property rights. Strictly non-governmental initiatives

were the players that developed file exchanges on the Internet, especially music files. This has

led to the questioning of the economic model of culture industries, especially the music

industry.

5. The Information Society

The Internet was created because of the Pentagon’s, and therefore the United States’, fears but

the exchange protocol, which has permitted the development of the Internet, has been

managed privately by the World Web Consortium. This entity, despite pressure from different

states, is still a private organization which is dedicated to giving out domain names. The

example of file-exchange protocols shows, as was the case with biological agriculture, which in

a global economy policy making, an essential aspect of governance, is far from being a state

monopoly.

6. Health

In the field of health, the essential question of generic medicines has already been raised. You

only need to visit the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation web site to see that since its creation

the Foundation has invested more than 9 billion dollars in health, of which 2.5 billion has been

used to fight AIDS. Financing comes through several private and public circles. I had the

opportunity twelve years ago to conduct an audit of the WHO (World Health Organization) and

I can say that private donations to these organizations have a lever effect on the orientation of
programs. Therefore, the power of initiative, as in other fields, is now the non-state actors’

domain.

7) Environment

Environmental protection is one of the favorite domains of NGOs. Together with human rights,

this is one of the fields where independent observation structures have permitted the creation

of real international regulatory systems. The environment has also been a domain where states

had not been very motivated to take the initiative, as many of them were involved with

economic lobbies. A certain number of non-governmental actions have started from

international accords: the gradual elimination of chloro-fluoro-carbons (Montreal Protocol

1987); the conservation of biodiversity (Rio Convention 1993 and the Cartagena Protocol). As

for climate change, the Giecc IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) was

officially created by the World Meteorological Organization and by the United Nations, but the

initiative to commence was non state driven, with a strong involvement from physicians such as

Gérard Megie. Afterwards international entities took the baton.

Conclusion

In short, non-state actors have become essential instruments within the international system.

Today, it is difficult to analyze international politics and behaviors of nation-states without

attaching great importance to them. As mentioned by Brown (1995), “the world polity is in the

process of self-transformation out of the traditional nation-state system and into a system

more congruent with the contemporary global polyarchy” Nation-states, including the most

powerful one, the United States, have to attach great significance to non-state actors in order

to maintain their interests. Therefore, any new theoretical and conceptual approaches to
international relations have to take non-state actors and new conditions into account in order

to be able to make sound analyses about world politics.

Reference

1. Ataman, M. (2000). “The Effectiveness of International Organizations

2. Barnet, R. J. and Cavanagh, J. (1994). Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the New

World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster.

3. Bennett, A. L. (1991). International Organizations: Principles and Issues, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.

4. Bishara, M. “Adresi Belli Olmayan Düsman,” Birikim, n. 151, pp. 75-78.

5. Brown, S. (1995). New Forces, Old Forces, and the Future of World Politics Post-Cold War

Edition, New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.

6. Carnoy M. (1993). “Multinationals in a Changing World Economy: Whither the Nation-State,”

7. M. Carnoy et. al. (Eds.) The New Global Economy in the Information Age. University Park,

PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 45-96.