In today's world, many powerful nations with large weapon industries play a role in continuing wars for their own benefit. This blog explores the ethical responsibilities these nations have to stop conflicts and promote peace. Drawing from the GS4 syllabus on ethics in international relations, we discuss how these countries should act responsibly and make choices that lead to lasting peace instead of fueling wars for profit.Check the Model Answer for UPSC Mains 2024 GS4 question on a quote by Mahatma Gandhiji.
Q2. (a) "It is not enough to talk about peace, one must believe in it, and it is not enough to believe in it, one must act upon it." In the present context, the major weapon industries of the developed nations are adversely influencing the continuation of a number of wars for their own self-interest, all around the world. What are the ethical considerations of the powerful nations in today’s international arena to stop the continuation of ongoing conflicts?
Model Answer:
The quote by Mahatma Gandhi highlights the importance of not just talking about peace, but actively believing in it and taking concrete actions to achieve it. In today's world, the continued existence of numerous conflicts is often influenced by the self-interest of powerful nations and their arms industries.
Ethical considerations for these nations in stopping such conflicts include:
- Responsibility to Protect: Powerful nations have a moral obligation to protect human rights and prevent atrocities. This doctrine suggests that when a state fails to protect its citizens, the international community has a responsibility to intervene.some text
- Example: The United States and its allies could prioritize diplomatic solutions and humanitarian aid in conflicts like Syria and Yemen, rather than focusing solely on military interventions.
- Promoting Diplomacy and Negotiation: Powerful nations should actively promote diplomacy and negotiation as the primary means of resolving conflicts.some text
- Example: The negotiations for a nuclear agreement with Iran highlight the potential for dialogue over force.
- Long-term Stability vs. Short-term Gain: Supporting armed groups or regimes may provide short-term benefits but can undermine long-term stability. some text
- Example: The U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, initially aimed at counter-terrorism, evolved into a complex situation where arms support led to prolonged conflict rather than resolution.
- Economic Interests vs. Humanitarian Needs: Weapon industries often have significant lobbying power, leading to policies that prioritize economic interests over humanitarian considerations.some text
- For example, many nations have faced criticism for their arms sales to Israel, particularly in light of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where the use of these weapons has raised serious ethical concerns about civilian casualties.
- Accountability and Transparency: Ethical foreign policy should include accountability for arms sales and clear transparency about how these weapons will be used.xample: Poor arms trade regulation can have severe consequences for civilians, as seen in conflicts across Africa and the Middle East.
A shift towards a more ethical approach, focusing on peacebuilding and conflict resolution rather than arms sales, could significantly alter the dynamics of international relations and lead to more sustainable peace.
✅ Now that you have gone through the model answer, try practicing and writing it in your own words and evaluate it instantly with SuperKalam here - Evaluate Mains Answer instantly
✅ Download Model Answer PDF for complete UPSC Mains 2024 GS4 Paper with analysis here - Download GS4 Model Answers
All the best!
.png)
