Core Values in International Relations and Their Application in the Kigndom of Saudi Arabia - Essay Example

CORE VALUES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND THEIR APPLICATION IN THE KIGNDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA Introduction International relations can be described as the particular study of the relationships that exist among various countries of the world (Tight 2005, 9). In this process, it focuses on the specific roles conducted by sovereign states, non-governmental organizations, multinational companies, internationally recognized non-governmental organisations as well as various inter-governmental organisations and groups. Alternatively, international relations can also be referred to as the field of public policy and academy, which in this case, can be normative or positive. This field makes an analysis and formulation of different foreign policies for various countries. Being a political activity, the practice traces its origin back to the times of Thucydides, a Greek historian (460-395 BC). At the beginning go of the 20th century, international relations became an important and discrete academic sector in political science (Reus-Smit & Duncan 2010, 37). In general, it is important to realize that international relations has become an important interdisciplinary field that people go to study in colleges, universities and other institutions of higher learning. Apart from the field of political science, international relations derive its intellectual materials from various other fields like history, technology, philosophy, geography and international law among many others. The particular scope of the field of international relations understands such issues like ecological sustainability, nuclear proliferation, nationalism, international security, human rights among other important fields. Historical developments of International Relations International relations traces its history from many centuries ago; for instance, Buzan and Little Richard are believed to have considered the interactions in many of the ancient city-states of Sumeria as a form of fully-fledged and operational international relations. These interactions are believed to have started taking place around 3500 BC. When based on sovereign states, the history regarding international relations can be followed back to the time of Westphalia in 1648 (Beaulac 2004, 25). During this time, it is believed that the development in international relations were a major stepping-stone towards development of the current state systems (Provost 2002, 87). Before this particular development, organisations in political authorities in the European medieval period were depended on some kind of vaguely developed hierarchical religious orders. Despite the popular belief, Westphalia still had various layered systems that characterized its sovereignty, with particular concern on the Roman Empire, which was the most holy by then. The agreement of Utrecht that was signed in 1713 is believed to have reflected a certain kind of emerging norm that sovereign countries did not have any internal equals that existed within certain defined territories. Additionally, it lacked external superiors that were to be ultimate authorities to operate within the particular borders of the sovereign states (Muldoon, 2011, 27). The centuries between 1500 and 1748 witnessed the development of various independent and sovereign states that advocated the process of institutionalizing diplomacy and real armies. The French revolution is said to have made an important contribution to the development of international relations by projecting that no oligarchy or princes but the particular citizenry of states defined a nation (Bayne, 2011, 73). These were to be the principles by which the sovereignty of the state were to be defined. In this approach, the kind of state, which its nation was to be sovereign, would thereafter be described as the nation-state. This was to be against the previous approach in which the nation was referred to as the religious state or monarchy. It also important to realize that the term republic later became the synonym of the word nation. The act of colonialism led to the spread of the concept of sovereignty; this was in many of the countries and continents that colonialism reached. This included Africa, Asia and America among other states. Additionally, the colonialism came along with new styles and ways of life, which were described as civilization. Currently, few states in the world have gone beyond the concept of sovereignty and are often termed as “post-modern.” The capacity of the contemporary international relations to make an explanation for the relations in these kinds of states has often been a subject of dispute in several instances (Wilcke 2010, 38). Recognition of international relations It is important to realize that the concept of international relations did not get any due recognition until the end of the First World War (McHugh & Pacy 2001, 28). The theory of international relation has much to do with social sciences; the use of the capitals “I” and “R” in the definition of international relations are often aimed at making a distinction between academic fields of IR from the various phenomena in the International relations (Carlsnaes, 2013, 43). It is believed that the realistic theory of the concept of international relations is inspired by the contributions of the history of Thucydides and the 5th century Peloponnesian war. In the same way, the approach to international relations from the liberalism perspective draws from the works of Rousseau and Kant (Donnelly 2000, 16). However, it is important to point out that modern human rights approach has a completely different perspectives from that provided in the natural law. The development of the concept of international relations in the 20th century has seen a new perspective from the Marxist approach, which has been thought to be the main foundation of the international relations. Concepts in international relations International relations are often seen as the particular terms in the different levels of analysis of IR. It comprises of the wide concepts that shape and define the scope of international relations, which is characterized by the system of anarchy. Power In international relations, the idea of power is often used to refer to the extent of resources, influence and capabilities affect various affairs in the international arena. Power, in this context is divided into three main categories (Jacovides, 2011, 57). First is hard power, which primary refers to the coercive power like the application of force over certain situations. Second, there is soft power, which in most cases describes the diplomacy, economics and other cultural influences (Joseph 2004, 12). It is important to realize that no clear line can be drawn to distinguish the two most common types of power in international relations. Sovereignty Largely, the concept of international relations relies heavily on the initiative of sovereignty in nations, this is besides the idea of dependence and interdependence as the case was initially. Many scholars have described sovereignty as being a country or merely the state, which has absolute power over its territories. In this case, the particular power is restricted within the sovereigns, who are the citizens of that particular state. In the world history, many cases can be cited of groups of people and societies that happened to lose their sovereignty. Good examples include the African countries and others that were colonized by their colonial masters, mostly from Europe. Another better example includes Iraq, which is also recorded to have lost its sovereignty in the times of Iraq war. In this case, it is evident that sovereignty is still needed in the process of assessing international relations among various countries. Core values in International Relation The spirit of international relations raises various issues that countries are expected to pay attention to as they carry out their various functions. Some of these issues include development, security climate, environmental protection as well as reduction in the global and local inequalities in resource distribution and allocation (Baylis, 2001, 42). Countries are expected to ensure that they put in place systems that address the above issues and delivers goals and objectives aimed at protecting its sovereigns. It is important to realize the value of rules and regulations as far as international relations are concerned. Countries and their citizens are expected to recognize the functions of rules and their particular structures, which are often ordered to encourage issues of common good among the citizens (Black, 2010 62). In this case, human freedom is created and duly protected by the systems in place. It is necessary for people to know that the security systems and regulations put in place do not in any way limit the freedom that people want, but rather, it creates a ground for proper practice of human rights. One of the ways of protecting and practicing the core values in the international relations is countries to ensure that they prohibit and shun behaviors and other actions that happen to be contrary to issues of common good. Those practices that compromise on the dignity of citizens are supposed to be eliminated by governments, this way; they have a duty to ensure that the rights of all its citizens are safeguarded. A correlation between duties and rights is expected to be put in place by all states. In this understanding, every person has a duty to take responsibility for his choices because of interacting with others in the environment. The influence of science and technology has emerged to play a leading role in the application some of the core values in international relations. While people and countries embrace the concept of science and technology in advancing these values, they are not supposed to undermine the rights of people and their environment. Many benefits exist, which humanity can tap from these advancements. The international action and capacity to protect the environment and other forms of life are supposed to guarantee the rational application of science and technology. In this case, a choice is not needed as far as ethics and science are concerned. Instead, the main issue is the adoption of reliable scientific approaches that respect the ethical imperatives. Community life on the domestic and international front is a clear demonstration of the respect for human rights as well as the particular guarantees that follow them. These issues are of common good are essential in the evaluation of existing relationships between injustice and justice, poverty and development as well as conflict and security. It is important to ensure that active promotion of particular human rights continues to remain the most essential and reliable strategy that eliminates inequalities between social groups and countries while increasing security. Victims of despair and hardships, whose dignity and particular human rights have been contravened often become easy targets for violence (Copeland 2009, 18). Most these people can often become violators of peace, which as an important core value in international relations. The common good advocated by human rights cannot easily be achieved through application of the right procedures and strategies; neither can it be effected by striking a proper balance between the various competing rights. The core values described in international relations has made it easy for various cultures juridical institutional models and expressions often converge on the basic nucleus of rights and values. Betrayal of core values in international relations in Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabian Kingdom has always been a monarchy that has been led by the family of Al Saud for a very long time. The country has population of about 28.5 million people of which approximately 5.8 million of them are foreigners (Zuhur 2011, 43). King Abdul-Aziz Abdullah has used the title of Madina since 2005. In its rule, the government of Saudi draws from the provision of the sharia law, which is the official Islamic law, as well as basic law (Sinkler 2003 45). The rights of the citizens, duties and powers of the government as well as the system of governance are clearly spelt out in the basic law. Different international reports on human rights have revealed various instances in which the government of Saudi Arabia has been reported to act against the core values in proper international relations (Bureau of Democracy and Labor 2010. 2010, 7). One of the most important core values in international relations is the rule of law, which is vital in the achievement of human rights for all people across all countries of the world (Saud 2003, 58). In this case, countries are expected to ensure that they safeguard the rights of all people in the country. They have to ensure that they put in place reliable systems and policies that protect the rights of all its citizens including those in the country from other countries for various reasons. Human rights reports have showed various instances in which the Saudi government has participated directly and indirectly in undermining the proper practice of human rights among other important core values in international relations. The country has been faulted for failing to create reliable systems that can achieve the core values spelt out in international relations, something that has raised serious concerns on the global stage. Undermining the rights of women and girls The government of Saudi has been undermining the rights of girls, women and minors for a long time. In this system of discrimination, women and girls are often forbidden to study, travel or without the consent of male guardians (Enloe 2004, 59). In 2009, the country made some changes in this law, whereby the ministry of commerce, after a very long time abolished the concept of women having to conduct their business through the representation of their male counterparts. At one point in time, the kind of the Monarchy, king Abdullah announced that women would have the capacity to participate in the voting in the elections to be held in 2015. In the elections held in 2011, the government openly excluded women in the voting process despite the delay that had been done deliberately to make reforms that would have allowed them to take place in the municipal elections (Deif 2008, 58). Women activists started a campaign in 2011 in order to advocate for recognition of their rights. It was only until 2000, when the Interior Ministry managed to offer identity cards for women, but this was only to those that had attained an age of 22 years and above. In 2011, a woman by the name of Manal al-Sharif was arrested by the Saudi authorities when she was found driving, something that was considered as a violation of the countries law (Amnesty International 2014, 7). The prosecutors charged her for tarnishing the face of the kingdom on the international front, as well as stirring up debate and public opinion on the issue (World Report 2011 2011, 9). After the woman made a successful appeal to the king, the police later released her. Saudi is the only country in the world that has continued to prohibit its women from driving something that does not go well with the international human rights. This directive has been met with a lot of criticism by many other countries because they do not find any legal or social argument behind stopping women from driving and enjoying this privilege. Violation of the rights of migrant workers It has been recorded that approximately 8 million of people, most of whom make up the population of migrant workers have been filling clerical, and other service jobs manually. Many of these workers have complained of exploitation and abuse, which sometimes amounts to conditions of slavery. Most of the employers of the immigrant workers abuse the kafala, which is a sponsorship structure that allows employers to give travel documents and other identification to their employees before they can change employers or travel back to their countries. Most of the employers in Saudi Arabia are said to abuse this contract. Instead, most of them confiscate these items and continue to abuse the rights of their immigrant workers. Many migrant workers have reported various instances in which their salaries and wages has often been violated, in addition, they are sometimes made to work and perform various activities against their will and the employment contract (Varia, 2008, 62). This issue has raised diplomatic concerns with Saudi Arabia and its Asian friends who have complained that the country has a kind of unfair working environment that is not in tandem with international relations and the spirit of diplomacy (Janin & Besheer 2003, 47). Many Asian embassies have raised thousands of complaints where its workers have been made to work for their employers for more than 20 hours in a day, with poor work conditions and denial of salaries among other serious violations of human rights (Fandy 2007, 17). The domestic workers, most of whom comprise women have complained of frequent cases of food deprivation, confinement, sexual abuse and various severe physical and psychological abuses. In 2010, authorities in Saudi Arabia did not make any attempts in rescuing a migrant worker from Indonesia, who had worked for approximately 10 years under severe work conditions and given no salary. This domestic had complained that her employers were now renting her to other people for her services. This case was reported by one of the Saudi women who noted the kind of life the domestic worker was undergoing and decided to report to the authorities for further action. In 2010 and years after, the Saudi government encountered several cases of Indonesian domestic who had suffered from physical abuse among other kinds of abuse in the hands of their Saudi employers. In the same year, the government had been forced to behead a number of Indonesian domestic workers after their employers denied them opportunities to go back to their countries or tried to rape them (Cohen 2009, 32). Many countries have been pondering of severing links with the Saudi government because of these incidences and several others that defy the right of their people that go to work in the country (Legrenzi 2011, 39). This matter is very serious and a gross violation of the core values regarding the practice of international relations. It is often expected that any country has to create a secure work environment that respects the rights of all people irrespective of whether they are international migrants or domestic workers. This comes from the fact that human rights is an important core value, which at the heart of international relations. Countries that show open violation to this core value are supposed to face stiff penalties from the international community, which ensure that all people get equal opportunities to carry out their activities in a country. Conclusion International relations is an important concept that ensure countries of the world are better-placed to share ideas and create proper systems of economic development and integration for their nationals. The United Nations provides a framework upon which all countries can provide a proper system by which the goals and objectives international relations can be achieved by all countries. In the past, Saudi Arabia has been receiving mounting pressure for it to reform its systems so that the rights all people in the country can be granted fairly without discrimination to any section of people (Brown, 2004, 51). Additionally, the country has been urged to ensure that all migrants get better and reliable conditions of work, which safeguards their rights and respects them. This way, the country will be better-placed to benefit from international investors who often need an assurance that government systems will play a vital role in helping to protect the rights and welfare of all migrant and domestic workers. It is expected that until this is done, the country will continued to face a reducing percentage of migrants’ workers seeking better pastures in the country and many other international investors. Bibliography Amnesty International. 2014. Saudi Arabia must back concessions on human rights with action. Viewed 11 November 2014. < http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/saudi-arabia-must-back-concessions-human-rights-action-2014-03-19> Bayne, N. 2011. The new economic diplomacy decision-making and negotiation in international economic relations. Ashgate Pub, Farnham, England. Baylis, J. 2001. The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations (2nd Ed). Oxford University Press, Oxford. Beaulac, S. 2004. “The Westphalian Model in defining International Law: Challenging the Myth”, Australian Journal of Legal History Vol. 9, No. 3, 23-64. Black, J. 2010. A History of Diplomacy. Cambridge University press, Cambridge. Brown, L. 2004. Diplomacy in the Middle East the international relations of regional and outside powers. I.B. Tauris, London. Bureau of Democracy and Labor 2010. 2010. 2010 Human Rights Report: Saudi Arabia. Viewed 11 November 2014. < http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/nea/154472.htm> Carlsnaes, W. 2013. Handbook of international relations. SAGE Publications, London. Cohen, S. (2009). Beyond America's grasp: A century of failed diplomacy in the Middle East. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. Copeland, D. 2009. Guerrilla diplomacy: Rethinking international relations. Lynne Rienner, Boulder, Colo. Deif, F. 2008. Perpetual minors: Human rights abuses stemming from male guardianship and sex segregation in Saudi Arabia. Human Rights Watch, New York. Donnelly, J. 2000. Realism and international relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Enloe, C. 2004. “'Gender' Is Not Enough: The Need for a Feminist Consciousness."International Affairs. Vol 80, No. 1, 95-97. Fandy, M. 2007. (Un)civil war of words media and politics in the Arab world. Praeger Security International, Westport, Conn. Jacovides, A. 2011. International law and diplomacy selected writings. Brill, Leiden. Janin, H., & Besheer, M. 2003. Saudi Arabia (2nd ed.). Benchmark Books, New York. Joseph N. 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, Public Affairs Ltd, Washington DC. Legrenzi, M. 2011. The GCC and the International Relations of the Gulf Diplomacy, Security and Economic Coordination in a Changing Middle East. I.B. Tauris, London. McHugh, J., & Pacy, J. 2001. Diplomats without a country Baltic diplomacy, international law, and the Cold War. Greenwood Press, Westport, Conn. Muldoon, J. 2011. The new dynamics of multilateralism diplomacy, international organizations and global governance. West View Press, Boulder, CO. Provost, R. 2002. International human rights and humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Reus-Smit, & Duncan S. 2010. The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Saud, F. 2003. Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf: Power politics in transition 1968-1971. I.B. Tauris, London. Sinkler, A. 2003. Saudi Arabia. Greenhaven Press/Thomson Gale, San Diego. Tight, M. 2005. International relations. Elsevier JAI, Amsterdam. Varia, N. 2008. "As if I am not human": Abuses against Asian domestic workers in Saudi Arabia. Human Rights Watch, New York. World Report 2011. 2011. World Report 2012: Saudi Arabia. Viewed 11 November 2014. < http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-saudi-arabia> Wilcke, C. 2010. Looser rein, uncertain gain: A human rights assessment of five years of King Abdullah's reforms in Saudi Arabia. Human Rights Watch, New York. Zuhur, S. 2011. Saudi Arabia. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, Calif. Read More