If There Is a Role for Morality in Diplomacy - Report Example

Discuss If There Is a Role for Morality in Diplomacy Table of Contents Introduction 3 Discussion 4 Principles of Morality 4 Principles of Diplomacy 5Linkage between the Principles of Morality and Diplomacy 7 Critical Evaluation 8 Conclusion 11 References 12 Introduction Undoubtedly, the general conceptions of morality and diplomacy in modern ethics theories often act in polarised directions. But an in-depth understanding to the phenomenon shall reveal that the two concepts are intertwined at various paradigms of ethical values and legitimacy to rule in favour of their unique philosophies. Also known as Wilsonian Diplomacy, the philosophy of “Moral Diplomacy”, first was coined by the 28th US President, Mr. Woodrow Wilson (Peters, 2014). Focusing on the interlinkage between the principles of morality and diplomacy, perhaps since then or since the earlier years, has been a centre topic of debate among the worldwide critics. In those days, the perception of morality was not considered as a decisive constituent in forming and preserving international relations, especially that existing amid the governments and the states resulting in political fluctuations during the era of late 19th as well as early 20th centuries. On the other hand, the notion of diplomacy during that particular period was viewed to be aligned with the views presented by social Darwinists, which could be duly regarded as with the much debated “survival of the fittest” contest (Hist, 01 Feb 2014). Correspondingly, it can be affirmed that the main argument lies in the somewhat isolated assumptions, beliefs or principles of the conceptions of morality and diplomacy, which differ from one another at various junctures, ultimately intensifying debates based on the issue as to whether morality has a role to play in diplomacy. In relation to essay plan, the discussion hereunder will initially focus on assessing the principles of both these conceptions separately, followed by measuring the interlinkage amid these indentified basic tenets of morality and diplomacy. In transition, a critical evaluation will be drawn aimed at examining whether morality plays a role in diplomacy considering the modern political decision-making system. Accordingly, conclusions will be made to obtain a firm judgement to this notion. Discussion Principles of Morality It is evident that though the worldwide social and the political systems are transforming at a rapid pace, the significance and the relevance of diplomacy, as an instrument of maintaining international relations, can be identified to have remained almost intact, with few additions in its basic principles. In this similar concern, the basic tenets of morality revealed remarkable resilience and the capability to mitigate any sort of challenge, which might arise due to frequent changes in the social as well as the political systems (Manojlovic and Thorheim, 2007: 3-41). Prior to obtaining a critical understanding as to whether morality plays a role in diplomacy, it is quite indispensable to gain a succinct idea about the principles, values or beliefs associated with morality and diplomacy. In this context, it can be apparently observed that traditional principle based theories have been replaced by the modern principle morality theories in politics, with the sole intention of developing the rational thinking of the individuals along with the governments belonging to any particular nation. Specially mentioning, the chief principles of morality can be viewed as focusing upon executing action-guiding rules and regulations, mitigating rising conflicts through moral judgments and enhancing the capability of the leader to judge. These effective principles of morality are often treated as algorithms that can be stated as a particular decision-making procedure, which might be fundamentally applicable in making moral judgments efficiently. Correspondingly, it has been assumed that the above depicted morality principles aim at finding out a set of effective rules that could be applied by any particular individual, irrespective of his/her experience or sensitivity, for discovering correct and appropriate answers or responses (Albertzart, n.d.: 1-13). It is concerning these principles of morality that the conception is explicitly assumed as ‘internalised long-term commitments’ through which, individuals or a specific cluster of people can build as well as comprehend themselves as an agent. Moreover, in relation to this, the individuals can also form their respective moral sensibilities through following diverse morality principles but towards a shared vision, comprehended as ‘internalised long-term commitments’. From a negative perspective, morality based considerations often become mutually conflicting and plural at certain times, hindering the scope of obtained appropriate justifications to moral questions. In recent times, the modern world has been incessantly changing due to certain critical factors forcing the decision-makers to accept morality principles extensively in creating a balance to their quantitative return centric objectives and value based ethical obligations. Majors among these factors can be identified as increased effects of globalisation, gaining momentum in internationalisation, prevalence of extreme level of business market competition and extensive as well as rapid introduction of advanced technologies. Finally, it can be concluded that the morality principles are often regarded as easy resolutions towards solving any sort of ethical dilemmas and conflicts (Wood, n.d.: 1-46). Principles of Diplomacy Conceptually, the idea of diplomacy has evolved in order to assist a core of specialists towards lessening the risks associated with arising conflicts and also forming a ritualised means of conducting activities that aid in understanding one another (Mayall 2013: 89). Moreover, diplomacy is also duly considered as a practice through which, various state members across the globe, can perform their assigned activities towards ensuring the formation along with the development of peaceful political relations. Arguably, the prime intention of diplomacy is concentrated towards protecting the interests of the common public, which apparently gives it a moral edge to perform efficiently. It is because of these significant facets of diplomacy that eventually promotes cultural, scientific, financial and political relations in the form of creating international commitments towards safeguarding human rights and permanently settling the disputes in a peaceful way. After acquiring a brief idea about the perception of diplomacy, its certain major principles can be apparently noted to fulfil the requisites of developing peaceful relations within the government and the state as well as internationally. In this regard, the principles encompass resolving outstanding international concerns, adhering responsibly towards international lawful prerequisites and strengthening decision-making along with problem solving procedures. Additionally, the other chief principles of diplomacy can be depicted as imposing stern inspections regimes, formulating effective policies for determining positions of strength, effectively utilising the accessible resources and performing the required activities timely (Edelman and Ross, 2013). As per the above analysis, it can be affirmed from a broader understanding that the various major principles of diplomacy typically demonstrate its significance in developing and preserving international relations as well as political stability within the domestic environment. It is worth mentioning in this similar concern that the principles of diplomacy are often featured as “the engine room” or “the master-institution” of maintaining international associations in this presently changing world scenario. Emphasising similar facts, it has been often claimed that the principles of diplomacy are defined as “the missing link” in the context of maintaining international relations. This might be owing to the reason that the underlying principles of diplomacy suffered from establishing a strong linkage between theory and practice of the subject matter. Moreover, the other reason can be identified as the threat of force, which was often categorised as the indispensable foundation of a feasible foreign policy and therefore, overhauled morality principles during the era of Cold War. It was specifically due to these reasons that the diplomacy principles were criticised at a considerable magnitude, affirming it as “redundant and anecdotal” (Jonsson and Hall, 2005). Linkage between the Principles of Morality and Diplomacy As was argued previously, while a generalised view will oppose the notion that morality and diplomacy principles are interlinked and that the former plays a role in determining the efficiency of the latter, an in-depth assessment of the fact is likely to offer a differing view altogether. Critically assessing the philosophies of diplomacy and morality, significant aspects become identifiable that eventually depict a correlation between these principles of modern day politics. In this similar concern, the foreign policy of America has been criticised as unduly moralistic as well as legalistic in the judgment of the actions made by the respective government of the nation. The other vital aspect demonstrated the attempt made towards relating moral considerations with the diplomacy of the foreign policy in order to promote and develop international relations. While determining the linkage or the correlation prevailing between the principles of morality and diplomacy, it has been evident that the conduct of diplomacy is the accountability of the governments of the respective nations. In this regard, the endeavour made by the American government towards linking moral considerations specifically with the foreign policies ultimately depicts the correlation existing between the principles of diplomacy and morality. It has been apparently observed that the functions, responsibilities, moral obligations and commitments of the governments belonging to any nation are not similar to that of the individuals. This signifies that the governments are recognised as agents not principals. The other valuable aspect, which reveals the linkage prevailing between the principles of morality and diplomacy, is the transnational forces that strongly influence the international business system. In this similar context, the transnational forces generally include globalisation, augmenting incorporation and rapidly rising interdependence of socio-economic activities, besides a considerable rise in sovereign as well as nationalist claims. These forces are generally identified to get influenced by diplomacy principles, making a greater call towards relating moral considerations with the inherent diplomatic principles of the foreign policy (Kennan 1985: 205-218). Critical Evaluation Morality in diplomacy refers to a particular system wherein active support is provided only to such particular nations whose moral assumptions along with beliefs are identified to be analogous in nature. It has been apparently observed that the perception of this system is also regarded as a diplomacy form, proposed by the 28th President of the US, Mr. Woodrow Wilson during his1912 election. According to the US President, the moral diplomacy system attempts to promote the development of the ideas of a particular nation and also incorporate nations with diverse ideologies when striving to secure the legitimate interests and human rights of the common public (Peters, 2014). The determination of the role for morality in diplomacy has always been controversial amid the political scientists and the historians who are mainly associated with the philosophies of the US diplomacy. This can be justified with reference to the fact that a portion of the above discussed individuals strongly realise the outcomes to be mainly determined by morality principles or principles of ‘justice’ rather than diplomacy principles such as military force and power among others. It has been critically argued that in the above discussed morality principles in the US diplomacy, justice and the former rule of law ought to play an imperative role in forming and developing international relations and thus, the diplomacy principles are ignored to a certain extent. This argument eventually depicts that there lays a greater role to be played by morality in diplomacy for the purpose of enhancing international relations. Moreover, apart from this aspect, it can be comprehended that the principles of morality can offer effectual enforcement mechanisms, collective security and actions with sanctions for conducting peace negotiations in the context of developing international relations. This facet also represents that there exists a role for morality in diplomacy. However, it can be argued in this similar concern that the international relations are often identified to be based upon legal as well as ethical principles, which require mandating for performing peace negotiations. This also portrays the role for morality in diplomacy (Valls, 2000; 1-4). In this similar context, the notion of morality and its diverse principles are often viewed to be based upon the aspect of external authority that fosters moral and spiritual intelligence. This, in turn, aids in conducting negotiations efficiently between the representatives of diverse nations or groups, which generally refers to the notion of international diplomacy. Correspondingly, it is often argued that the morality principles play a decisive role in diplomacy through the intervention of professional diplomats with respect to the aspects concerning peace-making, culture, trade along with war and economics. This ultimately supports in forming as well as developing international relations, which is regarded as one of the prime practices of diplomacy. It is worth mentioning that in this present world of incessantly transforming societal conditions, the role for morality in diplomacy has augmented with the reforming trends in developing international relations. From a generalised perspective, it can be affirmed that the development in the international relations is quite likely to eventually facilitate the nations to progress their respective economies and provide utmost benefits to their citizens. In this regard, the morality principle of intuition or ‘intuitive process’ plays an imperative role in creatively assessing the transforming societal conditions followed by effective adaptive behaviour and decision making. The issues linked with public diplomacy can be observed as playing an apparent role in determining the extents of funding, incapability of the government towards offering utmost security to the nations and inappropriate placement of diplomatic personnel in high-threat environments. Moreover, the other issues relating to public diplomacy mainly comprise governmental inability towards monitoring along with assessing the political activities aptly, leveraging expertise as well as conducting best practices and raising the effectiveness of entire system. Arguably, these issues can be resolved through efficient utilisation of the morality principles by a certain level, advocating the role of morality in diplomacy. This can be justified with reference to the fact that one of the supreme morality principles i.e. making moral decisions would significantly aid in resolving the above depicted issues by assisting in the adoption of measures appropriate for sourcing funds, placing diplomatic personnel appropriately and effectively monitoring the activities associated with public diplomacy (Nakamura and Weed, 2009). Conclusion Based on the above discussion and analysis, it becomes argumentative that the various principles of morality and diplomacy can be interlinked with each other. This can be justified by taking into concern the attempt made by the American government towards relating moral considerations with foreign policies for the purpose of raising the standards of their international relations. This particular attempt of linking moral considerations with foreign policies eventually represents a greater role to play for morality in diplomacy. With an in-depth understanding, while discussing the role for morality in diplomacy, it can be apparently observed that there are certain issues, faced by the enforcers, which often restrain the followers of such a blended principle from applying the same into practice. These issues have been viewed to be correlated with the motives of augmenting the effectiveness of public diplomacy, performing best practices and leverage expertise among others. In this similar context, one of the morality principles i.e. making moral decisions ultimately aids in resolving the above issues by a certain level. Thus, it can be concluded that morality plays a significant role in diplomacy. References Albertzart, Maike (No Date) “Introduction”, Moral Principles and Moral Judgement, 1-31. Edelman, Eric and Ross, Dennis, 2013, “Principles for Diplomacy”, Files, http://www.jinsa.org/files/PrinciplesForDiplomacyWithIran.pdf [February 2014]. Hist, Wallace, G. Mills, No Date, “Morality and Diplomacy--Impact of World War I”, History 203 Lecture, http://husky1.stmarys.ca/~wmills/course203/12Morality_Diplomacy.html [February 2014]. Jonsson, Christer and Hall, Martin, “Analytical Framework”, Essence of Diplomacy, http://gendocs.ru/docs/20/19312/conv_1/file1.pdf [February 2014]. Kennan, George F (1985), Morality and Foreign Policy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Manojlovic, Marija and Thorheim, Celia Helen (2007) “Introduction”, Crossroads of Diplomacy: New Challenges, New Solutions, 3-41. Mayall, J (2013), World Politics: Progress and its Limits, US: John Wiley & Sons. Nakamura, Kennon H and Weed, Matthew C, “U.S. Public Diplomacy: Background and Current Issues,” Congressional Research Service, https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40989.pdf [February 2014]. Peters, Gerhard, “Address at Independence Hall: "The Meaning of Liberty”, Home, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=65381 [February 2014]. Valls, Andrew. “Doing the Right Thing: Ethics, Morality, and Diplomacy”, Reviews, 1-4. Wood, Allen W (No Date) “What is The Supreme Principle of Morality”, The Supreme Principle of Morality, 1-46. Read More