Ethical Issues in International Relations and Funding (UPSC Ethics — GS IV)

International relations is where ethics meets power, and where neither wins cleanly. For UPSC GS IV, the subject is indispensable because it tests whether an aspirant can reason about moral commitments that cross borders — sovereignty, intervention, aid, trade, war, climate, refugees — when no overarching authority exists to enforce them. This guide organises the principal schools of thought, the main ethical issues at the global level, the ethics of international funding, sovereignty and its limits, the just war tradition, nuclear weapons debates, and the distinctive Indian contributions to ethical international relations.

Schools of Thought in International Ethics

Realism

Realism is a state-centred perspective. It claims that all states attempt to enhance their power, and those that accumulate strength efficiently prosper, quickly transcending less powerful states. A nation's primary goal, on this view, is self-preservation; increasing power is a socioeconomic and political requirement.

Realism splits into two strands.

• Defensive realism: states act to maintain a balance of power rather than let rivals develop overwhelming economic or military strength. They should acquire enough power to survive but not pursue hegemony.
• Offensive realism (John Mearsheimer): states are prone to rivalry and conflict because they are self-interested, power-maximising, and afraid of others. The international system requires that states maximise their offensive power to be secure and to prevent rivals from gaining at their expense.

Liberalism

Liberalism in international ethics emphasises individuals, institutions, and international cooperation in promoting global peace, prosperity and justice.

Core principles include:

• Individual rights and freedoms: human rights, democracy.
• Rule of law and international norms: legal frameworks, norm adherence.
• Economic interdependence: free trade, globalisation.
• International institutions and cooperation: multilateralism through the UN, WTO, IMF.
• Collective security: security alliances like NATO, peaceful conflict resolution.
• Promotion of liberal values: democratic peace theory, humanitarian interventions.
• Sustainable development: SDGs, aid, and development assistance.

Idealism

Idealism emphasises moral values, principles, and the pursuit of a better world through international relations.

Its core principles include:

• Moral principles and values: justice, human rights, democracy as foundations of international policy.
• International law and institutions: development and strengthening of UN and related bodies.
• Humanitarianism: intervention to prevent suffering and protect human rights.
• Global cooperation and collective security.
• Peaceful conflict resolution: diplomacy, dialogue, addressing root causes.

Constructivism

Constructivism argues that the structure of the international system cannot be uniformly applied to all state relations. Relations between countries are shaped by shared understandings, identities, discourses, conventions, and social interactions. Identity is the basis for interests, institutions, and relations between countries. This framework illuminates contemporary debates on globalisation, human rights, defence policy, and cultural diplomacy.

Ethical Issues at the International Level

Human Rights Violations

Political interventions frequently lead to human rights violations. US intervention in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Syria are cases in point. The refugee issue is a closely related challenge — European nations closing borders to refugees from war-torn regions, India's reluctance to accept Rohingyas, and limited global capacity to handle mass displacement.

Climate Change

• International equity concerns: countries least responsible for climate change and least equipped to cope with it are the most affected (the Marshall Islands, for instance).
• Common but differentiated responsibilities: defining responsibilities between present and future generations, and between developed and developing countries, is difficult.
• Climate scepticism: some still deny that climate change is real.

Disarmament

States with massive reserves of nuclear weapons and missiles often promote disarmament for others. The United States imposes sanctions on Iran to prevent nuclear weapons development while retaining its own arsenal. The ethical question is whether it is legitimate for a country to impose sanctions on others without discarding its own weapons.

Intellectual Property Rights

Developed countries limit access to new technologies — even life-saving drugs — through restrictive IPR clauses. Is it ethically defensible for a country to defend its IPRs on commercial grounds, or should it share technology for the greater good?

Global Commons

Global commons are parts of the planet outside national jurisdictions to which all nations have access. International law identifies four: the High Seas, the Atmosphere, Antarctica and Outer Space. Issues include nuclear weapons tests, zoonotic diseases (Covid-19), greenhouse-gas emissions, Arctic governance, overfishing, plastic waste, and space debris.

Global Poverty

Kaushik Basu has argued that global poverty remains out of sight for those not living it, breeding insensitivity among well-off nations. States face an inherent dilemma in prioritising citizens versus non-citizens for resource allocation.

Power Asymmetry

The UN is not fully democratic — the five permanent Security Council members hold veto power. Institutions designed to protect democracy, led by nations that call themselves defenders of democracy, are run undemocratically.

Genocide

Genocide is a crime against humanity, and the world has signed the UN Convention on Genocide. Yet genocides continue: the Holocaust (1933-45), the Armenian Genocide, the Rape of Nanking, the Rwandan Genocide (1994), the Tamil experience in Sri Lanka, and Rohingya persecution in Myanmar.

Ethical aspects include:

• R2P is vague, leading international responses that are too late or absent.
• Intervention dilemma: whether to intervene directly or arm persecuted groups.
• Narrow definition of genocide: excluding targeted political and social groups, and indirect acts against the environment that sustains peoples and their cultures.

Wars

The twenty-first century has become a century of global flashpoints: the East China Sea dispute (with Japan revising its pacifist constitution), the South China Sea dispute, the Galwan clashes, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Terrorism

Most countries are affected by terrorism. Ethical issues arise over good versus bad terrorism distinctions. States differentiate based on their interests. Pakistan, for example, has distinguished between "good" and "bad" Taliban. This reveals a selective, self-serving approach to an inhumane activity. States use terrorism as a tool of foreign policy and indulge in human rights violations — Pakistan's support of LeT and JeM, Iran's support of Hezbollah.

Issues with the WTO, IMF and World Bank

Western First World countries hold asymmetric voting rights in these institutions. This asymmetry negatively affects the interests of the third world. The third world pays the cost for historical wrongs of the first world through restrictions on economic development in the name of climate concerns.

Ethics and International Funding

Foreign aid is the transfer of money, goods or technical knowledge from developed to underdeveloped countries.

Why Funding?

• Humanitarian concern: we may have drawn artificial boundaries, but we all belong to the human race.
• Historical burden: past colonial nations (UK, France) developed by exploiting Asia, Africa and South America. Grants and soft loans partially compensate.
• Principle of sacrifice: the well-off have a duty to sacrifice some wealth to protect those who cannot protect themselves.
• Economic explanation — export of capital: Western countries with excess capital need to invest in lucrative developing markets.

Types of Aid

• Military aid — the worst form, destabilising regions (US military assistance to Pakistan).
• Technical assistance — capacity building (India's Pan African e-Network Project).
• Economic aid — loans at nominal rates, repaid over long periods (Asian Development Bank for Indian water and sanitation).
• Humanitarian assistance — saving lives during emergencies.
• Bilateral aid — India to Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka.
• Multilateral aid — through the World Bank, IMF, BRICS.
• Project aid — the Salma Dam in Afghanistan.
• Voluntary aid — Doctors Without Borders.

Issues in International Funding

• State versus non-state actors: whom to fund? Governments of donee countries are often inefficient; NGOs and UN organisations may deliver better, but direct funding to non-state actors erodes sovereignty.
• Conditions on funds: most funds come with strings. Funds can only be used on donor-approved projects, highly paid observers are required, and World Bank/IMF grants come with market-opening conditionalities. This can resemble a continuation of colonialism by other means.
• Proliferation of monoculturalism: aid programmes often promote specific cultural forms and values, with low regard for indigenous culture.
• Technology transfer asymmetry: modern technologies are kept for "for-profit" motives while obsolete technologies are transferred to developing nations.
• Corruption in aid delivery: only about one per cent of humanitarian funds reach affected populations in some documented cases (West Africa during the Ebola crisis).
• Dependency: the state starts to lose independence and relies on foreign aid for socio-economic policies.
• Indirect benefits to rebel groups: rebel groups derive financial benefits through charges on transport, taxes on imports, and rent for warehouses.

Problems with Major Funding Institutions

• Democratic deficit: voting shares favour the US, EU and global north. India and China have expressed discontent.
• Global response to regional problems: responses concerning developing-nation problems are often untimely.
• Accountability and transparency issues: owing to back-door diplomacy and competing interests.

The Limits of Sovereignty

Important ethical concerns include:

• What is the limit of sovereignty?
• When large-scale ethnic cleansing or genocide is taking place (South Sudan, Myanmar), can a country protect its actions under the garb of sovereignty?
• What is the limit of non-intervention by the international community?

The UN's Responsibility to Protect (R2P) initiative declares that nations have sovereignty but are subject to human rights obligations. If human rights are grossly violated, the international community can unilaterally act against that nation. The idea was invented in the aftermath of the Holocaust, to prevent such crimes that shook the conscience of mankind.

Weaker and smaller states fear that in the garb of R2P, developed nations undermine their sovereignty.

Just War Theory

The just war tradition asks three questions. What is a valid justification for starting a war? What actions are justified during a war? And what must a country do after a war ends?

Jus ad Bellum (Just Recourse to War)

• Last resort: all non-violent options must be exhausted.
• Just cause: the purpose is to redress a wrong.
• Legitimate authority: only a lawfully constituted government of a sovereign state can declare war.
• Right intention: morally acceptable aims, not revenge.
• Reasonable prospect of success: do not fight a hopeless cause.
• Proportionality: responses must be measured and proportionate.

Jus in Bello (Just Conduct in War)

• Discrimination: force directed only at military targets; civilians are innocent.
• Proportionality: force proportional to the threat.
• Humanity: no force against captured, wounded or controlled enemy personnel (prisoners of war).

Jus post Bellum (Just Conduct after War)

• Reconstruction: post-war rebuilding.
• Reconciliation: efforts to bind communities after conflict.

The tradition is not intended to justify wars; it is intended to prevent them by showing that going to war in all but certain limited circumstances is wrong. The Mahabharata similarly outlines principles for just conduct of war — armies were allowed to collect bodies, personnel could meet for negotiations.

Ethical Issues around Nuclear Weapons

Nuclear weapons can destroy the planet's ecosystem. A handful of states insist these weapons provide unique security benefits while reserving the sole right to possess them.

Benefits

• Deterrence: no war between nuclear-armed states due to fear of mutually assured destruction (USSR and US in the Cold War).
• Indirect life-saving: conventional wars have not occurred between certain nuclear-armed states (India and Pakistan are less likely to attack each other).
• Nuclear statesmanship: possession engenders responsibility and a bias against adventurism.

Drawbacks

• Intrinsic moral status: morality does not attach to things, so nuclear weapons are neither good nor evil in themselves. The moral question arises with users. As long as weapons exist, terrorists may obtain them.
• Utilitarian view: nuclear weapons give security to possessors but instil fear in billions. On the test of maximum good to maximum people, they falter.
• Deontological view: means to peace should also be pure. Peace built on fear of destruction is not ethically adequate; it should rest on humanity and peaceful coexistence.
• Opportunity cost: money spent on nuclear weapons could fund social upliftment.
• Risk of rogue states: the possibility that nuclear-armed states may collapse or fail to prevent their arsenal from reaching terrorists.

The deterrent effect of nuclear weapons worked in the bipolar first nuclear age; it is far less reliable in today's multipolar second nuclear age.

Asylum

The response of most countries to asylum seekers has been xenophobic. Afghans, Tunisians, Libyans, Syrians, Rohingyas.

Principles of Ethical International Relations

The UN Charter

The UN Charter is the legal and moral foundation of international relations, manifesting humanity's spiritual values and inner oneness. Its Preamble commits to saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war, reaffirming fundamental human rights, establishing justice, promoting social progress, practising tolerance, maintaining international peace and security, and employing international machinery for economic and social advancement.

Article 1 of the Charter sets out UN purposes: to maintain international peace, develop friendly relations based on equal rights and self-determination, achieve international cooperation in solving problems, promote human rights, and harmonise the actions of nations.

India's Article 51 (DPSP)

Article 51 directs the Indian state to promote international peace and security, maintain just and honourable relations between nations, foster respect for international law and treaty obligations, and encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration. This places an ethical obligation on Indian foreign policy.

Panchsheel

The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, known as Panchsheel:

• Mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty.
• Mutual non-aggression.
• Mutual non-interference in each other's internal affairs.
• Equality and cooperation for mutual benefit.
• Peaceful coexistence.

A New Panchsheel for the 21st Century

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh outlined a new Panchsheel in 2013:

• India's development priorities will determine its engagement with the world.
• India's development prospects are inexorably linked to the world economy.
• India will work with all major powers — a policy of multi-alignment via G20, BRICS, IBSA.
• Greater regional cooperation and connectivity.
• India's values of plural, secular and liberal democracy as inspiration to others.

Panchamrit: New Pillars of Foreign Policy

• Samman — dignity and honour.
• Samvad — greater engagement and dialogue.
• Samriddhi — shared prosperity.
• Suraksha — regional and global security.
• Sanskriti evam sabhyata — cultural and civilisational linkages.

Non-Aligned Movement

Nehru gave three reasons for non-alignment:

• India was newly independent and had to focus on socio-economic reconstruction, not military blocs.
• India had never shown aggression against any country.
• When the world was divided into two military groups ready to fight, strengthening a peace area (the third bloc) would bridge conflict.

Gujral Doctrine

The five principles of the Gujral Doctrine for South Asian relations:

• As the largest nation in South Asia, India must show a big heart. With Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka, India should give all it can in good faith without asking reciprocity.
• No South Asian country should allow its territory to be used against another country.
• No country should interfere in the internal affairs of another.
• South Asian countries should respect each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty.
• All disputes should be settled through peaceful bilateral negotiations.

Applications include the Ganga Waters sharing agreement with Bangladesh (1996), allowing Nepal and Bhutan to use Hooghly Port, soft loans and infrastructure development in Afghanistan, most-favoured-nation status to Pakistan, freezing of the border dispute with China through confidence-building measures, and unilateral people-to-people concessions to Pakistani elderly and cultural groups.

Nuclear Doctrine

India has a declared no-first-use policy and is developing a doctrine based on credible minimum deterrence.

Refugee Policy

India harbours one of the largest populations of refugees despite not signing the UN Convention on Refugees — an illustration of values-based practice that exceeds legal obligation.

Neighbourhood First

India's Neighbourhood First policy reflects several ethical principles.

• Mutual respect and sovereignty: respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity; non-interference in internal affairs.
• Regional cooperation and integration: collective progress; shared interests.
• Peace and stability: conflict resolution through dialogue; ensuring regional stability.
• Economic and social development: aid and assistance; inclusive growth.
• Environmental sustainability: collaboration on climate change, water management, disaster response.
• Cultural and people-to-people ties: cultural respect and human connections through education and tourism.

Case study prompts

• A large-scale ethnic persecution is underway in a neighbouring country. India must decide whether to accept refugees, intervene diplomatically, or pursue both. Apply R2P and the realist-liberal-idealist schools to frame the decision.
• A donor country offers significant aid with strict conditionalities that compromise the recipient's policy autonomy. Using the ethics of international funding, outline a response.
• A decision must be made on whether to conduct cross-border strikes after a terrorist attack. Apply just war theory to evaluate the decision.

UPSC Relevance

Ethics in international relations is a high-yield area for GS IV. It appears in questions on R2P, humanitarian intervention, climate justice, foreign aid ethics, Panchsheel, the Gujral Doctrine, and India's role in global ethical discourse. A candidate who can invoke realism, liberalism, idealism and constructivism; apply just war theory; analyse nuclear ethics; and weave in Indian doctrines (Panchsheel, Panchamrit, Neighbourhood First) demonstrates precisely the integrative, values-driven thinking the paper rewards.

PDF