International Activities of German Political Foundations and American Philanthropic Foundations: A Comparative Analysis
https://doi.org/10.24833/RJWPLN-2023-1-32-59
Abstract
This paper is aimed at investigating the influence of political foundations on the domestic and foreign policies of state and analyzing the place and role of foundations in international relations. The relevance of this topic lies in the expanded use of semi-official and guerilla diplomacy instruments in the foreign policy toolkits of governments, which are widely financed by political foundations. The paper deals with the development of the contemporary political foundations of the United States and Germany, including a comparative analysis of performance features. We introduce a classification of the functions of foundations in the context of international relations. The conclusion is drawn that German political foundations are designed much like a ministry of foreign affairs with the elements of a political party, whereas the typical American philanthropic foundation is run much like a business corporation. German representatives tend to be present on the spot, continuously make contacts and keep track of local developments. Meanwhile, American foundations apply a project-based approach, and aim to create NGOs or partnerships geared towards concrete actions or tasks making claims for international legitimacy. Foundations in Germany and the United States are different in terms of funding models, degree of governmental involvement, scale and methods. Both serve as proxies and commentators of the ideology of the ruling elites, which contributes to the foreign policy aims of their countries of origin. By distancing themselves from official diplomacy and formal legal autonomy (although the programmes of the largest foundations are often consistent with the interests of their home country), foundations have plenty of room for manoeuvre and are thus able to penetrate the society of the target country and influence sensitive areas, such as education, domestic policies, the expert community, the media, etc. A great deal of ties and points of influence on social and power structures of a foreign country are thus shaped “from the inside,” and could be exploited to further the interests of the state of origin of a given foundations. The experience of Western foundations is actively employed by other, including non-Western, states and organizations. A range of tools could be applied to strengthen bilateral and multilateral cooperation within the framework of the Eurasian integration project of Russia according to the principles of mutuality and inclusivity.
About the Author
V. V. Sutyrin
MGIMO University; State Academic University for the Humanities
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Adick C., Giesemann M. 2015. Relevance of German Political Foundations for Comparative Educational Research. Journal of Education and Research. 5(1). P. 7–24. DOI: 10.3126/jer.v5i1.13055
2. Aksartova S. 2009. Promoting Civil Society or Diffusing NGOs. In S. Heydemann, D. Hemmack, eds. Globalization, Philanthropy, and Civil Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. P. 160–191.
3. Anheier H. 2018. Philanthropic Foundations in Cross-National Perspective: A Comparative Approach. American Behavioral Scientist. 62(12). P. 1591–1602. DOI: 10.1177/0002764218773453
4. Anheier H., Toepler S., eds. 2020. The Routledge Companion to Nonprofit Management. London: Routledge. 560 p. DOI: 10.4324/9781315181011
5. Anheier H., Leat D. 2018. Performance Measurement in Philanthropic Foundations: The Ambiguity of Success and Failure. New York: Routledge. 204 p. DOI: 10.4324/9781315161631
6. Anheier, H., Leat D. 2013. Philanthropic Foundations: What Rationales? Social Research. 80(2). P. 449–472.
7. Baykov A., Crowley-Vigneau A. 2018. Pochemu gosudarstva zaimstvuyut ekologicheskie normy: opyt Rossii [Transnational Networks and Russia’s Environmental Policies]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. 16(4). P. 137–153. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17994/IT.2018.16.4.55.8
8. Bek U. 2007. Vlast’ i ee opponenty v epokhu globalizma. Novaya vsemirnopoliticheskaya ekonomiya [Power and its Opponents in the Age of Globalization]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya. 464 p. (In Russian).
9. Bennett C. 1991. What is policy convergence and what causes it? British Journal of Political Science. 21(2). P. 215–233.
10. Berman E. 1983. The Influence of the Carnegie, Ford, and Rockefeller Foundations on American Foreign Policy: The Ideology of Philanthropy. New York: Suny Press. 238 p.
11. Boesso G., Cerbioni F., Kumar K. 2014. What Drives Good Philanthropy? The Relationship Between Governance and Strategy in Foundations. In G. Luca, A. Hinna, F. Monteduro, eds. Mechanisms, Roles and Consequences of Governance: Emerging Issues. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. P. 159–180.
12. Bol'shova, N. N. 2014. Gosudarstvennaya politika v oblasti vysshego obrazovaniya i nauki kak instrument myagkoy sily (Opyt Germanii) [Public Policy in the Sphere of Higher Education as a tool for soft power (the Experience of Germany)]. Vestnik MGIMO. 2(35). P. 71–80. (In Russian). DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2014-2-35-71-80
13. Brown R. 2020. Alternatives to soft power: Influence in French and German external cultural action. In N. Chitty, L. Ji, G. Rawnsley, C. Hayden, eds. The Routledge Handbook of Soft Power. London: Routledge. P. 37–47. DOI: 10.4324/9781315671185
14. Burns R. 2019. New Frontiers of Philanthro-capitalism: Digital Technologies and Humanitarianism. Antipode. 51(4). P. 1101–1122. DOI: 10.1111/anti.12534
15. Çevik S. 2019. Reassessing Turkey’s Soft Power: The Rules of Attraction. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political. 44(1). P. 50–71. DOI: 10.1177/0304375419853751
16. Correa-Cabrera G., Núñez L., Hayden L. 2021. Assessing the International Influence of Private Philanthropy: The Case of Open Society Foundations. Global Studies Quarterly, 1(4). P. 1–14. DOI: 10.1093/isagsq/ksab039
17. Cumings B. 2014. Biting the Hand That Feeds You: Why the “Intelligence Function” of American Foundation Support for Area Studies Remains Hidden in Plain Sight. Global Society. 28(1). P. 70–89. DOI: 10.1080/13600826.2013.848191
18. Cunningham H. 2016. The multi-layered history of Western philanthropy. In T. Jung, S. Phillips, J. Harrow, eds. The Routledge Companion to Philanthropy. London: Routledge. P. 42–55.
19. Dakowska D. 2005. German Political Foundations: Transnational party go-betweens in the process of EU enlargement. In W. Kaiser, P. Starie, eds. Transnational European Union. London: Routledge. P. 150–169. DOI: 10.4324/9780203016534
20. Gonzalez M. 2017. State Department and Congress Should Probe USAID, Soros Promotion of Radical Agenda Overseas. The Heritage Foundation Issue Brief. 4671.
21. Grincheva N., Kelley R. 2019. Introduction: Non-state Diplomacy from Non-Western Perspectives. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy. 14(3). P. 199–208. DOI: 10.1163/1871191X-14401072
22. Halberstam D. 1973. The Best and the Brightest. New-York: Fawcett-Crest. 720 p.
23. Istomin I., Baykov A. 2020. Alyansy na sluzhbe gegemonii: dekonstruktsiya instrumentariya voennopoliticheskogo dominirovaniya [Alliances at the Service of Hegemony: Deconstruction of the Military Domination Toolbox]. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. No. 6. P. 8–25. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.06.02
24. Jung T., Harrow J. 2015. New development: philanthropy in networked governance–treading with care. Public Money & Management. 35(1). P. 47–52. DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2015.986880
25. Jung T., Harrow J. 2019. Providing Foundations: Philanthropy, Global Policy, and Administration. In D. Stone, K. Moloney, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Global Policy and Transnational Administration. Oxford: Oxford University Press. P. 619–637. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198758648.013.45
26. Katzenstein P. 1978. Policy and Politics in West Germany. The Growth of a Semi-Sovereign State. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 434 p.
27. Krige J. 2006. American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe. Cambridge: MIT Press. 384 p.
28. Lambin R., Surender R. 2021. The rise of big philanthropy in global social policy: Implications for policy transfer and analysis. Journal of Social Policy. 52(3). P. 1–18. DOI: 10.1017/S0047279421000775
29. Lan'shina T. A. 2014. Myagkaya sila Germanii: kul'tura, obrazovanie, nauka [German Soft Power: Culture, Education, Science]. Vestnik mezhdunarodnyh organizatsiy. 9(2). P. 28–57. (In Russian).
30. Lipman P. 2015. Capitalizing on crisis: venture philanthropy’s colonial project to remake urban education. Critical Studies in Education. 56(2). P. 241–258. DOI: 10.1080/17508487.2015.959031
31. Loaeza S. 2007. The political dimension of Germany’s unintentional power: The KAS and Mexican democratization. In A.-M. Le Gloannec, ed. Non-state actors in international relations: The case of Germany. Manchester: Manchester University Press. P. 46–69.
32. Lofgren M. 2016. The Deep State. The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government. New York: Viking. 336 p.
33. Luqiu L., McCarthy J. 2019. Confucius Institutes: The Successful Stealth “Soft Power” Penetration of American Universities. The Journal of Higher Education. 90(4). P. 620–643. DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2018.1541433
34. Martínez-Zarzoso I., Nowak-Lehmann F., Klasen S., Johannsen F. 2016. Does German Development Aid Boost German Exports and German Employment? A Sectoral Level Analysis. Journal of Economics and Statistics. 236(1). P. 71–94. DOI: 10.1515/jbnst-2015-1003
35. Marzo P. 2019. Supporting political debate while building patterns of trust: The role of the German political foundations in Tunisia (1989–2017). Middle Eastern Studies. 55(4). P. 621–637. DOI: 10.1080/00263206.2018.1534732
36. Mezhdunarodnyy tribunal po byvshey Yugoslavii: Deyatel'nost', rezul'taty, effektivnost'. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii (Moskva, 22–23 aprelya 2009 g.) [The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: activities, results, effectiveness]. 2012. Moscow: Indrik. 544 p. (In Russian).
37. Mikhaylenko E. B. 2022. Uroki mezhdunarodnoy kampanii po zapreshcheniyu yadernogo oruzhiya [From Advocacy to Diplomacy. The case of the international campaign to abolish nuclear weapons]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. 20(1). P. 55–79. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17994/IT.2022.20.1.68.5
38. Mohr A. 2010. The German Political Foundations as Actors in Democracy Assistance. Boca Raton, Florida: Universal-Publishers. 108 p.
39. Moran M. 2014. Private Foundations and Development Partnerships: American Philanthropy and Global Development Agendas. London: Routledge. 200 p.
40. Nathan A. J., Link P., eds. 2002. The Tiananmen Papers. New York: Public Affairs. 580 p. Nielsen W. 1972. The Big Foundations. New York: Columbia University Press. 475 p.
41. Ogneva A. V. 2011. Politicheskie fondy FRG i ikh vklad v razvitie mezhdunarodnogo dialoga [Political Foundations of Germany and their Contribution into the Development of International Dialogue]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. No. 4. P. 113–118. (In Russian).
42. Parmar I. 2002. American foundations and the development of international knowledge networks. Global Networks. 2(1). P. 13–30. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0374.00024
43. Parmar I. 2014. American Power and Philanthropic Warfare: From the War to End All Wars to the Democratic Peace. Global Society. 28(1). P. 54–69. DOI: 10.1080/13600826.2013.848187
44. Parmar I., Rietzler K. 2014. American Philanthropy and the Hard, Smart and Soft Power of the United States. Global Society. 28(1). P. 3–7. DOI: 10.1080/13600826.2013.850061
45. Parmar I. 2012. Foundations of the American Century: The Ford, Carnegie, and Rockefeller Foundations in the Rise of American Power. New York: Columbia University Pres. 368 p. Pierobon C. 2017. German Political Foundations in Central Asia: Promoting Democracy through Civil Society. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research. 4. P. 80–86. DOI: 10.26417/ejser.v9i1
46. Pisarev I. I. 2022. Politika grupp interesov v Evropeyskom Soyuze v sfere vysshego obrazovaniya [Interest group politics in the higher education sphere of the European Union]. diss. kand. polit. nauk: 23.00.04: defended 29.03.2022. Moscow: MGIMO. 235 p. (In Russian).
47. Pogorelskaya S. V. 2009. Nepravitel’stvennye organizatsii i politicheskie fondy vo vneshney politike
48. Federativnoy Respubliki Germanii [Non-Governmental Organizations and Political Foundations in German Foreign Policy]. Moscow: Nauka. 215 p. (In Russian).
49. Pogorelskaya S. V. 2014. Deyatel’nost’ germanskikh politicheskikh fondov v sredizemnomorskikh stranakh ES v period krizisa evrozony (na primere Gretsii) [Activities of German Political Foundations in the Mediterranean EU Member-States during the Eurosone Crisis (the Case of Greece)]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 2. P. 56–75. (In Russian).
50. Prewitt K., Mattei D., Heydemann S., Toepler S., eds. 2006. Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations: United States and European Perspectives. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 312 p.
51. Roelofs J. 2003. Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism. New York: State University of New York Press. 284 p.
52. Roelofs J. 2015. How Foundations Exercise Power. American Journal of Economics and Sociology. 74(4). P. 654–675. DOI: 10.1111/ajes.12112
53. Shakleina T. A. 2015. Liderstvo i sovremennyy mirovoy poryadok [Leadership and Current World Order]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. 13(4). P. 6–19. (In Russian).
54. Shi Y. 2020. Charitable Foundations and American Diplomacy. IEESASM. London: Francis Academic Press. P. 449–452.
55. Stone D. 2010. Private philanthropy or policy transfer? The transnational norms of the Open Society Institute. Policy & Politics. 38(2). P. 269–287. DOI: 10.1332/030557309X458416
56. Stone D. 2013. Knowledge Actors and Transnational Governance: The Private-Public Policy Nexus in the Global Agora. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 240 p.
57. Strachwitz R. 2015. The Role of Foundations in Public Debates in Germany. American Journal of Economics and Sociology. 74(4). P. 826–852. DOI: 10.1111/ajes.12111
58. Sussman G., Krader S. 2008. Template Revolutions: Marketing U.S. Regime Change in Eastern Europe. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture. 5. P. 91–112.
59. Sutyrin V. V. 2020. Gumanitarnoe vliyanie vo vneshney politike: resursy, kanaly, infrastruktury [Humanitarian Influence in Foreign Policy: resources, channels, and infrastructures]. Obshhestvennye nauki i sovremennost'. No. 5. P. 5–20. (In Russian). DOI: 10.31857/S086904990012324-8
60. Toganova N. V. 2018 Ekonomika i bezopasnost' kak motivy pomoshchi razvitiyu: primer Germanii [Economic and security motives in international development assistance: The case of Germany]. Mezhdunarodnye processy. 16(3). P. 39–55. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17994/IT.2018.16.3.54.2.
61. Weaver W. 1967. U.S. Philanthropic Foundations – Their History, Structure, Management and Record. New York: Harper & Row. 492 p.
62. Whitaker B. 1974. The Foundations. An Anatomy of Philanthropy and Society. London: Eyre Methuen. 287 p.
63. Youde J. 2019. The role of philanthropy in international relations. Review of International Studies. 45(1). P. 39–56. DOI:10.1017/S0260210518000220
Review
For citations:
Sutyrin V.V. International Activities of German Political Foundations and American Philanthropic Foundations: A Comparative Analysis. Russian Journal of World Politics and Law of Nations. 2023;2(1):32-59. https://doi.org/10.24833/RJWPLN-2023-1-32-59
Views:
1490
Email this article 