The value of solidarity in international relations
By Ioan Voicu*
Promoting a universal value
In the following pages we are going to present how the value of solidarity is reflected in a recent collective book entitled Politics Between Nations: Power, Peace, and Diplomacy, edited by Adebowale Akande in the series Contributions to International Relations,published by Springer in 2023.The book is comprehensive and has 645 pages
The general editor of the book is Adebowale Akande who currently serves as an international director for IR GLOBE in Vancouver and a guest professor to a number of Canadian Universities in British Columbia, Canada.
The main objective of this multidisciplinary volume is to examine the meaning of global conflict and cooperation by international actors that can be caused by dis- or misinformation to people and discusses how to build diplomacy for peace and regional cooperation. In that large context, this collective work further identifies boundaries of the relationships among the various governments, transatlantic alliances, international and non-governmental organizations, transnational corporations, and the overall interdependence of nations in the making of the modern world.
Specific topics discussed in this volume include inter alia diplomacy as a profession, international relations theory, European Union, Brexit, Afghanistan conflict, international law, universal organizations, interstate war, threats and challenges, global civil society, religion, and culture.
The point of departure of all studies dedicated to current international relations should be inspired by the Millennium Declaration adopted by consensus by a United Nations Summit on 8 September 2000.This diplomatic document has proclaimed six values which must be considered as universal values to be essential to international relations in the twenty-first century. They include : freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, respect for nature and shared responsibility.
The first reference to solidarity in the book under review appears in the section on NATO’s Goals and Values.In this section it is clearly emphasized that “NATO’s fundamental purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means. The organization’s security system is that of collective defense that should be distinguished from the collective security system of the United Nations. Thus, collective defense constitutes the core of the Atlantic alliance and creates a spirit of solidarity and cohesion among its members”.(p.58)
A comprehensive vision of human rights on solidarity can be illustrated by an analysis of the African Declaration of Human Rights which does not operate only with individual rights, but also with individual duties towards the state. This multilateral regional instrument requires all its destinataires “To strengthen social and national solidarity”.(p.85)
In Asia,China was unhappy with the US initiative to invite 110 countries to a virtual “Summit for Democracy” in December 2021. Le Yucheng, China’s vice foreign minister, described his government as a democracy and was critical of the decision to not invite China to the summit. “But this is in fact the very opposite of democracy,” said Le in her criticism. “It will do no good to global solidarity, no good to cooperation and no good to development” . The decision to invite Taiwan to the summit may have been the motivation for China to negatively comment this event.(p.179)
Solidarity cannot be separated from sustainable development which implies that everybody in the global community works together to solve global problems . The partnership goal requires the collaboration between states, business and civil society in responsible world citizenship with focus on basic ethical principles of protection of human autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability. In a functional interpretation partnerships move beyond the nation state and can be considered to follow the vision of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) based on a global concern for the totality of humanity . Consequently “ partnerships integrate human rights with the idea of human solidarity and cooperation towards the future of humanity.”(p.229)
The book under review deals with factors limiting the effectiveness of the EU’s public diplomacy. Some of these factors are structural, while some others are operational. First, the EU’s public diplomacy is complicated by the imprecise nature of the EU’s self-definition or, in other words, by the EU efforts to determine what type of actor the Union wishes to be on the international stage. This is in part due to the fact that the EU is an ongoing project, but also partly due to the existential crisis the Union is facing about who and what the EU is on the global stage. “This is a structural factor and unless a greater solidarity is achieved within the EU and among its member states through common policies and common approaches, it would be very difficult for the EU public diplomacy to improve the EU’s image both within the Union and abroad”.(p.296)
An adequate attention is paid to the significant role of solidarity in the case of migrant, refugee and displaced persons (IDPs). The quoted document, known as Kampala Declaration on Refugees, Returnees and Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (2009) is a Pan-African ideal that aims to foster solidarity among African states and harness past histories, experiences, and commitments to tackle displacement caused mostly by conflict. This instrument recognizes expressis verbis that IDPs are people with skills, experiences, and expertise who are willing and able to contribute to Africa’s development and progress. Thus, the declaration can be interpreted as an unanimous agreement to prevent forced displacement in Africa, and a deliberate commitment to effectively protect victims of forced displacement. It meets the specific needs of displaced women, children, and other vulnerable groups, and reconstruct communities emerging from conflicts and natural disasters.(p.411)
A serious potential situation for Europe is not ignored in this book. Indeed, the requirements for fighting and controlling a limited nuclear war in Europe include formidable expectations for political collaboration, military interoperability and public acquiescence. Even nuclear command post exercises and simulated alerts proved to be challenging during the Cold War. The question is : In the immediate aftermath of the first-ever detonation of a nuclear weapon in Europe, would solidarity and resilience hold among NATO member states, or would some governments begin to opt out ?
The answer suggested by the authors of the book is circumstantial :”The reaction of public opinion in Europe to the imminent prospect of “limited” nuclear war is likely to be extremely fragmented, divisive, and in all likelihood, somewhat hysterical”.(pp.533-534)
The book contains a special chapter about Romania under the title Romania: Between Europeanisation and De-Europeanisation signed by S. Mișcoiu, Faculty of European Studies, Babeș-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca. There is only a single reference to solidarity in this chapter which is explained in an interesting context.We will summarize it using the original terminology of the author.
Romanian Euroscepticism presents a particularity (or extremism) that distinguishes it from the similar phenomena existing in many other European countries. This is related to the high degree of formal support of the Euro-Atlantic direction of Romania, a direction identified as a guarantee of security and stability. Romanians overwhelmingly choose the “West”, i.e., the European Union and NATO. This has already been the case for two decades. Moreover, trust in the EU is consistently high and even much higher than that in national institutions. However, it is questionable whether this can be interpreted as proof that Romanians have fully internalised European values. Rather, the Romanians’ formal Europhilia could be explained, on the one hand, by the historical attitude of conformity to a national strategy perceived as useful and, on the other hand, by the rejection of alternatives to “Europe”, that is, of the East, dominated by Russia, but also of the autarchic isolation preached by ultra-nationalists. However, the conclusion is a complex one :” although persistent and entrenched, neither of these two attitudes—compliance with official doctrine and fear of alternative solutions—is irreversible. Above all, they do not reflect the structural rootedness of European values (democracy, solidarity, inclusion, tolerance, etc.) in the national collective mind.”(p.600)
All other references to solidarity are limited to Poland. The first one is related to the period when Poland was “opened” to Western media, at least to young intellectuals who could read in English, French, German, or Spanish, by allowing foreign magazines and newspapers to be placed on public library and university shelves. Immediately, this diluted the influence of the Russian news media that had exercised a monopoly in Poland at least since 1952, that had been the lifetime of an entire generation. Directly, this inspired the rise of labor movements, including Solidarity (Polish Solidarność). “Indirectly, this nurtured the rise of Poland’s new middle class and intelligentsia, the prelude to the free Poland as we came to know it from 1989 until the present time.”(p.612)
It is also asserted that in supporting the people of Poland, the Solidarity and later the post-Solidarity time, the United States earned the lasting respect of all political parties within Poland. It is reminded that Poland’s respect for the US was earned as the product of individual hard efforts by the diplomats these countries exchanged. The diplomats that Poland sent to the USA since 1945 harbored views of Polish nationalism and independence. “If there is commonality among the diplomats the United States sent to Poland, it would be that they provided personal and independent assessments of Poland as their host country, sometimes even taking their views directly to the American public”.(p.618)
Conclusion
Why did we focused in 2023 on the way the value of solidarity is reflected in the studies incorporated in the book entitled Politics Between Nations: Power, Peace, and Diplomacy edited by Adebowale Akande ?
There is an essential event nearly forgotten today which is directly linked to the value of solidarity..On 18 February 2000 the 194 Member States of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), including Romania, gathered in Bangkok, Thailand, between 12-19 February 2000, for the tenth session of the Conference, and adopted by consensus, in an atmosphere of enthusiasm, the first significant multilateral document of the current century entitled Bangkok Declaration: Global Dialogue and Dynamic Engagement. Paragraph 9 of this document says :” Solidarity and a strong sense of moral responsibility must be the guiding light of national and international policy. They are not only ethical imperatives, but also prerequisites for a prosperous, peaceful and secure world based on true partnership. Such partnership requires more inclusive, transparent and participatory institutional arrangements for international economic decision-making so as to ensure that the benefits of globalization are accessible to all on an equitable basis. In addition, the success of international development efforts depends on account being taken of all stakeholders, including the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and academia.”
Books and studies about solidarity produced by academia , which are not numerous, represent a must-read for students, researchers, diplomats, scholars of international relations, as well as for the general public.
Global solidarity has never been more important than today.The recent COP28 on climate change in Dubai has demonstrated that only by acting in solidarity the world community can successfully cope with vital problems for the future of humanity.The warning formulated by the UN Secretary-General according to whom “Humanity has a choice: cooperate or perish…. It is either a Climate Solidarity Pact – or a Collective Suicide Pact” is too serious to be underestimated.The relevance of this warning will be further validated in 2024 and in the years to come.
*Dr. Ioan Voicu was Visiting Professor at Assumption University in Bangkok (2000-2019).
18.12.2023 / Editor, Andreea Dragan
The diplomatic daily newspaper Nine O’Clock does not assume responsibility for the information received and published on the public website. The responsibility for the content lies solely with the issuer of the press release.
The diplomatic daily newspaper Nine O’Clock cannot be held accountable for false information transmitted by the recipients of the press releases/announcements.
The diplomatic daily newspaper Nine O’Clock reserves the right not to publish press releases that contain inappropriate expressions or accusations and violations of the rights of other individuals, guaranteed by the Constitution of Romania.
The content of the website www.nineoclock.ro is intended for public information. Copying, reproduction, recompilation, modification, as well as any form of content exploitation from this website are prohibited. The use of the Comments section signifies your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions regarding the publication of comments on www.nineoclock.ro.
