It is possible to speak about an ethical position in the international relation field. The theory of the international dealingss born as a scientific discipline with the WWI, when provinces asked about why provinces go to war? This inquiry has an ethical significance, because provinces are in struggle and war erupts taking mass devastation and stoping with about all the population. From here, one of the biggest preoccupation on international personal businesss appears, Security. One of the justifications of why to analyze international dealingss and which are the international issues that connect all the planetary population.
Each one of the theories about international dealingss has an ethical position in their foreign policy devising and the involvement of the province. Into the foreign policies the provinces are confronted by an ethical and moral issues that they must analyzed to do determinations on planetary subjects that affect their national involvement as the planetary involvement besides. These subjects are the merely war theory and peace in which we find justness, international jurisprudence, sovereignty of province, international cooperation, the human-centered intercession, human rights that involves ethical arguments in the field. Here are some analysis about the ethical analysis that this issues have and how is connected this field with a societal scientific discipline as moralss.
The realist theory of the international dealingss is based in 4 basic statements as ( Donnelly, 2008 ) says: Anarchy, Egoism, Groupism and Power Politics. Base on that, the anarchical of the international dealingss field has no portion in the inclusion of moral values into the International Relations. A batch of Realist theorist say that the international dealingss is a practical exercising and non a moral because no ethical criterions are applicable to dealingss between provinces, as each province being in a race of battle for power to be more powerful and to govern the wreakers in the international domain as non be an international histrion that punishment the battle for power and the unethical actions between provinces in the international community. But this type of avowals disappear when it is analyzed in the different histrions that step ining in the international personal businesss. The provinces are conform, by people, and each individual has their ain moral rules with which they act in they daily life and they make ethical determinations every individual twenty-four hours no affair if it is a good or a bad for the moral issues. In a superior degree is the province, which ever is looking for the good of the state and the people in the state. This involvement, in theory is the involvement of the state, no affair if they are in the custodies of their authorities, non in to the peoples hands. This authoritiess are in charge of doing determinations for the good and well-being of the state and the security of the state, in which all the times, is confronted by their ain moral values, and their ain involvement, in an ethical quandary, between what they think is the best for their subjects and what is the best for them. In some occasions, the involvement of a individual or the involvement of the province collapsible shelter to the moral rules of the international society in general. Is so when the international jurisprudence enters to the game. In their determinations of foreign policy, the provinces must reason which are the national histrions and the international histrions that they must battle to hold and keep the province security to guaranty, as the Colombian instance, which portion of their ain foreign policy is specially to contend against terrorist act, narcotrafic, guellila as a job that concerns all the provinces, the international community, because these jobs can impact all the states in the universe. ( U.S. 9-11 instance ) . The provinces, at the clip of doing determinations that affect the people, no affair if they are national or international people, they must make an ethical logical thinking in which they take into consideration, as ( Reus-Smit, 2008 ) say, to move in the ethical manner and in the best manner that benefits the peculiar involvement of the provinces here are 6 factors: Idiography, Diagnosis, Consequences, Principle, Context, Capacity. Each state must analyse who are to be engaged, if merely the state, or is a group of states which will fall in the action, besides make a diagnosing of what is the moral and moralss to which they are faced, which is the map of the site, where entered into, which is what they ‘re making, because they have to step in, so it must see the effects of intercession for the state where they have to talk to their ain state, discourse how it should be that intercession, in which instance it has to step in and that others do non, the societal, political and ethical intercession site and finally its ability to step in in order to find whether or non suited intervene or non, and what benefits could be drawn from this intercession. In the Just War Theory states has a set of international moral rules in which to cognize if onslaught or non assail a province, each province must analyse the conditions?
This analysis allows us to measure the conditions which international intercession is necessary or non a province in affairs that do non match to their internal policies such as the U.S. struggle in Iran, where U.S. intercession is non justified as an ethical public presentation in the international sphere, because the internal struggle in these states were non a direct onslaught against the U.S. , therefore go againsting the regulations set by UN. A war at the international degree is merely justified when it is born in response to a anterior assault between two states, merely there you could state that the war is merely and ethically acceptable. Ethically acceptable because it enforces the maps of the province, which has sworn to protect and guarantee the safety of its members above all things, and being violated security, national involvement is to return to recover their stableness non lose their sense of freedom as a province, which is the most cherished plus of a state, their freedom.
In war, moral rules, persons come ining the international sphere, during combat, provinces may non aim noncombatants or civil belongings, they may utilize merely force that is proportionate to the injury suffered and required by military necessity ( 2009 ) . The same writer besides planted some current ethical contentions in merely war arguments as: the pertinence of merely war theory to the usage of force against a non-state histrion ( ColovenezolanoA?s struggle ) , The permissibility or impermissibility of aiming civilian ( but “ double usage ” ) substructure – e.g. , electrical and transit grids, the permissibility or impermissibility of the usage of arms of mass devastation either in struggle or as a deterrent- e.g. , the Cold War menace of “ reciprocally assured devastation ” , Obligations of provinces toward terrorists and other battlers who are non members of regular ground forcess and who do non subscribe to the Torahs of war, Obligations of provinces in the wake of struggle ( jus station bellum ) , including proviso for “ transitional justness ” .
An other international issue that includes ethical position is the human rights. This can be the must of import moral issue into the international dealingss theory. The human rights are an involvement of all provinces, no affair race, sex, nationalityaˆ¦ etc. The human existences have moral scruples no affair which civilization or faith they have, that gave them the capacity of known what is good or chiropteran to make to others. This is a planetary issue that must be portion of every foreign policy in all the international society. When a state is go againsting others right, the provinces are in an ethical logical thinking in which they must analyse if the international community must move and step ining or if they can non step in in that. ThatA?s the portion of the UN, but in the absence of an supranational organisation that can penalize this Acts of the Apostless, the international dealingss field deficiency of an ethical establishment that can reason and hold a existent jurisprudence that can truly impact the provinces, to makes them non go against the rights of their people. But here enters an issue that all the realist affirms: the purposes of the provinces non all the clip are good. Some provinces are merely looking for power, or have other involvement that are non see good or right in values rules, they have another involvement different of protect the human rights of the planetary society. For illustration the instance already references U.S and Iraq. As is explained in ( 2009 ) one manner to believe through international moral duties sing human rights is to seek to place which international histrions are best positioned to transport out assorted dimensions of those duties.
States has no equal economic systems so this makes a difference between the people. Some of them are hapless, some of them are rich, but this is a job that besides is presented between provinces at the international domain. Some states are rich and some are hapless. This difference is portion of the statements of human-centered intercession. The rich states contribute to the poorest seeking to assist them in the developing procedure with the human-centered intercession. But this is besides an ethical argument in the international personal businesss. When a state step ining with the human-centered intercession in an other state ‘ , which care the involvement that the state have with the intercession? are the involvement of the states a moral involvement less than political, economic or power involvement? . That ‘s the thought behind the “ searching for the planetary being ” . The European Union has been a part that had suffered a batch of war and race murders, devastation, decease, force and now yearss are the must subscribers to the 3rd universe states in footings of human-centered intercession. But this good action must be analyzed in a geopolitical footings. The human-centered intercession of the European Union is non in all the 3rd universe states, merely in a specifically 1s, states that represent to them some peculiar involvement. In some instances Political involvement as being ex- settlements, other strategic economic spouses because of the resources that the state possess, and in some, merely the control of some countries, as the instance of the land folks.
As we an see, there ‘s a batch of ethical arguments in the international dealingss Fieldss, but there ‘s no an specific histrion, or jurisprudence that regulates the ethical actions in the international domain. This sort of histrion must be coercitive and must hold the right to punishment the histrions when they violate the international ethic jurisprudence. But in the international dealingss there ‘s an ethical position in the foreign policy, the international jurisprudence that is question the involvement of the provinces, and that is afirm the lawless feature of the international society.
Bibliografia ( 2009 )
2009. Asociation for Diplomatic surveies and preparation. U.S Diplomacy. [ En linea ] 2009. [ Citado EL: 29 de Abril de 2010. ] hypertext transfer protocol: //www.usdiplomacy.org/diplomacytoday/values/values.php.
Cochran, Molly. 1999. Normative Theory in International Relations: A Matter-of-fact Approach. CambridgeA : Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Devetak, Richard. 2005. Critical Theory. [ aut. libro ] Andrew Linklater, Y otros. Theories of International Relations Third Edition. New YorkA : Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Donnelly, Jack. 2008. The Ethics of Realism. The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. New YorkA : Oxford University Press, 2008, pags. 150-160.
Frost, Mervin. 2001. Ethical motives in International Relations: A constructive Theory. New YorkA : Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
lOPEZ, jorge ALBERTO. 2002. The Style of the New War: Making the Rules as We Go Along. Ethics & A ; International Affairs. Spring, 2002, Vol. 16.1.
Nardin, Terry. 2008. International Ethics. [ aut. libro ] Oxford University Press. The oxford Handbook of International Relations. New YorkA : Oxford University Press, 2008.
NARDIN, TERRY. 2005. JUSTICE AND COERCION. International Society and its Critics. New YorkA : Oxford University Press, 2005.
Reus-Smit, Christian. 2008. Cambridge Studies in International Relations. s.l.A : Cambridge University Press, 2008, pags. 65-70.
Ricken, Mathias. 2000. superescalar. Superescalar. [ En linea ] 30 de noviembre de 2000. [ Citado EL: 27 de Abril de 2010. ] hypertext transfer protocol: //www.superscalar.org/writing/Ethics % 20in % 20International % 20Politics.pdf.