Foreign Policy by Proxy: Democracy and Human Rights Promotion through an Engagement with Civil Society

  • Raffaele Marchetti
Part of the International Series on Public Policy book series (ISPP)


The European Union (EU) has intensified policy partnerships with civil society organizations (CSOs) in its external action. With regard to democracy promotion and human rights protection in particular, engagement with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has become a crucial issue in schemes such as the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights. However, this ‘foreign policy by proxy’ is becoming increasingly controversial and a number of countries are implementing countermeasures to protect their national sovereignty, such as limits to foreign funding, media censorship, and restrictions to NGO activities. This chapter first explores how the EU engages with CSOs in its foreign actions, and then examines comparatively the main controversies that these policies are generating.


European Union Civil Society Foreign Policy Participatory Democracy European Union Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Belloni, R. (2001). Civil society and peacebuilding in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Journal of Peace Research, 38(2), 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boronska-Hryniewiecka, K. (2011). Europeanization of non-state actors: Towards a framework for analysis. In D. Armstrong, V. Bello, J. Gilson, & D. Spini (Eds.), Civil society and international governance. The role of non-state actors in global and regional regulatory frameworks (pp. 73–91). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Chandler, D. (2001). The road to military humanitarianism: How the human rights NGOs shaped a new humanitarian agenda. Human Rights Quarterly, 23(3), 678–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Christensen, D., & Weinstein, J. M. (2013). Defunding dissent: Restrictions on aid to NGOs. Journal of Democracy, 24(2), 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Council of the European Union. (2012). EU strategic framework and action plan on human rights and democracy. Luxembourg (11855/12): Retrieved from
  6. Curtin, D. (2003). Private interest representation or civil society deliberation: A contemporary dilemma for European governance. Social and Legal Studies, 12(1), 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Della Porta, D., & Caiani, M. (2009). Social movements and Europeization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doyle, M. W. (1983). Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs (parts I and II). Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12(3–4), 205–235 (I); 323–253 (II).Google Scholar
  9. Dupuy, K. E., Ron, J., & Prakash, A. (2015). Who survived? Ethiopia’s regulatory crackdown on foreign-funded NGOs. Review of International Political Economy, 22(2), 419–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dupuy, K. E., Ron, J., & Prakash, A. (2016). Hands Off My Regime! Governments’ restrictions on foreign aid to nongovernmental organizations in poor and middle-income countries. World Development. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.02.001.
  11. Economic and Social Committee. (1999). Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee onThe role and contribution of Civil Society Organizations in the building of Europe’. Brussels.Google Scholar
  12. European Commission. (2001). European governance: A white paper. Brussels.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2006). Non-Paper expanding on the proposals contained in the communication to the European Parliament and the Council onStrengthening the ENP: Strengthening the civil society dimension of the ENP. Brussels.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission. (2007). European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). Strategy Paper 2007–2010. Brussels.Google Scholar
  15. European Commission. (2010). European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). Strategy Paper 2011–2013. Brussels.Google Scholar
  16. Heidbreder, E. G. (2012). Civil society participation in EU governance. Living Reviews in European Governance, 7(2). doi: 10.12942/lreg-2007-2.
  17. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2009). A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus ot constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science, 39(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Joerges, C., & Neyer, J. (2006). Deliberative supranationalism. Florence: EUI Working Paper LAW-20.Google Scholar
  19. Kaya, A., & Marchetti, R. (2014). Europeanization, framing competition and civil society in the EU and Turkey.Google Scholar
  20. Marchetti, R., & Tocci, N. (2011). Redefining EU engagement with conflict society. In R. Marchetti & N. Tocci (Eds.), Civil society, ethnic conflicts, and the politicization of human rights (pp. 181–203). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Marchetti, R., & Tocci, N. (2013). The European Union approach to peacebuilding via civil society. In J. Boulden & W. Kymlicka (Eds.), International approaches to governing ethnic diversity (pp. 169–197). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Quittkat, C., & Finke, B. (2008). The EU commission consultation Regime. In B. Kohler-Koch, D. De Bievre, & W. Maloney (Eds.), Opening EU-Governance to civil society: Gains and challenges (pp. 183–222). Mannheim: Connex Report Series #5, University of Mnnheim.Google Scholar
  23. Radaelli, C. (2003). The Europeanization of public policies. In K. Featherstone & C. Radaelli (Eds.), The politics of Europeanization (pp. 27–56). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Richmond, O. (2006). Patterns of peace. Global Society, 20(4), 367–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Richmond, O., & Carey, H. (2005). Subcontracting peace: The challenges of NGO peacebuilding. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  26. Vukosavljevic, N. (2007). Training for peacebuilding and conflict transformation. Experiences of the Centre for Nonviolent Action. Berlin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raffaele Marchetti
    • 1
  1. 1.LUISSRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations