Framing and Shaming

Abstract

Reframing the Agenda: The Impact of NGO and Middle Power Cooperation in International Security Policy. Edited by Kenneth Rutherford, Stefan Brem, Richard A. Matthew. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2003. 240 pp., $69.95 (ISBN: 0-275-97921-0). In this interconnected world, some observers worry about leaving the agenda of international relations solely to powerful states. The inability or unwillingness of major powers to make the “right” decisions has led nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), individuals, and smaller states to mobilize on various issues, from globalization to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict (see www.tikkun.org for a description of the recent, unofficial “Geneva Accord” for solving the latter conflict). Just how influential civil society and supporting states are in directing the agenda of international security is the question at the center of Reframing the Agenda . This edited volume argues that NGOs and “middle powers” significantly define the agenda of international security from small arms control and the landmine ban to redefining norms related to child soldiers and nuclear weapons. However, even though the editors have assembled an interesting set of articles reflecting how activists attempt to frame security debates and shame reluctant states into compromise, Reframing the Agenda falls short of a coherent empirical or theoretical argument that will convince readers of the potency of these political forces. The cases described in Reframing the Agenda represent a continuum of relative success in trying to frame and push the agenda of international security in the face of Great Power opposition. The collection …