A report released by the Henry Jackson Society finds human rights NGOs are struggling with a crisis of confidence, in part due to poor messaging.

Human rights non-governmental organizations are at risk of losing their influence in Africa, which would create an opportunity for foreign adversaries such as China and Russia to fill the void, one think tank warns.

A new report released by the Henry Jackson Society, a foreign policy think tank based in London, finds that human rights NGOs are struggling with a crisis of confidence worldwide in part due to poor messaging or a lack of engagement in developing countries. Africa is one such case study of the challenges that the global-minded nonprofits face.

“NGOs, much like any other institution working in the public sphere, are not only responsible for defending human rights, but also for earning and maintaining the trust of those they serve. Without that trust, even the most well-intentioned interventions risk doing more harm than good,” Dr. Helena Ivanov, author of the report, said in a statement obtained by National Review.

In Africa, NGOs have been criticized for offering conflicting messages. When NGOs hold Western companies on the vast continent to high ethical standards that are often unattainable, they rarely criticize the Russian and Chinese entities that have poorer track records in human rights, enforcing the perception of a double standard. Contradictory messaging then leads to declining public trust.

The U.S. is no longer the leading global power in Africa. According to an April 2024 Gallup poll measuring the median approval rating of leadership in different countries, Washington fell from 59 percent in 2022 to 56 percent in 2023. China took its place, rising from 52 percent in 2022 to 58 percent in 2023. Russia similarly improved its image in Africa by a significant margin, standing at 42 percent in 2023 after sinking to 34 percent the previous year.

Western NGOs’ paternalistic approach, or their failure to let local communities take responsibility for their own lives, also contributes to pushing African nations toward China or Russia.

Former President Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers recounted a conversation he had with someone from a developing country about this very issue, illustrating how China delivers results more efficiently than the U.S.

“Look, I like your values better than I like China’s. But the truth is, when we’re engaged with the Chinese, we get an airport. And when we’re engaged with you guys [Americans], we get a lecture.”

The relationship between China and Africa has been growing for the past 20 years, resulting in improved trade relations. Trade between the two neared $300 billion in 2022, nearly three times more than the trade volume between the U.S. and Africa, per a recent report from NGO Monitor.

“Obviously, this is not to suggest that the U.S. should abandon its commitment to upholding human rights, but rather that it must adopt a more effective strategy to achieve this goal,” the Henry Jackson Society’s report states. “Failing to do so risks ceding influence over the continent to hostile actors.”

In February, President Donald Trump’s administration and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency made significant cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development and its overseas aid programs. Since then, foreign powers have looked to capitalize on the U.S.’s absence in Africa.

China launched ad campaigns in certain African regions to sell itself as a permanent and reliable partner, the Washington Post reported. In the capital of Malawi, billboards proclaiming “China Aid — for shared future” were put up. And in Kenya, a top-selling daily newspaper featured a front-page interview with the new Chinese ambassador.

“We mean what we say, and we honor our commitments,” Ambassador Guo Haiyan said, seemingly taking a shot at the U.S.

These examples were cited by Jim Gilmore, former U.S. ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe between 2019 and 2021, who argues Beijing will overtake the U.S. in key international markets if the latter steps back from global competition.

“Our adversaries understand the influence of economic aid and the power of the message,” Gilmore wrote in a Newsmax op-ed last month.

Dr. Ivanov’s report also explores how NGOs have become increasingly biased against Israel over the years, a trend that has been further exacerbated by the Jewish state’s war with Hamas. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, for instance, condemned Israel for launching airstrikes on Gaza in 2012, which were preceded by rocket attacks from Palestinian terrorist groups. The two human rights organizations failed to denounce the terrorists prior to the Israeli operation.

In December, Amnesty International published a politicized report accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The report was rejected by Amnesty Israel, which said its authors reached a “predetermined conclusion.”

Critics argue the problem of bias lies in NGOs’ dependency on outside funding, leading them to answer to donors rather than represent underserved communities.

Ivanov proposes several policy solutions to restore public trust in human rights NGOs, including increased transparency of their funding and improved messaging strategies that don’t leave room for accusations of political bias or partiality.

“By working alongside local institutions and engaging with the complexity of regional dynamics, human rights NGOs can deliver outcomes that are not only morally right but strategically effective,” Ivanov said. “Inclusivity, cultural understanding, and credibility are no longer optional—they are essential.”