Terry Nardin

Traditions of international ethics

1. Ethical traditions in international affairs Terry Nardin 2. The tradition of international law Murray Forsyth 3. The declaratory tradition in modern international law Dorothy V. Jones 4. Classical realism Steven Forde 5. Twentieth century realism Jack Donnelly 6. Natural law and international ethics Joseph Boyle 7. Kants global rationalism Thomas Donaldson 8. Utilitarianism and international ethics Anthony Ellis 9. The contractarian tradition and international ethics David R. Mapel 10. Liberalism and international reform Michael Joseph Smith 11. Marxism and international ethics Chris Brown 12. The idea of rights in international ethics R. J. Vincent 13. Biblical argument in international ethics Michael G. Cartwright 14. Convergence and divergence in international ethics David R. Mapel and Terry Nardin.

Nonintervention and Human Rights

Long a part of the theory and practice of international politics, the principle of nonintervention has traditionally admitted few exceptions. Recently, however, arguments have been advanced that seek to expand the grounds for armed intervention to include a wide range of situations in which violations of human rights have occurred. This paper argues that although in principle the moral justification for intervention to protect human rights is broader than defenders of a strong principle of nonintervention, such as Michael Walzer, are willing to allow, the practical constraints on armed intervention are such that it can never be more than an exceptional remedy for human rights abuses.

Theorising the international rule of law

Recent trends in international law scholarship recycle objections to international law advanced by an earlier generation of political and legal realists. Such objections fail to understand the place of international law in the global order. To understand that place, we must distinguish the idea of the rule of law from other understandings of law. That idea is an inherently moral one. Theories of international law that ignore the moral element in law cannot distinguish law as a constraint on power from law as an instrument of power. A Kantian theory of international law can help to recover that moral element.

International ethics and international law

In this paper I am going to argue a familiar but still controversial thesis about the relation between international ethics and international law, which I would sum up in the following list of propositions: First, international law is a source as well as an object of ethical judgements. The idea of legality or the rule of law is an ethical one, and international law has ethical significance because it gives institutional expression to the rule of law in international relations. Secondly, international law—or, more precisely, the idea of the rule of law in international relations—reflects a rule-oriented rather than outcome-oriented ethic of international affairs. By insisting on the priority of rules over outcomes, this ethic rejects consequentialism in all its forms.

Reliability and Validity of Some Patterns of International Interaction in an Inter-Nation Simulation

The study evaluates the reliability and validity of the Inter-Nation Simulation (INS) as an operating model of international interaction. Reliability is evaluated by comparing correlation coefficients describing patterns of interaction in one series of runs of the INS with coefficients generated during a second series of runs. Of 21 reliability comparisons, 2 were found to differ by a magnitude of .20 or more. Validity is evaluated by comparing coefficients describing patterns of interaction in the combined runs of the INS with coefficients observed in data from the international system chosen as a referent. Of 21 validity comparisons, 10 were found to differ by a magnitude of .20 or more. These 10 comparisons, all involving relationships represented by high correlations in the referent system but low correlations in the INS, are interpreted as mispredictions of the INS—i. e., as relationships which exist in the referent system, but which the INS fails to gener ate. Further analysis aimed at isolating the particular relationships and variables involved in these mispredictions is reported as a basis for revising the INS model.

Justice and authority in the global order

The global justice debate has largely ignored law. But that debate presupposes a legal order within which principles of justice could be implemented. Paying attention to law alters our understanding of global justice by requiring us to distinguish principles that are properly prescribed and enforced within a legal order from those that are not. Given that theories of global governance depreciate law and that cosmopolitan and confederal theories are utopian, the most promising context for a realistic global justice discourse is one that is focused on strengthening, not transcending, the international legal order.

Oakeshott on theory and practice

The expression ‘theory and practice’ implies a separation between the two, even when that separation is denied. Political theorists are divided on the question of their relationship, some regretting the abstraction of theory and its consequent irrelevance to practical discourse and action, others insisting that no theory is without practical biases or implications. Oakeshott’s contribution has been to suggest that theory and practice – or, more exactly, the activities those words identify, theorizing, and doing – are conceptually distinct. Much can be learned about the vocation of political theorist, in contrast to that of the citizen or politician, by distinguishing theory and theorizing from practice and doing. Whether political theorizing emerges as an autonomous activity only when it is distinguished from political activity and whether this autonomy should be cultivated or rejected are questions that invite continued debate.

Globalization and the public realm

Globalization can undermine as well as enable public discourse at the national, international, and supranational levels. A challenge for political theory is to imagine how a global public realm might be constituted. Because the public realm has flourished in states whose citizens are related under the rule of law, one might ask whether this model of civil association can be extended to a broader and potentially universal context. Given the contingent obstacles to a global state, realizing civil association globally implies a universal confederation of rule‐of‐law states. If the public realm means free deliberation on the laws of a civil association, the ‘global public realm’ would include deliberation at all three levels.

The new realism and the old

Abstract The tradition of political realism denies the relevance of morality to politics and asserts the value of prudence. The new realists in political theory repeat these claims in the context of criticising a style of political theorising they identify with Rawls and Kant. Some affirm the importance of experience and judgment, echoing an earlier generation of political theorists, including Oakeshott and Arendt. Others locate the distinctive character of politics in the problem of establishing order and legitimising it, and because they are moral sceptics they treat legitimacy as contextual and plural. But arguments about legitimacy must address the difference between governing people and dominating them. The new realists therefore find themselves encountering the question of justice, from which their tradition has tried without success to distance itself. To show that questions of order and justice are related, I briefly consider Kant’s political thought. Like the new realists, Kant treats politics as distinct from ethics and looks for principles of legitimacy that are internal to political order. Instead of making Kant a target for criticism, the new realists could draw on his insights to strengthen their own account of the autonomy of politics. Doing so would also strengthen their case against the simplistic moralising of academic political philosophy and further illuminate the contribution of realism to political thought.

Realism and Right: Sketch for a Theory of Global Justice

Theories of global justice are sometimes criticized for being idealistic in extending the idea of justice to a domain in which it cannot be realized. This criticism is in one sense beside the point, for one can still ask what a just global order would look like, assuming it could be realized. But it is also mistaken because there is in fact an emerging global order. This order is evident not only in economics, culture, and communication but also in a public realm in which global issues are debated. In this context, political theorizing is not unrealistic in trying to understand this emerging order and the ways in which it is just or unjust. Its defect is not idealism but fuzziness about the idea of justice. Too often the word ‘just’ is used as if it were a synonym for ‘moral’ or ‘desirable’. A theory of global justice must define the idea of justice more precisely if it is to achieve coherence and explanatory power.