Globalization has driven the ethical orientation of international relations towards “peace, reconciliation, and harmony.” Photo: TUCHONG

As a series of new concepts have emerged across different disciplines, such as “global history,” “the world economy,” “international political economy” and “global international relations,” scholars have grown increasingly conscious of taking a “global perspective” in theorizing, giving more weight to ethical perspectives. In the 21st century, globalization has not only promoted the integration of world economies, technology, and lifestyles but has also advanced the mutual learning of civilizations and the fusion of cultural ethics among nations. This has driven the ethical orientation of international relations (IR) towards “peace, reconciliation, and harmony,” increasingly becoming the guiding values for global society to be good, seek good, and do good.

Ethics and values in IR

Ethics represent the fundamental values of human existence and the core orientation of the human spirit. While morality often refers to individual, subjective principles, ethics are more about collective, normative standards. The reality of IR is replete with ethical conflicts and judgments. The moral actions or events among nations often reflect specific moral relationships within a particular ethical framework. 

For instance, when the United States designates China as its primary competitor and vigorously imposes suppressive sanctions, is it to maintain international hegemony or to alleviate domestic crises and its own decline? Answering such questions requires more in-depth reflections from the ethical research perspective in IR. The mission of such studies is to establish a possible “boundary” of values for real-world international relationships and provide a positive humanistic interpretation and justification for the pursuit of good and moral actions in global society.

The study of ethics in IR is concerned with the “good” or the ethical order of global society. The fundamental ethical value in the international community is the triumph of civilization over barbarism. Barbarism signifies violence, aggression, disregard for rules, and carnage, while civilization emphasizes non-violence, non-aggression, respect for rules, and protection of life. However, the evolution of human civilization has led to changes in how humanity addresses insecurity—ranging from cold weapons to hot weapons and thermonuclear weapons. The current stockpile of nuclear weapons alone is sufficient to destroy the Earth multiple times. Although the threat posed by war and violence (traditional security issues) to humanity is decreasing, the threat from non-traditional security issues is increasing. In particular, the various “heterogeneous” conflicts between states need to be resolved through the establishment of a new global ethical order. The development of ethics in IR is precisely this process: human society first strives to jointly build a small-scale “homogeneous” community with shared benefits, and then moves towards the joint construction of larger and eventually global communities that can accommodate “heterogeneity” and benefit all. Thus, it is clear that the study of ethics in IR is of great significance. It can be said that the future development of all social and natural sciences can all be attributed to human studies or ethics, and the study of IR ethics is an emerging and complex discipline that integrates various IR theories. 

Ethical dimension in IR theory

The “mirror image” of human realities is often reflected in the study of ethics in IR. In general, the ethical dimension within existing IR theories can be categorized into three major types.

The first type, strong moralism, prioritizes moral pursuits, with interests and power subordinated to the realization of moral objectives. In other words, the pursuit of interests and power is meaningful only within the constraints of moral principles. For instance, moral romanticism emphasizes “utopian” ideals, using moral ideals to reflect on, critique, transcend, and reconstruct reality. Representative works include Plato’s The Republic, Thomas More’s Utopia, and John Rawls’s The Law of Peoples, all of which emphasize that justice is superior to interests and that “the people’s society” is the society of highest good. Similarly, moral idealism, which emphasizes “personified” peace, views the fundamental nature of humanity as the basis for human development. Its representative works include Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace, Woodrow Wilson’s The State: Elements of Historical and Practical Politics, and Johan Galtung’s Peace by Peaceful Means, all of which stress that national interests should be subordinate to international norms, and that a “peaceful society” is the best society.

The second type is weak moralism, whereby the pursuits of interests and power are the primary goals, with morality being secondary and only emphasized when it serves the realization of interests and power. For example, moral nihilism posits that “might is morality,” and assumes that human nature is inherently evil. Its representative works include Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince and Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan, both of which emphasize the supremacy of power and regard self-preservation as the basis of all state morality. Similarly, moral realism, which posits that “interests are morality,” takes interests as the moral yardstick. Hans Morgenthau’s Politics Among Nations is among its representative works, all of which advocate that interests dominate reason, conflicts cannot be eliminated, and the special interests of the state are its highest law.

The third type, neo-moralism, takes the international or global society as its starting point, recognizing the trend of humanity transcending the limitations of nationalism, statism, and regionalism, and using values higher than those of individual states as the criteria for moral realization. Unlike moral romanticism, which bases its ideals on spontaneous “light,” or moral nihilism, which sees the “darkness” of reality as a hindrance to world development, new moralism adopts the stance of an “independent” rational subject. As an “independent” intellectual subject, in the creation of shared global knowledge, neo-moralism transcends international anarchy. For example, moral liberalism highlights the “interdependence” among nations and explores the possibility of achieving international cooperation through the establishment of international institutions, with institutional liberalism and trade liberalism being notable examples. Another example is moral constructivism, which emphasizes “shared concepts” and “shared values,” starting from epistemological changes to overturn material structural paradigms with social structural paradigms. It stresses that social relations can shape the role of the state, social norms can create behavior patterns, social identity can help build national interests, and social culture can influence national strategies.

Ethical resources in IR

The international community requires a global order based on the ethics of IR. As humanity expands its living community, the ethics of IR also elevate towards “good,” which is regarded higher in the hierarchy of values, thereby continuously reshaping and upgrading the global order.

Different civilizations throughout history have contributed different ethical orientations to the global order, and these contributions have become important value resources for the study of ethics in IR today. By inheriting the concept of order derived from the ancient Greek “logos,” Western civilization has successively put forward theories of world order under different ethical dimensions, such as the “power order” led by the imperial system, the “balance-of-power order” maintained by alliance systems, the “hegemonic order” within a structure featuring one superpower and multiple great powers, and the “clash of civilizations” in the context of pluralistic coexistence. 

Indian civilization has an ethical heritage characterized by introspection and detachment, as well as valuing good and non-violence. It has put forward the concept of a “circle of nations,” with “non-violence” as its ideal of world order. The value goal of the Islamic world order is peace and justice under the premise of Islamic “Sharia,” with its ideal world order being the “home of peace.” African civilization, with its ethical orientation rooted in the spirit of Ubuntu, emphasizes harmony, hospitality, inclusivity, cooperation, respect, and responsibility, with its ideal world order being “Pan-Africanism.”

Chinese civilization preserves its ethical legacy from traditional Chinese culture, which advocates for “harmony among all nations,” “maintaining harmony,” “harmony in diversity,” and “great harmony for all under heaven.” It has developed a concept of cultural order that centers around the “Hehe Culture” and “universal inclusiveness.” The ideal world order in this tradition is one of “Hehe” with “all under heaven” in mind [The first ‘He’ of Hehe indicates harmony, peace, and balance. The second ‘He’ indicates convergence, unity, and cooperation]. In an era increasingly focused on humanity and human-centered principles, Chinese cultural and ethical factors in IR are increasingly presented in international exchanges. For example, Confucius’ idea of “not to do to others as you would not wish done to yourself,” which emphasizes mutual development and reciprocity, transcends the Western concept of “Pareto optimality” in ethical terms, and has the potential to become an important value resource for the study of ethics in IR. While “Pareto optimality” emphasizes self-development without harming others, Confucius’ ideal emphasizes self-development on the premise of helping others, suggesting that mutual benefit through harmonious strategies leads to better outcomes than those achieved independently, representing the highest manifestation of human values.

To facilitate universal security for the world and build a community with a shared future for mankind, China has launched the Belt and Road Initiative, seeking to advance sustainable development globally, creating new platforms for international economic cooperation, and opening new spaces for global development. Chinese IR scholars have put forward the paradigm of “peace-cooperationism” with “Hehe” as its value orientation. Under this umbrella, numerous theories have emerged, such as the international symbiosis theory, a relational theory of world politics, process-oriented constructivism, the theory of the Tianxia System, the theory of cultural China, the theory of social evolution of international politics, and the general security theory. Many of these theories contain important theoretical elements and growth points for the construction of IR ethics, providing rich value resources and practical examples for the new exploration of IR ethics.

Yu Xiaofeng is a professor from the School of Public Affairs at Zhejiang University.

Edited by REN GUANHONG