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

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

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

Globalizations and NGOs in the Americas: New

Diplomacies in Argentina and Mexico
Antonio Alejo, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Galicia, 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, permanent
interaction in agendas, strategies and discourses on civil society actors. 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. 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. In this sense, states, institutions and societies are changing
as part of a global frame. Using the method of multiple case studies from collective action dimensions
(political structure opportunities, mobilization structures) and connections with identity, this paper
attempts to shows how NGOs adapt their organizations and discourses to be more effective, as they
try to gain influence though multi-scale, complex multilateralism. With the multiple case study method,
this research tested a hypothesis and offers a perspective from which to study the transnational practices
of NGOs in the Americas. New Diplomacy reveals innovative spaces where governments, international
institutions and non-governmental actors interact and develop sociopolitical transformations within
the State. The research analyzed four NGOs that focus on human rights and indigenous rights in Argentina and Mexico. We show the diversity of expressions of the globalized Americas that emerge from
NGOs. This paper aims to present a typology of the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas
as NGO Diplomacies. These NGO Diplomacies can be split into the following sub-categories: Citizenship Diplomacy, Global Politics of the South, Civic Bi-nationality and Indigenous Diplomacy. 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.
Keywords: Globalization, Civil Society, New Diplomacy, NGOs Diplomacy, Americas

HE CONTEMPORARY SOCIOPOLITICAL transformations in the Americas,

including a renovated relevance in world politics of some Latin American countries
(e.g. Argentina, Brazil, Mexico), parallel to a social cohesion breakdown product of
profound and long standing socio-economic inequalities, have instigated changes in
civil society actors scope of action. Under conditions of globalization, 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. 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, but most importantly,
has defined in some of them their modus operandi too: going from protest to policy influence (Alejo, 2011). Interestingly, these practices have not been exclusively deployed on
local agendas as the research demonstrated (Alejo, 2011).
The research presented in this paper sought to answer the following questions: 1.) How
do local and global actions interact in civil societies in the Americas? 2.) What kind of
The Global Studies Journal
Volume 4, Issue 4, 2012, http://www.globalstudiesjournal.com/, ISSN 1835-4432
Common Ground, Antonio Alejo, All Rights Reserved, Permissions:
cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

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

ANTONIO ALEJO

and combined application of methodological dimensions that enabled us to understand the

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

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

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

186

ANTONIO ALEJO

NGOs began to be recognized as actors in global politics in the 1970s. Since then, NGOs
have worked on issues like women rights, human rights, [the] environment and, recently,
anti-globalizations movements (Willetts, 2011). In diplomacy agendas, non-governmental
actors (not only NGOs) have promoted agendas related to poverty, humanitarianism and
health, human rights and the environment (Hamilton, Langhorne; 2011: 247). The diplomacies
of NGOs do not represent the official positions of states. The NGOs that are involved in international politics, foreign affairs and global issues are part of a complex interaction between
institutions, actors and discourses around diplomacy agendas. In this sense, NGO Diplomacies
have found influence as a natural channel for the work of public actors. To observe NGO
Diplomacies originating from Argentina and Mexico, we followed the argument of Heine
(2008) regarding the challenge of diplomacy in middle powers. Hein says that few countries
and actors from the developing world have the resources for South-South cooperation; 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, 2008: 280).
With this theoretical approach, the next step is to show the evidence with which we characterized the transnational practices of NGOs in the Americas.

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, 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. 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 (OBrien in Smith: 2008). Next we reviewed the institutional
spaces for dialogue between civil societies, governments and supranational institutions, including: the Meeting of European-Latin American-Caribbean Civil Society Organisations
at the Latin America, Caribbean and European Union Summit (bi-regional); the Civic
Meeting at the Ibero-American Summit (bi-regional); the Civil Society Forum (continental);
Somos Mercosur at the Mercosur Summit; and the North American Leaders Summit, which
had no mechanism for North American civil societies. As part of this multi-scale institutional
context within the states, 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, global agendas and foreign affairs issues.
These policies are: the Civil Society Advising Council in Foreign Affairs and the International
Commerce and Worship Ministry, in Argentina, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Liaison
Office with Civil Society, in Mexico.
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. This perspective is contrary to realistic international relations that define international politics, diplomacy and foreign affairs agendas
as matters of the state and the governments that represent states. Within this point of view,
political parties or interest groups represent sectors of societies and they are advised frequently. The political structure opportunities that we found include an opportunity window
for non-governmental actors who want to participate in international issues, diplomacy

187

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

agendas and global matters from within their states but with a global standpoint and a
transnational perspective. With this institutional context, we exposed challenges for societies,
governments and states in the Americas within a global framework. The analysis proved
that complex multilateralism in the Americas is weak and frequently seen as irrelevant, but
the processes are working and are part of a global evolution in the Americas.
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, 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- YES

ur

North American Leaders Sum- 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, 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. They have constructed their own perspective of the world, suggested alternatives
and acquired motivations to act. The mobilization structure has allowed organizations to
deepen their goals and directives. In this sense, the NGOs have analyzed how their organizational and discursive strategies influence public agendas.
The NGOs selected for the purposes of this research are considered early risers (Tarrow;
2004) in the sociopolitical transformations of the Americas. With the study of the transnational practices of NGOs, we consider the emergence of what we characterize as NGO
Diplomacy in the Americas. We detail below the evidence of some kind of diplomacy with
few select NGOs. Focusing on the origins, objectives and repertoires of NGOs in Argentina
and Mexico, we expose the complexity of transnational actors (Appadurai, 2007) that seek
to play on an effective role and maintain a global perspective.
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. For ex-

188

ANTONIO ALEJO

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

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

claims for damages on behalf of nations and the original people in Argentina; climate change
and natural resources.

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. Actors have perceived opportunities. In this sense, NGOs create
organizational and discursive strategies to try to influence foreign affairs issues, international
politics and global agendas. 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. With the analysis
based on the repertoires and discourses of the selected NGOs, we characterized the transnational practices as kind of NGO Diplomacy. With a weak institutionalized infrastructure
for the globalized Americas, 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.
Citizen Diplomacy is characterized by three elements: 1.) The verification that economic,
political and cultural globalization processes are on depth and economic globalization is
working under the hegemony of multinational financial and economic elites; 2.) It looks to
modify those contexts, creating a counterweight against the hegemony of the State; 3.) There
is the necessity for dual implementation, i.e. articulating local actions on national and international scales. This NGO Diplomacy directs its actions to require that the State observe its
duty to respect, protect and execute environmental, economic, social and cultural rights.
This type of NGO Diplomacy, when faced with a neoliberal model, demands a State that
favors citizens over investments. For citizen diplomacy there is an international context
characterized by exclusive economic globalization, as well as the globalization of social
struggle and solidarity. This NGO Diplomacy shows an interest in trying to influence international politics and foreign affairs agendas, and it demands to be consulted on these issues.
It boasts expertise and the capacity to promote alternatives. For this NGO Diplomacy, in
addition to formal diplomacy on the part of governments, there must be other forms of diplomacy that originate with citizens. That means creating a channel for the participation, opportunities and capacity to influence international political decisions that impact populations.
In this sense, the monitoring of international politics and foreign affairs is a strategic task
for NGOs because traditionally citizens are not consulted on these agendas. In this sense,
participation in international forums and summits is relevant because it is an opportunity to
try to influence public agendas. In this way, political influence refers to citizens efforts to
influence policy processes through persuasion and by putting pressure on governments, international financial organs, companies and other entities with the capacity to make decisions
that affect public agendas.
The defining issue for the Global Politics of the South is the denunciation of human rights
violations. This type of NGO Diplomacy looks to influence public policy processes and
seeks to make the State recognize and respect basic rights. 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 geopolitics and global activism of those
concerned with the Global Politics of the South has changed. Organizations from the South
are increasing legitimate, and now they debate with international organizations and civil
190

ANTONIO ALEJO

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

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

works to protect the cultural heritage and intellectual property of indigenous nations and
communities. It appeals to indigenous solidarity across nations, peoples and communities,
and it engenders and maintains friendly relations with related actors on a multi-scale basis.
Indigenous Diplomacy holds that since natural resources are located in indigenous territories, such resources belong to the indigenous people. Currently, external actors are extracting
these resources without any benefit to the indigenous communities. For this kind of NGO
Diplomacy, globalization has always existed, only now it has a capitalist face. In this way,
indigenous movement reveals a political process in which globalization is on the side of indigenous people and nations. Since Indigenous Diplomacy goes beyond the nation-state, it
is necessary to talk about geopolitics and international politics. The tools of globalization
should be used by indigenous people. From this perspective, 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. For the indigenous people the lack of recognition of their culture supposes countries without culture. From this perspective, the original
inhabitants struggles are crucial to contemporary issues related to globalization like racism,
territory, direct democracy, cultural diversity, gender equality and migration.

Box 2: Interaction for the Emergence of New Diplomacies in the Americas

Here, we expose the emergence of New Diplomacy in the Americas. This New Diplomacy
is the result of interactions between actors, discourses and institutions. The tensions and
cooperation between civil society actors, governments and multilateral institutions built this
New Diplomacy. Thus, in this research we did not look at transnational or global activism

192

ANTONIO ALEJO

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

193

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

References
Appadurai, Arjun. (2007). El rechazo de las minoras. Ensayo sobre la geografa de la furia. Barcelona.
Tusquets Editores.
Bada, Xochitl; Jonathan, Fox. (2009). Migrant Civic Engagement. USA, Center for Global, International and Regional Studies. University of Santa Cruz, California.
Beck Ulrich. (1998). Qu es la Globalizacin? falacias del globalismo, respuestas a la globalizacin.
Barcelona, Paids.
Bilsey, Nick. (2007). Rethinking globalization. Palgrave Mcmillan.
Brysk, Alison. (2009). De la tribu a la aldea Global. Derechos de los Pueblos Indgenas, redes
transnacionales y relaciones internacionales en Amrica Latina. Barcelona. Ediciones Bellaterra.
Cooper, Andrew; Brian, Hocking; William, Maley (Eds.). (2008). Global governance and diplomacy,
Worlds Apart? Palgrave Macmillan.
Della Porta, Donatella. (2011). Os movementos sociais e a sociedade civil: de como os emerxentes
conflitos sociais cuestionan as perspectivas adoptadas polas ciencias sociais. Santiago de
Compostela. Seminario Os sentido(s) da(s) cultura(s) Consello da Cultura Galega.
_______, (Ed.). (2007). The global justice movement. Cross-National and transnational perspective.
USA. Paradigm Publishers.
Edwards, Michael. (2009). Civil Society. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Falk, Richard. (2010). A Radical World Order Challenge: Addressing Global Climate Change and
the Threat of Nuclear Weapons. Routledge. Globalizations. March-June Vol.7.
Giddens, Anthony. (2002). Consecuencias de la Modernidad. Espaa, Alianza Editorial.
Global Policy. (2010). Editorial Statement. London. LSE, Wiley-Blackwell.
Grimson, Alejandro; Sebastian, Pereyra. (2008). Conflictos globales, voces locales. Movilizacin y
activismo en clave transnacional. Buenos Aires. Prometeo Libros.
Gutmann, Amy. (2008). La identidad en Democracia. Buenos Aires. Ediciones Katz.
Heclo, Hugh. (2010). Pensar institucionalmente. Barcelona. Paids.
Hamilton, Keith; Richard, Langhorne. (2010). The practice of diplomacy. Its evolution, theory and
administration. 2nd Edition. Routledge.
Heine, Jorge; Ramesh, Thakur (Eds.). (2011). The dark side of globalization. University of United
Nations.
Heine, Jorge. (2008). On the Manner of Practising the New Diplomacy. In, Cooper, Andrew; Brian,
Hocking; William, Maley (Eds.). (2008). Global governance and diplomacy. Worlds Apart?
Palgrave Macmillan.
Held, David; Anthony, McGrew. (2007). Globalization/antiglobalization. Beyond the great divide.
Cambridge. 2nd Edition. Polity Press.
_______ (Edits.). (2007a). Globalization Theory. Approach and controversies. Cambridge, Polity
Press.
Icaza, Rosalba. (2004). Civil society and regionalization exploring the contours of Mexican transborder
civic activism. PhD Thesis, University of Warwick.
Jones, Andrew. (2010). Globalization, key thinkers. Cambridge. Polity Press
_______ (2006) Dictionary of Globalization. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Kaldor, Mary. (2005). La sociedad civil global. Una respuesta a la guerra. Espaa, Tusquets.
Keane, John. (2009). The life and death of Democracy. UK. Simon and Schuster.
_______ (Ed.). (2006). Civil Society. Berlin Perspectives. USA. Berghahn Books.
_______ (2003). Global Civil Society? Cambridge. Cambridge University Press
Langenhove, Luk Van. (2010). The transformation of Multilateralism Mode 1.0 to Mode 2.0. London.
LSE, Global Policy Volume 1, Issue 3, October.

194

ANTONIO ALEJO

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

195

THE GLOBAL STUDIES JOURNAL

Wiewiorka, Michel. (2007). Identidades, desigualdades y globalizacin. En, Snchez Daz de Rivera,
Mara Eugenia. Identidades, globalizacin e inequidad. Mxico. Universidad Iberoamericana.
ITESO.
Willetts, Peter. (2011). Non-Govermental Organizations in World Politics. The construction of Global
Governance. Routledge.
_______ (2006). Transnational actors and international organizations in global politics. In, Baylis,
John; Steve, Smith (Eds.). The Globalization of World Politics. An introduction to international relations. Oxford. Oxford University Press.

About the Author

Antonio Alejo
Antonio Alejo, PhD, received a PhD in Contemporary Political Process from the University
of Santiago de Compostela, Spain. Alejos recent Publications include: (2012) Globalizations
and New Diplomacies in the Americas, The implementation of public policies for the inclusion
of civil societies in foreign affairs agendas, international politics, and global agendas in
Argentina and Mexico; (2012) Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and its future. The role of
the Alaska natives in the struggle for oil; (2012) From invisibility to recognition in a society
of migrants, The indigenous peoples in Argentina. Alejos areas of research interest include:
globalizations: theories, processes, and dimensions; civil societies: actors, institutions and
discourses; collective action, political processes and democratization in the Americas.

196

Editors
Jan Nederveen Pieterse, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA

Editorial Advisory Board

Jin-Ho Jang, Institute for Social Development and Policy Research,
Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
Lena Jayyusi, Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Mark Juergensmeyer, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
Seung Kuk Kim, Pusan National University, Busan, South Korea
Habibul Haque Khondker, Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Iain Donald MacPherson, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
Bhikhu Parekh, University of Hull, Hull, UK; Member, House of Lords, UK
Thomas Pogge, Columbia University, New York, USA
Jan Nederveen Pieterse, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA
Timothy Shaw, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad
Manfred B. Steger, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Gustavo Lins Ribeiro, Instituto de Cincias Sociais, Universidade de Braslia,
Braslia, Brazil
Fazal Rizvi, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA

Please visit the Journal website at http://www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com

for further information about the Journal or to subscribe.

The Global Studies Community

This knowledge community is brought together by a common intersest in the dynamics
of globalization in the world today. The community interacts through innovative, annual
face-to-face conference interactions, as well as year-round virtual relationships in a
weblog, peer reviewed journal and book seriesexploring the affordances of the new
digital media. Members of this knowledge community include academics, policy makers,
public administrators, members of non-government organisations, educators and
research students.

Conference
Members of the the Global Studies community meet at the Global Studies Conference,
held annually in different locations around the world, each selected for its particular
place in the dynamics of globalization. The inaugural Conference was held at the
University of Illinois, Chicago in 2008; in 2009, the Conference was held at Zayed
University, Dubai, United Arab Emirates and in 2010, the Conference was held at Pusan
National University, Busan, South Korea. In 2011, the Conference was held at JW
Marriot, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, and in 2012, the Conference will be held at Moscow
State University, Moscow, Russia.
Those unable to attend the Conference may opt for virtual participation, in which
community members can submit a video and/or slide presentation with voice-over, or
simply submit a paper for peer review and possible publication in the Journal.
Online presentations can be viewed on YouTube.

Publishing
The Global Studies community enables members to publish through three mediums.
First, by participating in the Global Studies Conference, members can enter a world of
journal publication unlike the traditional academic publishing forumsa result of the
responsive, non-hierarchical and constructive nature of the peer review process. The
Global Studies Journal provides a framework for double-blind peer review, enabling
authors to publish into an academic journal of the highest standard.
The second publication medium is through the book series On Globalization, publishing
cutting edge books in print and electronic formats. Publication proposals and manuscript
submissions are welcome.
The third major publishing medium is our news blog, constantly publishing short news
updates from the Global Studies Community, as well as major developments in
globalization issues. You can also join this conversation at Facebook and Twitter or
subscribe to our email Newsletter.

Common Ground Publishing Journals

AGING
Aging and Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal
Website: http://AgingAndSociety.com/journal/

ARTS
The International Journal of the Arts in Society.
Website: www.Arts-Journal.com

BOOK
The International Journal of the Book
Website: www.Book-Journal.com

CLIMATE CHANGE
The International Journal of Climate Change:
Impacts and Responses
Website: www.Climate-Journal.com

CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT
The International Journal of the
Constructed Environment
Website: www.ConstructedEnvironment.com/journal

DESIGN
Design Principles and Practices:
An International Journal
Website: www.Design-Journal.com

DIVERSITY
The International Journal of Diversity in
Organizations, Communities and Nations
Website: www.Diversity-Journal.com

FOOD
Food Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal
Website: http://Food-Studies.com/journal/

GLOBAL STUDIES
The Global Studies Journal
Website: www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com

HEALTH
The International Journal of Health,
Wellness and Society
Website: www.HealthandSociety.com/journal

HUMANITIES
The International Journal of the Humanities
Website: www.Humanities-Journal.com

IMAGE
The International Journal of the Image
Website: www.OntheImage.com/journal

LEARNING
The International Journal of Learning.
Website: www.Learning-Journal.com

MANAGEMENT
The International Journal of Knowledge,
Culture and Change Management.
Website: www.Management-Journal.com

MUSEUM
The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum
Website: www.Museum-Journal.com

RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY

The International Journal of Religion and
Spirituality in Society
Website: www.Religion-Journal.com

SCIENCE IN SOCIETY
The International Journal of Science in Society
Website: www.ScienceinSocietyJournal.com

SOCIAL SCIENCES
The International Journal of Interdisciplinary
Social Sciences
Website: www.SocialSciences-Journal.com

SPACES AND FLOWS

Spaces and Flows: An International Journal of
Urban and ExtraUrban Studies
Website: www.SpacesJournal.com

SPORT AND SOCIETY

The International Journal of Sport and Society
Website: www.sportandsociety.com/journal

SUSTAINABILITY
The International Journal of Environmental, Cultural,
Economic and Social Sustainability
Website: www.Sustainability-Journal.com

TECHNOLOGY
The International Journal of Technology,
Knowledge and Society
Website: www.Technology-Journal.com

UBIQUITOUS LEARNING
Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal
Website: www.ubi-learn.com/journal/

UNIVERSITIES
Journal of the World Universities Forum
Website: www.Universities-Journal.com

For subscription information please contact

subscriptions@commongroundpublishing.com