No “Nice-to-Have”: European Support to Critical Civil Society and Free Media
Jasmin Lorch argues that European support to human rights NGOs, critical civil society and free media is not merely a “nice-to-have“. Instead, it directly serves European interests due to the important information function that these civil society actors perform.
USAID funding cuts have dealt a heavy blow to human rights defenders, critical Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and independent media outlets around the globe. While the damage is hard to quantify exactly, it is clearly huge. For instance, the Centre for Human Rights and Democracy at People in Need estimates that the human rights and media organizations it supports have seen their budgets shrink by 40 to 100% because of the cuts. Based on a USAID fact sheet, meanwhile taken offline, Reporters without Borders (RSF) informed that the dismantling of USAID had affected support to 6,200 journalists, 707 non-state media outlets and 279 civil society organizations (CSOs) working to support free media. The impacts on local civil society are especially pronounced in closed authoritarian contexts where CSOs are both restricted and donor-dependent. In Cambodia, ADHOC, one of the few remaining local human rights organizations, lost 74 percent of its budget and had to close 16 out of its 22 provincial offices.
As critical CSOs and independent media outlets struggle to find alternative sources of funding, they face another threat to their survival: Major European donors, including Sweden, have cut down on foreign funding as well, citing their own national needs, including the necessity to invest more in defence. Germany, the biggest bilateral donor since the dismantling of USAID, has recently pledged to better integrate its foreign, defence, and development policy and to more closely align development cooperation with its security and economic interests. Accordingly, there is a significant risk that European donors will (further) cut down on funding for critical CSOs and free media as well.
However, European donors should consider that continuing to support human rights defenders, critical NGOs and independent media outlets is in their own interest.
Notably, these civil society actors serve an important information function. By furnishing insights into human rights abuses, governance deficits and patterns of corruption, they provide European (as well as other) governments with a better understanding of political developments, power relations and regime dynamics in their partner countries, thereby enhancing the predictability of security and economic partnerships. Authoritarian governments. in particular, restrict the free flow of information, while, concurrently, engaging in propaganda and, at times, strategic disinformation. Consequently, European foreign, economic and security policy towards these governments routinely suffers from severe information deficits, including the existence of numerous “unknown unknowns”. To compensate for this weakness, country assessments and expert opinions used by foreign, development, and defence ministries in Europe to devise policy approaches towards non-democratic partner countries often include information provided by independent media outlets, human rights or anti-corruption NGOs. Similarly, European embassies in authoritarian countries frequently draw on the reports and documentations accomplished by local human rights NGOs.
In some cases, the information provided by critical NGOs, human rights defenders and independent media outlets – both local and transnational – is highly economically and security relevant, for instance when it serves to unearth patterns of transnational crime. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an investigative journalist network, which also has a media development branch and was heavily affected by the USAID funding cuts, for instance, contributed to the Panama Papers that disclosed the secretive use of offshore tax havens. A recent report named Policies and Patterns. State-Abetted Transnational Crime in Cambodia as a Global Security Threat draws on interviews with journalists and civil society representatives. While expressing disappointment with the ineffectiveness of large parts of the aid community and big counter-trafficking NGOs in addressing the problem, it emphasizes that
“the ‘local civil society’ community — grassroots volunteer response networks, human rights watchdogs, and independent media —have been and remain the lynchpin of an embattled response. These heavily repressed and poorly funded groups have been and remain the primary source of available evidence on the lead perpetrators, their networks, and their modes of operation” (quote on p.3).
Similarly, CSOs, independent media outlets and individual activists who disclose human rights abuses can serve an important early warning function, potentially facilitating the prevention of violent conflict. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) emphasizes that “human rights violations, particularly when widespread and systematic, can serve as indicators of an increased risk of conflict, violence or instability“. Accordingly, it emphasizes the potential of United Nations (UN) human rights mechanisms to contribute to crisis prevention. Human rights NGOs and other CSOs provide important inputs into the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council and other UN human rights mechanisms. Similarly, the reports of human rights NGOs and independent media outlets, at times, also inform the crisis and early warning assessments used by European governments when devising their foreign, economic and security policies.
Last but not least, establishing partnerships with human rights defenders and critical NGOs also allows European countries to expand their social and political alliances in their partner countries, a diversification that can be highly useful in times of political uncertainty and change. For instance, events such as the Arab Spring show that even seemingly stable authoritarian regimes often do not last forever. When they fall, European governments obligated or willing to engage with the respective countries have to look for alternative interlocutors. Diversifying alliances, including with civil society, can hence constitute an important investment into the future. Following the ouster of Sheikh Hasina, for instance, an interim government assumed power in Bangladesh. Led by microcredit banker Muhammad Yunus, it also includes other civil society figures and NGO leaders.
Support to human rights NGOs, other critical CSOs and free media constitutes an important contribution to democracy and pluralism. However, it also benefits European economic and security interests by enhancing the knowledge base on which European governments can draw when constructing their international alliances. European governments already use the information provided by these civil society actors in various ways, so they should continue providing diplomatic support, solidarity, and resources to them. Moreover, partnerships with human rights, media, and other civil society representatives provide European governments with an important possibility to diversify their international partnerships.
Against this backdrop, European support to these civil society actors is not a “nice-to-have” that can easily be dispensed with when funding gets more scarce. It is an important element in ensuring the predictability and reliability of European foreign relations.
Jasmin Lorch is a Senior Researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) in Bonn, Germany.
Photo by The Vegan Monster
