TENETS OF INTERNATIONAL MORALITY: UN CHARTER
With the above background, we can now consider the tenets of international morality. We have already listed above while discussing idealism one set of maxims of international morality. Any list of international morals will include these general maxims. We, however, consider two more formulations. We adapt one list from the famous liberal thinker John Rawls. The other list is the UN Charter to which we made a passing reference earlier while discussing sovereign-equality of states in international legal order. We begin our discussion with a verbatim reproduction of UN charter because of its importance. Thereafter, we will paraphrase it in simple language.
The PREAMBLE to the Charter reads:
We the peoples of the United Nations are determined
¤ to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
¤ to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
¤ to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
¤ to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, and for these ends
¤ to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
¤ to unite our strength to maintain international peace andsecurity, and
¤ to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
¤ to employinternational machineryforthepromotionoftheeconomicand social advancement of all peoples,
We have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims.
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieveinternational co-operationin solvinginternational problemsof an economic,social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, andjustice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against theterritorial integrity or politicalindependence of any state, or in anyother manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall givethe UnitedNationsevery assistancein any action it takesin accordance withthe present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement underthepresent Charter; but thisprinciple shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.
The moral ideas of UN Charter are partly obscured by its rather grandiloquent and legalistic language.It alsoincludesmatters(likesocialdevelopment)whichseldomfeatureincorediscussionson international relations. Its content also includes matters of procedure and affirmations of commitment.
Leaving aside these issues, we abstract and express the Charter’s maxims of international morality in simple terms.
The preamble refers to the great human misery which the First World War and the Second World War caused and to the need to end wars. It emphasises the value of human rights, and also the rights of small (and weak) nations. It highlights that nations should abide by treaties and should observe international law.
The Charter mentions the following as requirements for achieving the aims set out in the preamble.
¤ An environment of peace, tolerance and good neighbourly relations
¤ A commitment to act together for collective or international security
¤ Adoption of principles and institutions for avoiding use of armed forces
The main purpose of UN is to maintain international peace and security. From this two instrumental objectives follow: to act collectively to prevent and remove threats to peace; and to suppress acts of aggression or other breaches of peace. An allied purpose is to settle peacefully, and in accordance with the principles of justice and international law, international disputes or situations which can disrupt peace.
As we noted, UN has created a new international political order of independent and sovereign states. It seeks to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples. It commits to take suitable measures to strengthen universal peace.
It emphasises the need for international co-operation for solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character. It gives high priority to respecting human rights. It strongly advocates granting of fundamental freedoms to all without distinction of race, sex, language, or religion.
UN prescribes that for achieving its aims member states should adopt the following principles of conduct.
¤ Sovereign equality of all Members
¤ Fulfilling in good faith theobligations assumed by Members in accordance with the Charter
¤ Settling by members of theirinternational disputes by peaceful means so as not to endanger international peace and security, and justice
¤ Avoidance by Members of the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations
¤ Assisting UN in its actions under the present Charter, and refraining from assisting any state against which the UN is taking preventive or enforcement action
¤ Ensuring by UN that non UN member states comply with these Principles to the extent necessary forthe maintenance of international peace andsecurity.
¤ Non intervention by UN in internal affairs of members nor requiring them to submit such matters for settlement under the Charter.
From the above paraphrase, it is clear that the UN Charter is mainly focused on world peace, amity among nations, peaceful resolution of disputes and international cooperation. Its themes are
derived from idealism. Its emphasis on international cooperation is also in line with neorealism. There is no placeforradicalrealismwithinthisframework.However,inactualpractice, nationswhile subscribing to the UN Charter, have followed diluted realist approaches in their actual diplomatic practices. Even after the UN came into being, there have been numerous wars, though of course not on significant global level. But for our purposes, it is sufficient to note that the principles embodied in UN Charter form the norms or maxims of currently accepted international morality. There have been attempts to widen and modify these principles. We will consider them later in the chapter.
John Rawls’s List of International Morals
John Rawls discusses the morality of international politics in his book The Law of Peoples. His list of international moral norms is based on his version of political liberalism. States have to comply with these norms (code of conduct) to qualify as members of good standing in the international political community. The code is minimalist or represents the lowest common denominator of international morality.
The code of conduct which John Rawls gives is outlined below. John Rawls uses the term ‘peoples’ while referring to states or nations. We have replaced it (in the following list) with ‘state’ which accords more with common usage.
1. States are free and independent, and their freedom and independence are to be respected by other states.
2. States should observe treaties and undertakings.
3. States are equal and are parties to the agreements that bind them.
4. States have to observe a duty of non-intervention.
5. States have the right of self-defence but no rights to instigatewar forreasonsotherthanself- defence.
6. States should honour human rights.
7. States should observe certain specified restrictions in the conduct of war.
8. States have a duty to assist other peoples living under unfavorable conditions that prevent their having a just or decent political and social regime.
We need to consider briefly the implications of the preceding list of international morals. John Rawls’s code for guiding the international action of states includes the rights of state to independence and non-intervention by others in its domestic affairs. The code also contains traditional norms which outlaw war as an instrument of policy and which prescribe that treaties and agreements should be observed. However, the human rights which Rawls identifies in this context do not include democratic rule or the freedoms which go with it. Of course, within a state wedded to liberalism, democracy and liberties are cardinal values. But Rawls is concerned here with proposing an international framework in which states with different internal political regimes (i.e. liberal and non liberal) can live in peace and harmony. In this framework, liberal states will not insistthat all states shouldfollowfullblownliberalism; andilliberal regimeswill adopt somewatered down principles of liberalism.
The illiberal states will have to accept two fundamental limitations on their policies. They will not try to expand their territorial boundaries, or use war as an instrument of their policy. They will adopt legal systems which prescribe some moral duties on their citizens. Rawls formulates in this
context the concept of illiberal but decent societies. Such illiberal societies usually ignore equality of individuals before law and liberal rights such as freedom of speech. Still, public officials in such societies sincerely work towards common welfare. If government actions harm the interests of any individuals, they are allowed to represent their point of view at some stage in the political process. It is of course possible that their views may be suppressed thereafter. Illiberal states who observe the fundamental limitations on their powers will be accorded legitimacy in the comity of nations.
States which do not meet the minimumrequirementsaretermed outlawregimes.Rawlsregards their existence as an unfortunate fact. One can easily think of many contemporary examples. But Rawlscites examples of societies whichrecognise no limits on the applicability of theirphilosophical or cultural views and impose them on all people. For this purpose, he goes into past history. The examples hegives(duringcertainperiodsin history) are of Spain,France,andtheHapsburg Empire. Rawls condemns such societies for refusing to tolerate other reasonable ways of organizing political life. We may note that Rawls is hesitant to give contemporary examples. Rawls is a very eminent writer,but his avoidanceof contemporary examplesappearsto be an instanceof academicdiplomacy.
Rawls’s framework implies that states should avoid ideological crusades and struggles against other nations with divergent regimes. During the years of cold war, the liberal western democracies and Soviet bloc were engaged in an ideological struggle which threatened worldpeace. Many nations in UN are autocracies of various hues which do not respect civil rights. But so long as they observe minimum levels of decency in governance, they have to be left alone according to the norm of non intervention.
Rawls also mentions that some countries face extremely unfavorable circumstances like famine and immiseration. Rawls urges that well-ordered societies should help these countries. Well-ordered societies can be liberal or illiberal states. They are able to effectively organize their collective political life and maintain minimally decent political institutions and morally acceptable relations with outside nations. The well-ordered societies should help other societies in reaching a similar state of governance. But Rawls does not advocate distributive justice between nations. The rich nations are under no moral obligation to transfer their wealth and resources to poor nations for promoting economic equality between nations. For Rawls, the international community is a well-ordered society of well-ordered societies, in which each state should respect and tolerate the different methods of governance of other states.