Human rights theories appeared as early as after World War II (Rawls 1999). The debates centered on inequities among people of the same country. However, a strong emphasis on social justice began to emerge in the nineteenth century. John Rawl made significant contributions to ideas of social injustice. Recently, a sustained philosophical debate has emerged about how social justice applies to international institutions and interactions.
Cosmopolitanism first focused on distributive justice, war, human rights, political agency, and intervention (Caney 2011). It also affirms the three main concepts of individualism, generality, and universality. Remarkably, Egalitarian theorists argue that all human beings across the globe are equal and ought to be given similar opportunities. On the same note, contemporary happenings have played a huge role in instigating philosophical inquiries. Protuberant cases of terrorism, ethnic cleansing, genocide and security in countries such as Yugoslavia, Somalia, Rwanda, and Palestine have catalyzed further investigations. Based on the abovementioned cases, there is a growing consensus within the interest of international communities in tackling the crimes within such states. John Rawl’s Law of peoples prominently enthused thinking about various models of international justice (Rawls 1999). Rawl endorses eight principles that acknowledge equality and independence of people as well as the honor of human rights across the world. He advocates the United Nations organization to deal with global institutions governing borrowing, trade and other transnational matters. Another large prominent contributor of international justice is Thomas Pogge. He argues that developed countries ought to reform their global order to the poor to ensure the security of human rights (Pogge 2007).
Therefore, this essay embraces the broader account that claims of justice should extend beyond national borders. The argument proceeds in three sections. First, it conducts a more detailed discussion on the nature of truth based on theories that have been developed and become more accepting of the international justice regime. Then, it highlights on the general review on neorealism institutionalism being born of the same paradigm. Additionally, the paper will discuss how globalization has resulted in a claim of extending of justice beyond borders.
Section 1
Drawing the argument from Hegel, it is evident that theory of nature of justice develops through the mechanism of Hegelian dialectic. In international relationship (IR) theory where there has been such virulent debate between scholars there is a progression of thesis and antithesis leading to synthesis in discussions surrounding both the conceptualization of justice and the role that state sovereignty plays in its advancement and hindrance (Broke 2012). The emergence of institutionalism and internationalism as an alternative to pragmatism in IR theory has resulted in a heated argument since the 1970's concerning the cogency of liberal institutionalism. They have developed the key concepts in the liberal school of IR theory.
Social justice theories originated in the late 19th century and gained popularity after publishing of John Rawl’s theory in 1971 (Rawls 1999). Most of the theories focused on the questions concerning citizen's particular duties they owe to each other. They inclined to be broadly egalitarian and were concerned in mitigation of a variety of economic and social disparities within a society. Since then, social justice literature debates focused on how full the restrictions on several forms of economic and social disparity may be within a fair society and whether the concept of justice can be extended beyond the borders of a country. Therefore, the concern on extending egalitarian theories on social justice arises prominently during political and economic interaction among countries in the world.
Initially, cosmopolitan justice theories repudiated the profound moral significance of national limits in determining the duties as well as the rights of human beings. Cosmopolitan theories included human rights principles which endorsed universal individual rights with particular positive rights such as healthcare, education, and provision of requirements among others (Caney 2011). Consequently, there emerged complaints regarding the absence of connexion between social justice literature and human rights leading to the emergence of libertarians. They engaged egalitarian theories by arguing in contradiction of any ethnically authentic role of the nation in policing economic and social inequalities. According to the theory, global justice is co-extensive.
The principal justifications underlying protuberant egalitarian social justice theories are based on strong statist assumptions (Caney 2011). They embrace that all sorts of justice obligations that set limits of economic and social inequalities are applicable within the context of (national) domestic politics. Strong statists unveil egalitarian opposition to economic as well as social disparities among citizens within a state. Henceforth, they share a libertarian approach towards international inequalities.
Rawls’s Law of Peoples offers superfluous arguments in support of strong statist. He argued that national self-determination confines the solicitation of any egalitarian obligations to reduce economic and social inequalities (Rawls 1999). Indeed, both egalitarian social justice theorists and human rights theorist have a lot of work to be done to achieve justice beyond the borders of a nation. Human rights theorists scuffle to resolve their obligations to equality and positive rights woven in cosmopolitanism. Similarly, egalitarian social justice theorists scuffle to address their ethical apprehension with unjustifiable and intensely disadvantaging social discriminations among people. Consequently, hybrid views lead to the hybrid theory which aims to solve the earlier mentioned approaches hence ensuring acceptance and embracement of international justice regime. Hybrid theorists argue that there is a need for egalitarian norms of justice by ensuring equality and extent of justice across the nations in the world through distributive justice.
Theoretical Review
The emergence of liberalism as an alternative to realism in IR theory has resulted in the debate concerning the validity of institution of liberal institutionalism as the alternative of realism. There has been a conflation of justice based on the discussion about sovereignty, for example, the establishment of both neorealism and neoliberal theoretical approaches. Neorealist primarily focuses on high politics while neoliberal center on moderate politics. Regardless, both methods share same worldviews. The international relations theory has been dominated by the debate between neoliberal and neorealism institutionalism. The two paradigms are significant in defining research within global relations as well as in policy making. The International Relations (IR) study has experienced dramatic transformation as modern theorists have disparaged the introductory epistemology.
Neorealism tries to isolate the internal aspects of the global political schemes from the external. The separation segregates one realm from the other hence permitting theorists to deal with every structure at an intellectual level. Additionally, neorealist focus on security measures. On the other hand, neoliberal concentrates on the structure of the system as well as analysis of variations. Much emphasis is placed on economic and environmental issues.
According to Pogge (2007), institutions offer a coordinating mechanism to assist nations to apprehend prospective gains from the cooperation. Neoliberals accentuate on how a state benefits overly by considering long term gains made from an agreement.
Hence forth, both neoliberals and neo-realist are nation-centric theories which consider a state as the primary unit of theoretical analysis. They share same ontology, epistemology and methodology hence their institutionalism is borne of the same paradigm.
Section 2
Remarkably, globalization has acted as a mechanism for increased level of justice beyond national borders. Globalization challenges various traditional conventions concerning international law and its relationship to national (domestic) law. Laws concerning human rights always play a central role in the global law profile. Currently, the most centered areas include environmental, minority, cultural and human rights.
According to Caney (2011), globalization through economic integration has led to increased practice of justice across the world. Currently, there is greater economic integration through trading activities. The world has become a small market where traders can buy and sell their products across the globe. On the same note, countries trade with each other through importing and exporting their products. Transnational corporations engage in production and distribution of goods and services in multiple countries hence economic interdependence. By so doing, individuals across the countries apply international law to ensure justice across the globe. The World Trade Organization (WTO) sets up rules and regulations that govern all the countries that participate in international trade hence providing justice for all participants. Therefore, global economic activities enhance the extent of the claim of justice beyond borders.
Similarly, globalization through global gender justice has increased the practice of justice beyond the boundaries of a nation. According to Caney (2006), the impacts of poverty are not equal for women, men, boys, and girls. For instance, poverty hardens more the lives of females compared to the male counterparts. Based on culture and traditions, the women partake a lot of domestic and care work which significantly thwarts their well-being. The cultural perception concerning gender roles damage the fundamental interests of the females. Additionally, cultural practices such as forced prostitution, genital mutilation, arranged marriage, infanticide as well as rights to property inheritance significantly disadvantage the female gender hence there is a necessity to protect their rights. Due to globalization, critical policies have been passed to combat gender injustice across the world. Additionally, the Millennium Development Goals emphasize on the promotion of women empowerment and gender equality hence ensuring justice across the globe.
Furthermore, global health issues have led to the heightening of justice practices worldwide. In every country, there are vast inequalities health opportunities due to a wide gap between the wealthy and the have-nots. Overly, some countries especially the underdeveloped, as well as the developing nations, face a challenge to combat some diseases due to lack of funds and poor living conditions associated with high levels of poverty. Inadequate clean water, nutrition and other determinants of health play a vital role in determining the health levels of people residing a particular state. According to Caney (2006), health inequality is considered as unjust. Through globalizations, institutions such as WTO and World Health Organizations (WHO) and the developed countries significantly contribute towards the provision of better health to the needy and poor (Caney 2011).
Additionally, global security has led to increased practice of justice beyond borders. For instance, terrorism has been a major threat facing the underdeveloped countries. Countries across the world face terrorism which result in the death of many people. However, the international bodies such as UN and developed countries assist a lot in ensuring justice and safety. Therefore, through globalization, the idea of the nation-state is changing hence the practice of justice beyond national borders.
Section 3
Neoclassical realism accepts that it may be beneficial for the stability of the system to cede a certain amount of sovereignty to international institutions and allow justice mechanisms to operate beyond national borders in particular circumstances. According to Jokadieva (2012), international bodies such the International Criminal court (ICC) have been instituted to deal with crimes all over the globe. The institution operates outside the sovereignty of the state under a complementarity principle. Additionally, it can intervene without an accord of the sovereign state.
The ordinary people, as well as the international scholars, admit that the global systems such as the ICC are anarchic (Jokadieva 2012). Therefore, nations have the responsibility to arrive at amicable relations with others countries on their own. However, international systems exist in a situation where there is a constant antagonism within a state.
Neoclassical realism is a hypothetical methodology in international relations (IR) theory. The theory focuses on power as well as the conflictual relations among different states through war and conflict appraisal. Neoclassical realism aims at amplifying the foreign policies by basing the arguments on both national (domestic) and international levels (Armstrong 2012).
According to Tan (2010), neoclassical realism embraces that actions of a country in the global system can be elucidated by cognitive variables such as misperception and perception of systemic pressures, systemic variables such as power capability distribution among states as well as internal variables such as societal actors and public institutions. Additionally, the states mistrust or inability of state leaders to mobilize public support and state power lead to under balancing and expansion behavior hence imbalances, war as well as fall and rise of great powers.
Remarkably, humanitarian intervention has been widely used to enhance international justice beyond the borders. The invention occurs when a country is unable or unwilling to offer protection to the citizens in case of war. A third party is engaged in humanitarian intervention to provide protection. For example, countries such as Somalia, Rwanda, and Yugoslavia among other nations incurred internal wars, and the federal government failed to provide enough protection hence international bodies such as United Nations and ICC provided protection and justice. In Iraq, the United Nations intervened to secure and protect the citizens since the Iraq government was unable to offer protection to the citizens. On the same note, countries that experience genocide such as Rwanda in Africa, foreign organizations such as the UN and other international organizations assisted the affected people hence ensuring justice.
Notably, the individuals who caused the continuous war were involved in negotiation with the international arbitrators hence providing justice beyond the borders. Therefore, it is evident that claims of justice extend beyond the boundaries to ensure justice in the case of war or continuous conflict within a country. The international bodies such as ICC as well as the United Nations intervene in the constant conflicting nations to protects human beings as well as ensure that justice prevails. Therefore, the claim of justice should extend beyond borders of a country.
Conclusion
In summary, the application of justice should extend beyond national frontiers. For instance, there has been a debate between neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism which extensively dominates international relations (IR) theory. Although the two mentioned institutionalism is different in a manner, they are borne by a similar paradigm. Based on the nature of justice, several ideas have proven that there is a necessity for international justice. According to cosmopolitan and egalitarian theories, human beings have the right to justice and opportunities across the globe (Pogge 2007). Notably, John Rawls philosophy and publications on social justice have increased further inquiry for international justice among human beings (Rawls 1999). Therefore, the claim of fairness should extend beyond borders.
On the same, globalization has acted as a mechanism for justice extend across borders. For instance, the world has become a small village through global activities such as trading and technology. The idea of states is changing, and the borders are different. Notably, developed countries as well as the international bodies such as UN, WHO and WTO aid in ensuring international justice in the case of terror attacks, hunger and other disasters that affect the poor as well as human beings in general (Caney 2011).
Additionally, humanitarian inventions take place to protect people in a situation where the federal government is unable or unwilling to offer protection to citizens hence leading to extending of justice beyond national borders (Caney 2011). For instance, countries such as Rwanda have experienced genocide and wars, and the international bodies intervened to ensure justice to the citizens. According to the international law as well as the egalitarian theory, human beings across the world have the right to justice despite the states they reside. Henceforth, based on the human right ideas, the claim of justice should extend beyond the borders of a nation.
References
Abizadeh, A. (2007). Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: On the Scope (not Site) of Distributive Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 35, 318-358.
Armstrong, C. J. (2012). Global distributive justice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Blake, M. (2001). Distributive Justice, State Coercion, and Autonomy. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 30, 257-296.
Brock, G. (2012). Global justice: issues in political theory. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Caney, S. (2006). Justice beyond borders: a global political theory. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Caney, S. (2011). Humanity, Associations, and Global Justice: In Defence of Humanity-Centered Cosmopolitan Egalitarianism. Monist. 94, 506-534.
Cohen, J., & Sabel, C. (2006). Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia? Philosophy and Public Affairs. 34, 147-175.
Jokadieva. (2012). International Justice: Realism and the ICC. Available at
Nagel, T. (2005). The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 33, 113-147.
Pogge, T. (2007). World poverty and human rights: cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. Cambridge, Polity.
Rawls, J. (1999). The law of peoples. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press.
Tan, K.-C. (2010). Justice without borders: cosmopolitanism, nationalism, and patriotism. Cambridge [u.a.], Cambridge Univ. Press.
We will email this sample to you with pleasure!
Type your email