Let’s now take into account some examples of these non states actors and their roles on the international scene. We could choose any kinds of actors. Of course international transnational media, we know the role played by CNN during for instance the Golf war, we know also the role played by Al Jazeera in shaping the Arab spring, and we can find also many others example which are giving the clear evidence of the transnational role of these international transnational media. We could also take the example of religious actors and churches and religious entrepreneurs, but we will have a special chapter devoted to religious issues and so I will be able to go back to this question. Let’s consider now two important predominant non state actors: multinational corporations and NGOs. What is a multinational corporation? It’s a firm which has multiple settings in different countries but a strategic unity. We know that these multinational corporations have a turn over which is even bigger than a developed country GNP, Exxon has a turn over which is equivalent to the Denmark or Finland GNP. For these reasons and many others multinational corporations have to be considered now as a non state actor, as a predominant international and transnational actor. First of all because of its capacity of pressure on governments, second because of the capacity of promoting there own participation in the international life through negotiation with governments for instance. We have also to take into account their capacity of ruling the areas they are using for there own production, like for instance oils companies in Africa. We have also to consider their capacity of shaping public policies, transforming international and global public policies. But I would like to stress on one aspect which is probably the most surprising one that’s to say the capacity of multinational corporations of treating as equal partners with sovereign states for sentencing and also ordering them to pay in case of investment disputes. Let’s consider the famous institution which means International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), this institution which depends on the Worldbank is equally composed of states, sovereign states and multinational firms, and multinational firms are able to defeat states in very famous cases. I would give you some examples. First one, when a tobacco company made Uruguay - the state of Uruguay - sentences to find and pay damages when the Uruguayan government decided to restrict tobacco consumption. A multinational corporation could defeat a state in his sovereign decision. Another example is after the famous well known Argentine collapse in 2001-2002, 29 cases against Argentine where registered by foreign investors who complain of damages caused by the economic measures adopted by the Argentinean government. That’s to say in our global world now the distinction between private and public actors is blurring, the distinction between state and non-state actors is blurring, the real meaning of sovereignty is fading. What is a sovereign state when it can be condemned by a private actor? Now if we move to NGOs, that’s to say non governmental organizations. We have first to take into account that since 1960 we have a number of NGOs which is multiplied by 10. In the mean time, all the NGOs which are present and accredited in the United Nations is growing from 15 just after the War up to 3000 now in the famous ECOSOC where they are sitting, acting, playing a very very important role. That’s to say NGOs are now considered as official, as real international actors and they are accomplishing many new functions which are more and more crucial in the international present dynamics. I would take some example. First NGOs are more and more structured and rooted in the different countries around the world. If you take into account for instance Amnesty International, Amnesty International is really rooted in more than 160 countries around the world. This is probably a new kind of diversification of this new actor everywhere around the world. Second function: the NGOs are playing a function of advocacy, that’s to say they are more and more appealing to the public opinion, to the international public opinion that I mentioned, giving information, and now, thanks to the NOGs, public opinion is more and more informed about what is happening in the international arena. But it also able by this advocacy function to push some protest, to push some demand and to make pressure on government for transforming their own laws or for triggering new kinds of national public policies. Third function: the role playing by NGOs for the international development. The role of NGOs in development is clearly substituted to states which are less and less keen to participate in the international effort for world development. Fourth function: participating in the international debate. NGOs are at the first rank of this new international debate when the state diplomacy leads the nation states to be more discrete or sometimes absent in international Forums and in international debates. Fifth function: which is the fact finding function. Fact finding function is something very important, that’s to say because they are rooted, because they are structured, because they are involved to national societies, NGOs are well informed about the situation in every country around the world and even in authoritarian societies, in authoritarian nation states and are able to transmit these information. If you take into account for instance the Amnesty international Yearbook you will find there probably the most achieved the most completed Yearbook that youcan find in the world for giving the present situation of human rights around the world. All the dictators are really fearing of this kind of publication and know that through this kind of publication all the world are now aware of what they are currently doing in they own country. And the last function, which is more and more important to, is writing norms. Writing norms mean that international law is not only written by states, but are more and more written also by NGOs. If you take into account for instance the Rome Treaty, the Rome Convention which was creating the International Criminal Court, this text was partly written by some human right NGOs like Human Rights Watch or the International Federation of Human Rights or also Amnesty international. If you take into account the famous Ottawa Convention on the anti-personal mines you will see that this text has been mainly written by Handicap international which is as you know a specialized NGO in this field. That’s why now NGOs are playing a role which would be similar to the role played by bourgeoisie in the 18th century in Europe when appears what Jürgen Habermas called public space. There is now through this new activity of NGOs a kind of international "public space" which is organized by these private actors which are much more able to act freely than the states are. And that’s why what the state diplomacy is nor able to promote more and more NGOs are able to do through there own actions and through there own networks. That's why I would say that NGOs are now a kind of substitute to the states which are limited in their activities and their capacity. Of course the situation is much more complex and NGOs are limited in their actions by many constraints. NGOs are also structured by a kind of oligarchy sometime this oligarchy is very closed to the state and especially in the authoritarian regimes, governments are promoting NGOs which are controlled by the political actors and which are considered as GONGOs Government Oriented NGOs that’s to say manipulated, instrumentalized by the political actors and by the authoritarian regimes. Of course, there is also a problem of founding for these NGOs: who are those who are founding this NGOs? Are they free actors or are they themselves controlled by a power which would limit the power of these NGOs? But in any case now we know that this kind of actors have to be consider as one of the major players on the international arena.
