Paper Name: Introduction to International Relations and Diplomacy: Concepts and Theories

and their Practical Application

Paper Number: Paper I

QUESTION 1: Research Assignment (National Interest vs Global Responsibility: What

should Nations choose?)

Introduction:
National Interest is a prominent concept of International Relations. It is referred to as the
protection of physical, political, and cultural identity from intrusion by another nation-state.
Each state bases its foreign policy on its own unique set of national interests and tries to
attain or acquire the goals of those nation-states. Whereas in the words of Pedro Alejandro
Basualdo, every individual has a global responsibility too. Taking individual responsibility
for the world means having a strong moral and ethical duty to act in a good way. This duty
begins with realizing that there are people all over the world who are suffering and who have
a right to assistance and support.
This article aims to analyze whether nations should choose national interests or global
responsibility while dealing with either international or domestic circumstances. We will try
to discuss this important question with certain examples for better clarification.

Understanding National Interests:

The State is a sovereign political entity that has the only, independent, and unrestricted right
to exercise its authority both at home and abroad. Each State is made up of its national
interests, which were developed by the convergence and development of various factors: the
territory as an integrity to be protected, the population, the succession of governments, and
their policies. In accordance with Nuechterlein, four components of national interest are non-
exclusive. Defense, the economy, international order, and philosophy are among them.
Territorial integrity, cultural diversity, and political institutions are the three main items that
Morgenthau lists as being protected by the state as part of the national interest.
National interest demonstrates the state’s goals; it can be applied operationally to the actual
programs and policies implemented; and it can be used in argumentative public debates to
defend, justify, or criticize a position. Above all, each nation’s interests should guide each
statesman. The statesmen keep their national interests hanging around the neg whenever a
treaty or conference occurs. A statesman will only consent to concessions or special treatment
if he is sure that doing so will benefit his state either directly or indirectly. For instance, the
United States designation of China as a Most Preferred Country demonstrates its desire to
capture the market. Hence, by treating China favorably, trade opportunities, as well as
friendship, as well as friendship were achieved.
However, International politics is significantly impacted by globalization today. Several
recent modifications have had an impact on how global systems communicate. Due to the
involvement of other actors in the sector, such as civil societies, multinational enterprises,
and international organizations, the state is no longer seen as the only actor. States are
compelled by this circumstance to interact and communicate more with others. A state cannot
just concentrate on constructing its defense. With globalization, all participants are required
to work towards the idea of a pluralist society to attain common goals. States that make up
this civilization, all share a shared desire to improve the state of politics on a global scale.
These are some Global Ethics or Responsibility that we will elaborate on under the next
heading.

What is Global Responsibility?

Each state or global institution bears responsibility for its actions because the foreign policy
of any nation has an equal impact at the global level. The term ‘Global Responsibility’ refers
to the fact that all the countries in the world have some sort of common duty towards each
other to be fulfilled. There are many common grounds or objectives that must be met
globally. Issues like terrorism and climate change have no boundaries and are transnational
issues therefore, they require collective efforts of all the nations of the world.
Sense of collective efforts is represented by the very first article of the United Nations
Charter which states-
“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 achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of 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 center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these
common ends.
One can notice a sense of collective responsibility or duty mentioned throughout the article
such as ‘collective measures for prevention and removal of threats’, ‘universal peace’,
‘international cooperation’, and ‘common ends’. This collective responsibility is what is
known as a global responsibility.
Now, we will try to understand a concept called Responsibility to Protect which was
developed because of a similar dilemma of choosing between international obligations or
national interests. This will help us strengthen our argument and will give a better
clarification. To balance the national interests of UN Member States (state security, human
security, budgetary balance, and independence), we shall analyze the notion of R2P from the
perspective of international principles (solidarity, human rights, peace, and security). This
will highlight the reality that there is still a need for a comprehensive and coordinated global
response to prevent and halt mass atrocities. The international community has trouble coping
with the effects of atrocities since each state has different interests.

‘Responsibility to Protect’ principle (R2P)

The R2P is an expression of the political commitment to put a stop to the worst kinds of
violence and persecution. It aims to close the gap between Member States’ current legal
commitments to uphold international humanitarian law and human rights standards and the
realities faced by people in danger of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes
against humanity.
Background:
The international community held a serious discussion on how to respond to flagrant and
persistent violations of human rights after the atrocities committed in the 1990s in the
Balkans and Rwanda, which the international community failed to stop, and the NATO
military intervention in Kosovo, which was criticized by many as a violation of the
prohibition on the use of force. The UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan challenged the
Member States to “find common ground in respecting the ideals of the Charter, and acting in
defense of common humanity” in September 1999 when he delivered his annual report to the
UN General Assembly. The International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty
(ICISS), established by the Canadian Government, accepted the challenge and published a
report titled The Responsibility to Protect at the end of 2001. The idea of the responsibility to
protect was inspired by Francis Deng’s concept of “State sovereignty as a responsibility” and
confirmed the idea that sovereignty is not just about safety from outside interference, but also
about states having positive obligations for the welfare of their populations and to help one
another. Therefore, the State itself bore the primary obligation for providing for the
protection of its citizens. The larger community of states also had a ‘residual responsibility,’
which is triggered when a specific state is plainly either unwilling or unable to execute its
responsibility to protect or is itself the real perpetrator of crimes or atrocities, according to the
study.
Adoption:
Paragraph 138 and 139 clearly states that every nation has the R2P its population from any
type of atrocity and the international community through the United Nation also has the
responsibility to help other nations suffering from genocide, war crimes, and crimes against
humanity respectively.
The UN Secretary-General, who explains and disseminates the concepts underlying the
responsibility to protect through his yearly reports, is largely responsible for this conceptual
progression. In 2009, his first report stated three pillars agenda for R2P:
 Pillar I– States have the primary responsibility to protect their populations from
genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity;
 Pillar II– the international community shall provide assistance to States in building
capacity to protect their populations from these atrocities and to assist those, which
are under stress before crises and conflicts break out;
  Pillar III – in case of State manifestly failing to protect its population’s international
community shall take timely and decisive action to prevent and halt these atrocities.
In the end, the R2P principle strengthens sovereignty by assisting governments in fulfilling
their current obligations. It presents new programmatic opportunities for the UN system to
help states prevent the mentioned crimes and violations and to protect affected populations
through capacity building, early warning systems, and other preventive and protective
measures, rather than just waiting to react if they are successful.
Since effective R2P implementation at the national level imposes a heavy load on the state
and requires it to take on several political, financial, and legal obligations, it is never easy for
the Member States of an international organization to adopt a single strategy. For instance,
the existing humanitarian crisis in Syria highlights how these contradictions compromise the
prompt and forceful actions made by R2P. Despite the International Commission on State
Sovereignty and Intervention’s 2011 recommendation that permanent members of the UN
Security Council refrain from exercising their veto power when their vital interests are not at
stake, Russia and China have vetoed three resolutions that highlighted the Syrian
government’s responsibility for mass crimes and another resolution that called for referring
the situation to the ICC. Because the UN is unable to show a coherent approach while dealing
with the consequences of the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria, this inconsistency
undermines the UN’s credibility as a whole.
To implement this principle in a better way, Tomasz A. Lewandowski in his study shows that
“The biggest problem lies in building a nexus between different sets of interests to find
reasons for sacrificing national self-interest for the common universal good. In this matter,
responsibility to protect is supplemented by the ideas of international solidarity and good
international citizenship.”

International Solidarity
The expression of a sense of oneness among people, nations, states, and international
organizations is known as international solidarity. It includes the alignment of motives,
objectives, and behaviors as well as the acceptance of varying needs and rights to realize
shared objectives. To maintain international order and assure the continuation of international
society, international solidarity is a fundamental premise underlying contemporary
international law.
International solidarity as R2P is frequently viewed as a developing international law notion.
Nowadays, the concept of international solidarity as a human right is emerging. The change
in approach may be seen in the formal language of resolutions on the promotion of a
democratic and fair international order from the General Assembly or Human Rights Council.
Nonetheless, K. Wellens contends that procedural and substantive solidarity rules still exist in
current international law as part of the concept of solidarity. For example, international
humanitarian law, human rights law, international environmental law, refugee law, or
international development law make up the first category of norms. This organization covers
both forms of solidarity—positive and negative—exactly and directly. The numerous
international obligations, whose major goal is to realize a state of international solidarity, are
included in the second set of solidarity standards. The provisions of the UN Charter for the
maintenance of international peace and security are the most obvious illustration of such
rules. Notwithstanding these conceptual advancements, actual national interests continue to
impact how governments view the application of international solidarity and the R2P.
Foreigners’ human rights continue to be protected as a moral obligation rather than a legal
requirement. Without a clear legal standing, international solidarity, and the duty to protect
are less powerful arguments for nations. It is also challenging to identify the precise bearer of
responsibilities due to the absence of a normative character. While it is simple to establish
who is responsible for carrying out obligations under Pillar I, it is nearly impossible to
pinpoint exactly who should oversee obligations under Pillars II and III. So, the question is:
Which states must engage in upholding the obligations of the global community, to what
extent, and for what reasons? One of the founders of R2P, G. Evans, put out the notion of so-
called “good international citizenship” as a potential response to that query.
According to A. Pert, there are two fundamental requirements for understanding good
international citizenship from the standpoint of international law:
- the state’s involvement in the application of international law understood as the ratification
of treaties, compliance with treaties, policies, and practices of the state in areas such as
human rights, environmental protection, anti-terrorism, and treatment of asylum seekers;
- the involvement of the state in multilateralism on issues such as climate change, relations
within the UN, humanitarian aid, peacekeeping, and disarmament.

Conclusion
We discussed national interests, global responsibility, globalization, and many other topics,
but it is important to remember how much has changed since then. For contemporary issues
in international cooperation, we cannot apply historical solutions. A thorough awareness of
the current state of the world is necessary to discuss the applicability of national interests in
contemporary foreign policy. The emergence of new technologies and the changing nature of
the world have altered our way of thinking. An essential component of decision-making is the
national interest, which is seen as the government’s duty to its citizens. Arguments for the
preservation of international values are not entirely met with resistance by states. Yet,
commitments like R2P open a fresh avenue for resolving these issues. I do not say that global
governance is the solution, but I can state with certainty that change is the only constant in
the world and that we must adapt to it. In the future, we must act for all of humanity rather
than just one or two people. To sum up, I would want to state that while I agree that working
together is not an easy task, we must nonetheless do it because it is required. Before that, we
must strike a balance between national interests and international obligations. Eventually, the
world will be a better place to live.
References
1. United Nations. “Individual Global Responsibility | United Nations.” United Nations,
www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/individual-global-responsibility.
2. Brown, Gordon. “Global Ethic Vs. National Interest.” TED Talks,
www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_global_ethic_vs_national_interest?language=en.
3. Chauhan, Shivank Singh. “CONFLICTING IDEALS OF NATIONAL INTERESTS
AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY.” ProjectStatecraft, 9 June 2020,
www.projectstatecraft.org/post/conflicting-ideals-ofnational-interests-andglobal-
responsibility.
4. ---. United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect.
www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/about-responsibility-to-
protect.shtml#:~:text=138.,through%20appropriate%20and%20necessary%20means.
QUESTION 2: Application-based Question
As the President of Geniyaland, I would need to formulate a foreign policy strategy that takes
into account the country’s strategic location and the importance that it holds to both the
United States and the People’s Republic of China. My two priorities would be:
1. Need for military support against the rebel groups
2. Need for financial assistance to rebuild the country’s economy.
Apart from these, it will also be important to consider the fact that Geniyaland is surrounded
by countries that are either supportive or competing with it for oil trade.

Understanding the causes first

According to Barbara f. Walter, there are two most important causes of civil war – first, when
a country experiences anocracy which is partial democracy, and second, when the country
has identity-based parties instead of ideology-based ones. The next question that she
addresses is ‘who starts a civil war?’ “People who have one spin politically dominant in a
country but are in decline are the ones, she claims.” Whenever they feel that they are losing
power, they start becoming disenchanted with the existing system. Thus, as soon as they lose
hope, they try to indulge in what we call a civil war.
Being the President, I would try to find solutions for each of the causes. As Walter said, it is
because of the anocracy that civil war starts therefore, it is important to strengthen democracy
first. It becomes pertinent to ensure that the opposition parties that are trying to instigate the
youth come to the table for settlement. When they will do so, allowing them to be a part of
the parliament will be one solution because all this started when they lost hope of ever
coming to power. This will give them a chance to formulate their ideologies and present them
to the citizens.
To stop a civil war, again two things are important – first, to stop the outside backing of the
insurgent groups (in this case, Higarastan and Balabria) by taking the help of the international
community as this will help bring both the fighting parties to the negotiation table and
second, to have a third party that takes guarantee for the deal happening between two of
them. In the present case, since we do not have United Nations and it is being replaced by the
two powerful blocs, therefore it becomes important to have strong support from at least one
of them.

The foreign policy of Geniyaland

Considering all the above factors, my foreign policy priorities would be as follows:
1. Establishing diplomatic ties with the United States and the People’s Republic of
China to obtain financial and military backing against the rebel groups.
2. Attempting to obtain the assistance of the neighboring nations in the struggle against
the rebel organizations.
3. Form partnerships with nations that back the Geniyaland government to combat the
international funders of the rebel organizations.
4. Setting economic changes into place to entice foreign investment and expand the
economy of the nation.
Negotiation with the opposition is important but it is equally crucial to suppress the rebel
groups once and deal with them militarily. To accomplish these foreign policy objectives, it
would need to combine soft power and hard might. Soft power would be utilized to
diplomatically interact with the People’s Republic of China and the United States to win their
favor. To militarily destroy the rebel organizations and take control of the nation, hard power
would be employed.
To create a successful foreign policy approach, one must draw on a combination of liberalism
and realism. Realism would be employed to deal with the rebel organizations and impose
control over the nation. The use of liberalism would be made to interact with the United
States and the People’s Republic of China as well as to draw in outside capital.
To accomplish the goals of the nation’s foreign policy, a combination of domestic and
international measures would be necessary. Domestic policies would be utilized to carry out
economic reforms and seize power in the nation. To interact with the United States and the
People’s Republic of China and to build alliances with other nations, international policies
would be adopted. Apart from this, a combination of short- and long-term tactics must be
used. The rebel organizations would be dealt with, and the country would come under
control, using short-term tactics. To engage with the People’s Republic of China and the
United States and to draw in foreign investment, long-term methods would be employed.
Finally, it would be crucial to combine public and private diplomacy. Public diplomacy
would be employed to communicate with the People’s Republic of China and the United
States as well as to forge ties with other nations. To obtain military and financial support
against rebel groups, private diplomacy would be deployed.
In addition, it is crucial to investigate ways to enhance the business climate and infrastructure
of Geniyaland in the hopes of luring additional investment. Talking about joining any bloc,
then maintaining good and healthy with both will be helpful so that benefits from both
powers can be taken. Under the circumstance that the war is stopped, I would strengthen my
foreign relationships with other countries willing to help Geniyaland and ask for massive
investments and financial assistance to help jumpstart the economy, which is already in
shambles. This would also help create jobs for the youth who have taken up arms due to
unemployment.
I would ensure that any kind of social problem like corruption is eliminated to help boost the
economy and fight off the poverty and unemployment menace in the country. To protect the
nation from insurgent organizations, it becomes vital to increase the country’s military
capabilities.

Conclusion
In conclusion, these are some of my strategies to combat such a situation to establish peace
and tranquility. To deepen democracy and provide my country with an independent voice in
the international community is what I aim for. Strengthening the economy is highly important
because that is what matters to a country the most when it comes to development. I believe
that by implementing this foreign policy, we can transform Geniyaland into a peaceful
country with a strong economy and better ties with other nations in the international
community.