Subjects:
In actuality, globalization has provoked that every nation shares diverse issues such as commerce, climatic changes, justice and poverty with others. These nations need to adopt a new ethical perspective of globalization to deal accordingly with these problems.
Peter Singer starts the preface of this Bush by explaining that when the USA exposed their objectives of avoiding massive destruction by Sadam Hussein, some ethical issues came to light. The most important was if the way USA would reach those objectives could fortify or debilitate UNO’s authority.
Bush recurred to the UNO in September of 2002 to accuse Iraq. This apparently meant that Bush was not going to act by himself in a unilateral action. Later, Bush declared UNO as irrelevant and incompetent in the Iraq issue, claiming that if the Security Council could not support actions against Iraq, it was worth nothing. According to the United Nations, their members must fix their controversies by pacific means. Nevertheless, if Bush attacked Iraq, the UNO would lack power to do something about it.
Some people of the Bush administration suggested a new model as an alternative to UN: a “Pax
. . .
QUESTIONS
• Should we see each other as citizens of the world instead of members of a concept of nation-state that is two centuries old? Is the division of the world’s people into sovereign nations a dominant and unalterable fact of life?
• To what extent should political leaders see their role narrowly, in terms of promoting the interests of their citizens, and to what extent should they be concerned with the wellfare of people everywhere?
• Does the value of the life of an innocent human being vary according to nationality? Can the abstract, ethical idea that all humans are entitled to equal consideration govern the duties of a political leader?
Note: We separated these questions into three categorizations because we find they form part of the same issue.
Singer explains the ethical view that leaders of powerful countries have and should have.
The UNO rejected any attack in Iraq, but Bush attacked.
We cannot as such a globalized world omit or ignore the potential threat our decisions as members of a state-nation (as we have defined it since the 19th centry) would pose to other countries. They argue global benefits, as if they knew or cared about what the rest of the world wants or thinks. The most logical thing to do would be to think of ourselves as citizens of the world and take care of each other. For the rich nations not to take a global ethical viewpoint has long been seriously morally wrong. Would he love his child and others’ children equally? Or would the ethical way to follow be like Bush’s “first things first”?
It is interesting to note that as Singer says: “it is also a fact that there is no country, no matter how strong it is, that is vulnerable to be attacked”. A redefinition of state sovereignity and a sound global system of criminal justice
Another important point stated is the integration of a new community based on Terrorism: “Even if there were no altruistic concern among the rich nations to help the world’s poor, their own self interest should lead them to do so.
It is clear the Singer is trying to make us think about the urgent need of a "global ethical viewpoint". However, we are not used to thinking in other factors which are buried underneath the surface but can be much more dangerous and deadly. William Kristol, theWeekly Standard’s editor, in collaboration with Lawrence Kaplan, poses a question in his book The War Over Iraq: “What’s wrong about hegemony when it is based on solid principles and high ideals?”. The United States of America establishes democracy as one of those “solid principles”, but if they became an hegemony, what could stop them from becoming a tyranny? And, if they believe in democracy, is it democratic to get control of the world without the other nations consent? If a country declares itself as the “police of the world”, that means no democratic government or fair laws. ”
ASSESSMENT
In this globalized world, we have become used to the inmediacy of media. We need legitimate and universal principles on which to base intervention.
Essay's Topics
All research is for reference purposes only.