Theories of International Theories of International EthicsEthics

How can we judge leaders’ How can we judge leaders’ actions?actions?

I. Bases of ethicsI. Bases of ethicsA.A. Consequentialism: Right and wrong depend on Consequentialism: Right and wrong depend on

consequences of our actions. Examples:consequences of our actions. Examples:1.1. Constrained choice (practical necessity): We can be Constrained choice (practical necessity): We can be

excused when the consequences of any other choice excused when the consequences of any other choice would be to prevent us from making further choices. would be to prevent us from making further choices. (Analogy: a gun to your head).(Analogy: a gun to your head).

2.2. Utilitarianism: Greatest good for the greatest number.Utilitarianism: Greatest good for the greatest number.

B.B. Deontology: Certain acts are right or wrong Deontology: Certain acts are right or wrong regardless of consequencesregardless of consequences

1.1. Argument from divine revelation: Certain acts Argument from divine revelation: Certain acts prohibited by moral law even though no prohibited by moral law even though no punishment/consequencespunishment/consequences

2.2. Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Act only when you Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Act only when you want your behavior to become a universal lawwant your behavior to become a universal law

II. Goals: National vs. Global II. Goals: National vs. Global InterestsInterests

A.A. National Interest: Sometimes incoherent National Interest: Sometimes incoherent (Arrow’s Theorem) but probably (Arrow’s Theorem) but probably includes physical and economic securityincludes physical and economic security

1.1. Implication: Governments should value own Implication: Governments should value own citizens’ welfare above welfare of otherscitizens’ welfare above welfare of others

2.2. Problems: Problems: a.a. Identifying long-term national interest is hard or Identifying long-term national interest is hard or

even impossibleeven impossibleb.b. National interests may conflict National interests may conflict creates creates

opposing moral duties. Implies…opposing moral duties. Implies…c.c. Your country’sYour country’s national interest must be national interest must be

defended as a moral goal – but this rules out defended as a moral goal – but this rules out objective arguments from a hypothetical objective arguments from a hypothetical “original position”“original position”

B. The global interest: Everyone is B. The global interest: Everyone is equalequal

1.1. Implication: Equal moral weight to Implication: Equal moral weight to every lifeevery life

2.2. Problems: Problems: a.a. Requires governments to sacrifice their Requires governments to sacrifice their

own people (and people to sacrifice own people (and people to sacrifice themselves) for the good of others (self-themselves) for the good of others (self-detachment)detachment)

b.b. Arrow’s theorem undercuts the idea of Arrow’s theorem undercuts the idea of the “global interest” as a set of policies. the “global interest” as a set of policies. Instead, limit to focus of “all are equal”Instead, limit to focus of “all are equal”

III. Four Views of International III. Four Views of International EthicsEthics

Legitimate Goal of Policy

National National InterestInterest

Global Global InterestInterest

DecisionCriteria

ConsequencConsequenceses

RealismRealism

DeontologyDeontology

A. Realism: The Doctrine of A. Realism: The Doctrine of Practical NecessityPractical Necessity

1.1. Felix Oppenheim’s Argument:Felix Oppenheim’s Argument:a.a. Morality implies choiceMorality implies choice – to say that a state – to say that a state

shouldshould take Action A instead of Action B is to take Action A instead of Action B is to imply that it does indeed have a choice.imply that it does indeed have a choice.

b.b. Practical necessity makes morality irrelevantPractical necessity makes morality irrelevant – – Even if a state Even if a state has a choicehas a choice between Actions A between Actions A and B, if it and B, if it faces extinctionfaces extinction if it pursues Action B, if it pursues Action B, then it is practically necessary for it to pursue then it is practically necessary for it to pursue Action AAction A

c.c. National interest is necessary goalNational interest is necessary goal – States that – States that fail to pursue the national interest get eaten by fail to pursue the national interest get eaten by those that do those that do critical step: does this happen? critical step: does this happen?

d.d. It is It is not rational to oppose something that is not rational to oppose something that is practically necessarypractically necessary, since no genuine choice , since no genuine choice exists. exists.

2. Implications of Practical 2. Implications of Practical NecessityNecessity

a.a. Recommending national interest: RedundantRecommending national interest: Redundant

b.b. Opposing it: IrrationalOpposing it: Irrational

c.c. Goals compatible with national interest:Goals compatible with national interest:i.i. Only one effective means available: Support Only one effective means available: Support

redundant, opposition irrational.redundant, opposition irrational.

ii.ii. Several effective means available: Morality comes Several effective means available: Morality comes into play.into play.

• Some means more effective than others: irrational to Some means more effective than others: irrational to oppose the more effective means and redundant to oppose the more effective means and redundant to oppose the less effective means. (If something is oppose the less effective means. (If something is necessary, then it must be pursued using the best means necessary, then it must be pursued using the best means at hand.)at hand.)

• Several equally effective means available: Moral choice Several equally effective means available: Moral choice existsexists

3. Problems with Practical 3. Problems with Practical NecessityNecessity

a.a. If true, the theory is useless: If truly If true, the theory is useless: If truly necessary, all states will at all times necessary, all states will at all times follow national interest.follow national interest.

b.b. National Interest can be incoherent: National Interest can be incoherent: Arrow’s TheoremArrow’s Theorem

c.c. Is risk morally equivalent to certainty? Is risk morally equivalent to certainty? Very few choices involve certain death. Very few choices involve certain death. Is every risk to be avoided?Is every risk to be avoided?

d.d. Mixed evidence on necessity of national Mixed evidence on necessity of national interestinterest

e.e. Assumes existence is its own purpose: Assumes existence is its own purpose: Do societies exist to promote any Do societies exist to promote any particular value or way of life?particular value or way of life?

III. Four Views of International III. Four Views of International EthicsEthics

Legitimate Goal of Policy

National National InterestInterest

Global Global InterestInterest

DecisionCriteria

ConsequencConsequenceses

RealismRealism UtilitarianismUtilitarianism

DeontologyDeontology

B. UtilitarianismB. Utilitarianism

1.1. Fundamental principle: Greatest good Fundamental principle: Greatest good for the greatest number. Everyone’s for the greatest number. Everyone’s happiness counts equally.happiness counts equally.

2.2. Variant (John Rawls – who rejects Variant (John Rawls – who rejects utilitarianism for other reasons): utilitarianism for other reasons): Reason from a “original position” Reason from a “original position” behind a “veil of ignorance.” Assume behind a “veil of ignorance.” Assume decisions must be made without decisions must be made without knowing your own place in the world. knowing your own place in the world. Which world do you want to live in? Which world do you want to live in? Rawls: Would choose world that Rawls: Would choose world that protects the weak.protects the weak.

3. Problems with Utilitarianism3. Problems with Utilitarianisma.a. Vagueness – “The greatest good” is even Vagueness – “The greatest good” is even

more problematic than “national interest”more problematic than “national interest”b.b. Incorrect calculations can justify anything Incorrect calculations can justify anything

– Examples: economic benefits and social – Examples: economic benefits and social stability used to justify slavery, stability used to justify slavery, hegemonic stability theoryhegemonic stability theory

c.c. Distributive justice – Utilitarianism allows Distributive justice – Utilitarianism allows us to treat people unfairly for the benefit us to treat people unfairly for the benefit of others (kill half and give their stuff to of others (kill half and give their stuff to the rest, cutting pollution in the process). the rest, cutting pollution in the process). Rawls does avoid this problem…Rawls does avoid this problem…

d.d. Denies state sovereignty – States aren’t Denies state sovereignty – States aren’t happy or unhappy, only people are – so happy or unhappy, only people are – so sovereignty is meaningless. sovereignty is meaningless.

III. Four Views of International III. Four Views of International EthicsEthics

Legitimate Goal of Policy

National National InterestInterest

Global Global InterestInterest

DecisionCriteria

ConsequencConsequenceses

RealismRealism UtilitarianismUtilitarianism

DeontologyDeontology LibertarianisLibertarianismm

C. LibertarianismC. Libertarianism

1.1. Fundamental principles (largely from Locke)Fundamental principles (largely from Locke)a.a. Legitimacy: Government power is moral if and Legitimacy: Government power is moral if and

only if exercised by consent of people. Even only if exercised by consent of people. Even “effective” tyranny is wrong, since the state “effective” tyranny is wrong, since the state must serve the people, not the other way must serve the people, not the other way around.around.

b.b. Priority of Liberty: Strong property rights and Priority of Liberty: Strong property rights and strong political rights.strong political rights.

c.c. Government should never break the social Government should never break the social contract with the governed – legitimacy depends contract with the governed – legitimacy depends on respecting rights. This is a deontological on respecting rights. This is a deontological principle – consequences are irrelevant.principle – consequences are irrelevant.

2. Implications: Isolationism and the 2. Implications: Isolationism and the Minimal StateMinimal State

a.a. No taxation without consent – Consent can be No taxation without consent – Consent can be explicit (rare) or implied (government can explicit (rare) or implied (government can ensure continued survival of the people).ensure continued survival of the people).

b.b. Draft = Slavery. Forced labor violates Draft = Slavery. Forced labor violates fundamental freedom, so war must be limited to fundamental freedom, so war must be limited to actually repelling invasions.actually repelling invasions.

c.c. Foreign Aid = Theft. Steals money from Foreign Aid = Theft. Steals money from populace to give it to others. Also true of populace to give it to others. Also true of defense spending for the benefit of foreigners defense spending for the benefit of foreigners instead of homeland defense.instead of homeland defense.

d.d. National interest is the will of the people, not National interest is the will of the people, not the preservation of the state. The two may not the preservation of the state. The two may not be identical.be identical.

e.e. All lives are All lives are notnot equal under legitimate law – equal under legitimate law – each government exists to promote the welfare each government exists to promote the welfare of a limited group, not everyone.of a limited group, not everyone.

3. Problems with Libertarianism3. Problems with Libertarianism

a.a. Confuses consent to Confuses consent to governmentgovernment with consent to with consent to each each government actgovernment act: People may agree to be : People may agree to be bound by a process that sometimes harms thembound by a process that sometimes harms them

b.b. Logically precludes all social welfare within the Logically precludes all social welfare within the state as well as withoutstate as well as without

c.c. Popular Will vs. Fundamental Rights: Government Popular Will vs. Fundamental Rights: Government is established to protect its own people’s is established to protect its own people’s interests. This may require exploitation – but interests. This may require exploitation – but where does it acquire the right to oppress where does it acquire the right to oppress foreigners?foreigners?

d.d. Problems with national interest (disagreement) Problems with national interest (disagreement) can create need for secrecy can create need for secrecy but lying to but lying to citizens violates Locke’s idea of legitimate citizens violates Locke’s idea of legitimate consent of the people!consent of the people!

III. Four Views of International III. Four Views of International EthicsEthics

Legitimate Goal of Policy

National National InterestInterest

Global Global InterestInterest

DecisionCriteria

ConsequencConsequenceses

RealismRealism UtilitarianismUtilitarianism

DeontologyDeontology LibertarianisLibertarianismm

CosmopolitanisCosmopolitanismm

D. CosmopolitanismD. Cosmopolitanism

1.1. Fundamental principles: Fundamental principles: a.a. Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Behave in Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Behave in

ways that you think others should behave; ways that you think others should behave; don’t treat people as means to an enddon’t treat people as means to an end

b.b. Need for moral law: Conditional Need for moral law: Conditional statements aren’t really imperatives at statements aren’t really imperatives at all, so true moral guidelines must be law-all, so true moral guidelines must be law-like in formlike in form

c.c. Relevant community is global: Since we Relevant community is global: Since we interact with people in other countries, we interact with people in other countries, we have duties to treat them morallyhave duties to treat them morally

2. Implications of Cosmopolitanism2. Implications of Cosmopolitanism

a.a. Negotiate international laws where Negotiate international laws where lawlessness existslawlessness exists

b.b. Follow them once negotiatedFollow them once negotiated

c.c. Two wrongs don’t make a right – Two wrongs don’t make a right – noncompliance by others does noncompliance by others does notnot end end the moral force of lawthe moral force of law

d.d. Do the right thing even when no formal Do the right thing even when no formal law exists: Behave as if a moral law law exists: Behave as if a moral law governs one’s actionsgoverns one’s actions

3. Problems with Cosmopolitanism3. Problems with Cosmopolitanism

a.a. New state dilemma – Why obey rules to New state dilemma – Why obey rules to which the state never consented?which the state never consented?

b.b. Changing state dilemma – Stronger Changing state dilemma – Stronger states want to revoke consent to rules states want to revoke consent to rules that protect the weakthat protect the weak

c.c. Legal indeterminacy – Law frequently Legal indeterminacy – Law frequently contradicts itselfcontradicts itself

d.d. No justification for sovereignty – Why not No justification for sovereignty – Why not a single world government, if supra-a single world government, if supra-national rules are superior?national rules are superior?

e.e. Basis for law is left unresolved: Consent, Basis for law is left unresolved: Consent, “Natural Law,” Philosophy, Religion?“Natural Law,” Philosophy, Religion?

International LawInternational Law

What does it mean?What does it mean?

I. The Content of International LawI. The Content of International Law

A.A. International Norms – Unwritten International Norms – Unwritten principles that states usually claim to principles that states usually claim to followfollow

1.1. Jus ad Bellum – The law of Just WarJus ad Bellum – The law of Just Wara.a. Right authority – War must be authorized (by a Right authority – War must be authorized (by a

state?)state?)

b.b. Right intention – Aim of war is to re-establish just Right intention – Aim of war is to re-establish just peace, not narrow self-interestpeace, not narrow self-interest

c.c. Reasonable Hope – Victory possibleReasonable Hope – Victory possible

d.d. Proportionality – Means must be proportional to Proportionality – Means must be proportional to both ends and provocationboth ends and provocation

e.e. Last Resort – War is costly, so should be last resortLast Resort – War is costly, so should be last resort

2. Humanitarian Intervention2. Humanitarian Intervention

a.a. Original scope: Rescue own citizensOriginal scope: Rescue own citizens

b.b. Expanded concept: Rescue others Expanded concept: Rescue others from dangerfrom danger

c.c. Limits: Excludes regime change or Limits: Excludes regime change or territorial acquisition as means. territorial acquisition as means. Protect using minimum necessary Protect using minimum necessary force.force.

B. From Norms to LawB. From Norms to Law

1.1. Statutory international law: TreatiesStatutory international law: Treaties

2.2. Customary international lawCustomary international lawa.a. A certain legal practice is observedA certain legal practice is observed

b.b. It is generally regarded as binding It is generally regarded as binding (often disputed)(often disputed)

c.c. Examples: Diplomatic immunity, Law Examples: Diplomatic immunity, Law of the Sea, Prohibitions of slavery and of the Sea, Prohibitions of slavery and genocide (all regarded as binding prior genocide (all regarded as binding prior to treaties)to treaties)

II. The International Law of WarII. The International Law of War

A.A. War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand Pact, Pact, UN Charter except…UN Charter except…

1.1. Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Charter) – limited to response to armed Charter) – limited to response to armed aggression until Security Council can aggression until Security Council can deal with the situation. Requires deal with the situation. Requires notification of the Security Councilnotification of the Security Council

Kellogg-Briand Pact (1929)Kellogg-Briand Pact (1929) ARTICLE I: The High Contracting Parties solemly ARTICLE I: The High Contracting Parties solemly

declare in the names of their respective peoples declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.in their relations with one another.

ARTICLE II: The High Contracting Parties agree ARTICLE II: The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific them, shall never be sought except by pacific means.means.

II. The International Law of WarII. The International Law of War

A.A. War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand Pact, UN Charter Pact, UN Charter except…except…

1.1. Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Charter) – limited to response to armed Charter) – limited to response to armed aggression until Security Council can aggression until Security Council can deal with the situation. Requires deal with the situation. Requires notification of the Security Councilnotification of the Security Council

UN CharterUN Charter

Article II, paragraph 4: "All Members Article II, paragraph 4: "All Members shall refrain in their international shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity force against the territorial integrity oror political independence of any political independence of any state, state, oror in any other manner in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."United Nations."

II. The International Law of WarII. The International Law of War

A.A. War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand Pact, UN Charter except…Pact, UN Charter except…

1.1. Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Charter) –Charter) – limited to response to armed limited to response to armed aggression until Security Council can aggression until Security Council can deal with the situation. Requires deal with the situation. Requires notification of the Security Councilnotification of the Security Council

Article 51 ExceptionsArticle 51 Exceptions Nothing in the present Charter shall impair Nothing in the present Charter shall impair

the inherent right of individual or collective the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence self-defence if an armed attack occurs if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nationsagainst a Member of the United Nations, , until the Security Council has taken until the Security Council has taken measuresmeasures necessary to maintain necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence right of self-defence shall be immediately shall be immediately reported to the Security Councilreported to the Security Council and shall and shall not in any way affect the authority and not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace to maintain or restore international peace and security.and security.

II. The International Law of WarII. The International Law of War

A.A. War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand War is prohibited by Kellogg-Briand Pact, UN Charter except…Pact, UN Charter except…

1.1. Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Right of Self-Defense (Article 51 of UN Charter) – limited to response to armed Charter) – limited to response to armed aggression until Security Council can aggression until Security Council can deal with the situation. Requires deal with the situation. Requires notification of the Security Councilnotification of the Security Council

2. Anticipatory Self-Defense: The 2. Anticipatory Self-Defense: The CarolineCaroline Test (Customary) Test (Customary)

During the unsuccessful rebellion of 1837 in During the unsuccessful rebellion of 1837 in Upper Canada, against British rule, the British Upper Canada, against British rule, the British seized the US ship seized the US ship CarolineCaroline. In an exchange of . In an exchange of diplomatic notes between the governments of diplomatic notes between the governments of the United States and Great Britain, then U.S. the United States and Great Britain, then U.S. Secretary of State Daniel Webster outlined a Secretary of State Daniel Webster outlined a framework for self-defense which did not framework for self-defense which did not require a prior attack. Military response to a require a prior attack. Military response to a threat was judged permissible so long as the threat was judged permissible so long as the danger posed wasdanger posed was

““instant, instant, overwhelming, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and leaving no choice of means and no moment of deliberation.“no moment of deliberation.“

3. Military enforcement of 3. Military enforcement of international lawinternational law

Requires approval of UN Security Requires approval of UN Security CouncilCouncil Only Security Council has authority to Only Security Council has authority to

enforce its resolutions unless resolution enforce its resolutions unless resolution states otherwise – i.e. Pakistan cannot states otherwise – i.e. Pakistan cannot attack India over Kashmir, Arab states attack India over Kashmir, Arab states cannot invade Israel to enforce partitioncannot invade Israel to enforce partition

The UN Charter ProceduresThe UN Charter Procedures Article 41: The Security Council may decide what Article 41: The Security Council may decide what

measures not involving the use of armed force are to be measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.relations.

Article 42: Should the Security Council consider that Article 42: Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.of the United Nations.

3. Military enforcement of 3. Military enforcement of international lawinternational law

Requires approval of UN Security CouncilRequires approval of UN Security Council Only Security Council has authority to enforce its Only Security Council has authority to enforce its

resolutions unless resolution states otherwise – resolutions unless resolution states otherwise – i.e. Pakistan cannot attack India over Kashmir, i.e. Pakistan cannot attack India over Kashmir, Arab states cannot invade Israel to enforce Arab states cannot invade Israel to enforce partitionpartition

Precedent:Precedent: UN Resolution 573: The UN Security Council UN Resolution 573: The UN Security Council

condemned Israel on a 15-0 vote (US abstaining) condemned Israel on a 15-0 vote (US abstaining) in 1985, after Israel bombed PLO camps in in 1985, after Israel bombed PLO camps in Tripoli -- attacking a state which merely hosted Tripoli -- attacking a state which merely hosted terrorists, as opposed to actually committing terrorists, as opposed to actually committing acts of aggression itself acts of aggression itself

B. General principles of the Laws of B. General principles of the Laws of WarWar

1.1. Discrimination: Means used must Discrimination: Means used must discriminate between combatants and non-discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. combatants.

a.a. No rule of reciprocity – legally, two wrongs don’t No rule of reciprocity – legally, two wrongs don’t make a right.make a right.

b.b. Military necessity balancing test – If a weapon has Military necessity balancing test – If a weapon has adverse consequences (ie harms civilians directly adverse consequences (ie harms civilians directly or indirectly) then it should only be used where it or indirectly) then it should only be used where it will make a large difference in the war effort.will make a large difference in the war effort.

2.2. Proportionality: Means used must be Proportionality: Means used must be proportional to ends achieved. In general, a proportional to ends achieved. In general, a disproportionate response (i.e. full-scale disproportionate response (i.e. full-scale invasion in response to a diplomatic slight) is invasion in response to a diplomatic slight) is illegal.illegal.