1.1 Colonization and its Long-Term Impacts

Colonization has left an indelible mark on the relationship between Western countries and third-world nations. The process of colonization, which involved the control and settlement of territories often by force, has had profound long-term socio-economic, political, and cultural impacts on the colonized societies (Mamdani, 1996). By establishing colonial regimes, Western powers profoundly altered the economic structures and social hierarchies of these territories.

The extractive economic policies employed by colonizers, designed to benefit the metropolitan powers, often led to the depletion of local resources and stunted the economic development of colonies. Walmart (2010) argues that the legacy of these policies continues to affect third-world countries long after they achieved independence, manifesting in contemporary economic challenges, such as a lack of diversification and reliance on primary commodities for export.

Politically, the drawing of arbitrary borders by the colonizers, without regard for pre-existing ethnic, linguistic, or cultural divisions, has been a source of conflict and instability in many post-colonial states (Herbst, 2000). The imposition of Western political models, which frequently did not align with local political traditions or practices, has had enduring consequences on the internal coherence and governance structures of these nations.

Culturally, colonization often led to the suppression of indigenous cultures and languages, while promoting westernized education and religious conversion, a process that is linked to the current identity crises still experienced in some post-colonial states (Thiong’o, 1986). The cultural imposition also resulted in the dominance of Western norms and values, which would later prove to complicate the processes of nation-building and democratization.

Furthermore, colonization had an impact on international relations, as the narratives of racial superiority that underpinned colonial ideologies continue to shape perceptions between the West and third-world countries (Said, 1978). Post-colonial power dynamics often reflect these historical inequalities, signaling how deeply entrenched the colonial past is in modern geopolitical structures.

Despite achieving political sovereignty, many third-world countries continue to deal with the legacy of colonialism in their attempts to develop. Whether through economic patterns set during the colonial era or through the continuation of asymmetric power relations, the effect of colonization cannot be understated. It thus raises crucial questions about responsibility and the implications for reparations, a notion gaining momentum in international policy debates.

In examining whether Western countries bear responsibility for the state of third-world countries, the historical context of colonization provides an essential baseline for understanding the complexities and depth of contemporary challenges faced by these nations.

1.2 Decolonization and the Cold War Dynamics

The end of formal colonization and the onset of the Cold War introduced a complex era in international relations that continues to inform current debates over the responsibility of Western countries towards third-world nations. While decolonization ostensibly represented a transfer of sovereignty and liberty to formerly colonized states, the geopolitical rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union often subjected these nascent states to new forms of external influence and manipulation.

Decolonization, on the surface, appeared as a victory for self-determination, with Western powers relinquishing direct control over their colonies. Yet the aftermath was not a complete liberation but a transformation into a bi-polar world where third-world countries often found themselves pawns in a larger strategic game (Westad, 2007). During this period, both superpowers sought to expand their spheres of influence through economic, military, and political means, effectively curtailing the autonomy of newly independent states. Western countries, including the United States and its European allies, engaged in various forms of intervention, such as covert operations to influence political outcomes, the establishment of military bases, and the forging of alliances with compliant regimes, often at the cost of enabling authoritarian rulers and suppressing democratic movements (Leffler & Westad, 2010).

The culpability of Western countries in stunting third-world development during the Cold War is also evident in the context of economic policies and aid strategies. Economic assistance became a tool for gaining political allegiance, with aid often conditional on adopting policies favorable to Western interests. The use of such economic instruments served not only to fortify alliances but also to integrate third-world economies into a global capitalist system, albeit in a manner that frequently entrenched economic dependency and inequality. For instance, the establishment and promotion of the Bretton Woods institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, by Western powers resulted in economic policies that prioritized market liberalization and fiscal austerity which, as scholars like Stiglitz (2002) argue, often hindered sustainable development and poverty reduction in the developing world.

Critics of Western interventions during the Cold War period, including post-colonial and dependency theorists, have highlighted how these actions contributed to persistent underdevelopment and political instability within third-world countries (Frank, 1967; Rodney, 1972). They contend that Western policies exacerbated the structural problems inherited from the colonial era, solidifying unequal economic relationships and undermining effective governance and social cohesion in these regions.

Furthermore, decolonization was not an event but a process, with neo-colonial tendencies emerging as Western countries endeavored to maintain control over vital resources and markets through new means, such as multinational corporations and transnational economic agreements (Nkrumah, 1965). The post-colonial period revealed the extension of influence through economic domination rather than through direct political control, leading many scholars and critics to question the genuine extent of sovereignty granted to third-world countries after decolonization.

The Cold War thus presents a complex backdrop against which to assess Western responsibility for third-world countries. It suggests that while formal colonization ended, neo-colonial practices perpetuated Western influence, shaping the political and economic trajectories of developing countries in ways that continue to have resonant consequences for international relations today.

2.1 Realist Perspectives on State Responsibility and Sovereignty

In exploring the question of Western countries’ responsibility for third-world countries, realist perspectives provide a distinct framework emphasizing state sovereignty and the centrality of power in international relations. In this context, realist theory, championed by thinkers like Hans Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz, posits that states are the primary actors operating within an anarchic international system and are inherently focused on ensuring their survival and enhancing their power (Morgenthau, 1948; Waltz, 1979). In such a system, responsibility is viewed predominantly through the lens of national interest and strategic calculations rather than moral imperatives or historical rectitude.

Realists argue that state sovereignty is sacrosanct and that interference in the domestic affairs of third-world countries should be minimal unless it directly serves a state’s national interests. Under such an approach, Western responsibilities towards third-world countries would not be framed in terms of ethical duty but rather the strategic benefits that could be accrued from such relationships. Moreover, realists may argue that third-world countries also navigate this system looking out for their self-interest, albeit with constraints due to their relative power positions (Mearsheimer, 2001).

The realist interpretation would suggest that the West’s historical interventions, whether through colonization or contemporary economic and political engagements, predominantly reflect their pursuit of power and resources rather than a responsibility or obligation towards the third-world. The strategic placement of military bases, control over resource-rich territories, and establishment of favorable trade agreements are viewed as maneuvers to maintain and expand Western power rather than attempts to uphold the welfare of third-world countries. Even humanitarian assistance under a realist lens can be deciphered as a soft-power strategy to ensure alignment or stability, which serves the West’s long-term strategic interests (Nye, 1990).

This perspective, however, encounters criticism for its perceived moral bankruptcy and its neglect of ethical responsibilities and the historical context that has shaped the current disparities between the Western and third-world countries. Critics argue that the legacy of colonialism, with its exploitative practices and imposed boundaries, has left indelible marks on the socio-economic fabric of these countries; and hence, Western countries cannot absolve themselves purely on the basis of national interests (Williams, 2005).

Notwithstanding these critiques, the realist approach to international relations continues to significantly influence how Western policymakers formulate foreign policy towards third-world countries. Realism’s focus on the balance of power may also shed light on why certain Western interventions have occurred in some regions and not others, often reflecting geopolitical importance rather than the level of need or suffering. Understanding this theoretical framework is critical in engaging with the larger question of responsibility and the complexities that define West-third world engagements.

To summarize, within the context of realist theory, the responsibilities of Western countries towards third-world nations are not inherent obligations, but are contingent on how engagement with these countries aligns with the West’s strategic concerns. The unfolding geopolitical power play remains the driving factor, and not a philanthropic duty, in aligning Western policies with the interests of third-world countries.

2.2 Liberal and Constructivist Views on Global Justice and Ethics

The debate surrounding the responsibility of Western countries to third-world countries is significantly informed by liberal and constructivist theoretical perspectives. Both theories speak to ethics, human rights, and the concept of global justice in international relations. Within liberal thought, there is an emphasis on the importance of international cooperation, human rights, and economic interdependence. Constructivist theorists, on the other hand, focus on how international norms, values, and the identity of states influence their actions and responsibilities.

Liberalism, with its roots in the works of philosophers like Kant (1781) and later expanded upon by thinkers such as Nye (2004), suggests that democratic peace and transnational relations encourage states to avoid conflict and foster cooperation. Within this liberal paradigm, Western countries are often seen as having a responsibility to aid in the development of third-world countries, not only out of altruism but due to the interconnected nature of global economics and security; wealth and stability in one region can benefit all. The principle of mutual benefit is accompanied by an ethical dimension—emphasizing moral duty and the rights of individuals across borders (Moravcsik, 1997).

Constructivism, as forwarded by scholars like Wendt (1992), mainly argues that international relations are socially constructed through the interplay of states’ identities, interests, and interactions. The responsibilities of Western countries may thus be a reflection of their identity as developed nations, which have historically taken up the ‘white man’s burden’ or a modernised version of this concept, implying a historical and ethical responsibility to help ‘civilize’ or develop third-world nations (Doty, 1996). This perspective underlines that norms about responsibilities and development are created and take on a life of their own within the international community, shaping states’ behaviors.

Drawing from the works of Finnemore and Sikkink (1998), constructivism highlights the role of international norms in defining what constitutes “appropriate” actions for states. As these norms evolve, so too does the perception of responsibility; Western countries may be seen as responsible because they have both the capacity and the global influence to propagate norms of development, human rights, and democracy. This influence, in turn, gives them a greater role in addressing issues in third-world countries.

Moreover, constructivists would argue that the concept of responsibility is not fixed but a matter of interpretation that changes over time as new norms emerge and become widely accepted. For example, the climate change discourse has shifted the conversation, positioning industrialized nations with historical contributions to emissions as having a particular responsibility towards developing countries that disproportionately bear the impact of climate change (Adger, 2006).

Each of these perspectives provides a nuanced understanding of the ethics of care and responsibility that goes beyond mere state self-interest. They suggest that Western countries’ responsibilities should encompass support for human rights, fair trading practices, and international aid that respects the autonomy and development goals of third-world countries.

In this respect, both liberal and constructivist views contribute important ethical considerations to the discourse on international relations, challenging Western nations to reflect upon their roles and responsibilities within a global framework that strives for justice and equity.

3.1 Foreign Aid, Development Assistance, and their Consequences

Foreign aid and development assistance programs have long been tools through which Western countries interact with those in the third world. These mechanisms are often lauded for their potential to alleviate poverty and promote development; however, the effectiveness and motivations behind such aid have been subjects of intense debate within international relations.

At their best, foreign aid programs have led to significant improvements in healthcare, education, and infrastructure within recipient countries. Multilateral efforts, such as those driven by the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (now succeeded by the Sustainable Development Goals), demonstrate a concerted international focus on reducing extreme poverty and improving the welfare of billions. Easterly (2006) criticizes the one-size-fits-all approach of many Western-led aid programs, but also acknowledges instances where aid has had measurable positive impacts on poverty reduction.

However, aid effectiveness is also contested. Moyo (2009) offers a critical view, arguing that aid can create dependency, undermine local economies, and incentivize corruption and poor governance. She points to the paradox that, despite massive inflows of aid, some nations remain mired in poverty with little sustainable economic growth. In a similar vein, studies have shown that tied aid—aid which the recipient must spend on goods or services from the donor country—can distort local markets and often benefits donor country industries more than the recipients (Brautigam, 2009).

The political dimensions of aid cannot be overlooked. For example, the geopolitical strategy during the Cold War significantly influenced the distribution and conditions of development assistance. Western countries, especially the United States, used aid as a means of securing alliances and countering Soviet influence in the developing world. Nye (1990) discusses how the soft power of aid can be wielded to win hearts and minds, shaping political landscapes in line with Western interests.

The aftermath of aid is not always positive, and the consequences can be complex. Even with the best intentions, aid can inadvertently reinforce existing inequalities, as larger and more accessible populations often receive a disproportionate share over remote and marginalized communities. Collier (2007) examines the “bottom billion,” those who live in countries that are failing to catch up or are falling behind the rest of the developing world, and outlines how misdirected aid can exacerbate the trap of poverty.

With the emergence of new players in the international aid landscape, such as China, the traditional Western-centric aid model faces challenges. Whereas Western aid often comes with conditions regarding governance and human rights, Chinese aid is frequently considered “no-strings-attached.” This different approach has sparked discussions about the effectiveness and ethical implications of conditional versus unconditional aid (Woods, 2008).

In conclusion, the role of Western countries as providers of foreign aid and development assistance is multifaceted and carries significant repercussions for third-world countries. While aid has unquestionably had positive outcomes in some settings, its overall impact remains a complex mix of success, failure, and unintended consequences. The challenge for Western nations is to ensure that their interventions in the form of aid foster sustainable development, respect recipient countries’ sovereignty, and align with the aims of reducing poverty and inequality on a global scale.

3.2 The Debt Crisis and Structural Adjustment Policies

The debt crisis of the 1980s and the subsequent implementation of Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank are often cited as pivotal moments in the economic history of third-world countries. SAPs were introduced as conditions for the provision of loans to developing countries that were facing financial crises, aiming to restructure their economies and ensure debt repayment. However, there is a contentious debate regarding the impact of these policies and the level of responsibility that Western countries bear for the outcomes.

The debt crisis can be traced back to the borrowing spree of the 1970s when third-world governments took out substantial loans from Western banks flush with petrodollar deposits. The loans were expected to spur economic growth, but instead, many countries became mired in debt. Stiglitz (2002) criticizes SAPs for exacerbating poverty levels in debtor nations, claiming that their focus on austerity reduced public spending needed for social services, which had adverse effects on the population’s well-being.

According to the conditionality of SAPs, recipient countries had to undertake reforms such as deregulation, privatization of state-owned enterprises, trade liberalization, and the reduction of governmental intervention in the economy. These reforms were thought to be necessary to create a more favorable investment climate that would attract foreign direct investment and stimulate economic growth. However, critics like Easterly (2001) argue that these policies were often “one size fits all,” not taking into account the unique challenges and circumstances of each country, leading to social unrest, increased poverty, and political instability.

Klein (2007) goes further and suggests that the implementation of SAPs often served Western neoliberal economic interests more than the developmental needs of the indebted countries. She posits that the West, through financial institutions, effectively managed to reshape the economies of third-world countries to open them up for Western corporations, a process that has sometimes been referred to as “economic colonialism.”

Conversely, supporters of SAPs, such as Sachs (1995), argue that these policies were necessary for correcting economic imbalances and that the responsibility for the crisis lay not only with the Western lenders and institutions but also with the third-world governments that accrued unsustainable levels of debt and failed to manage their economies effectively.

The lasting effects of the debt crisis and SAPs raise important questions about the extent to which Western countries are responsible for the financial situations in third-world countries. While it is undeniable that third-world countries exercised sovereignty when agreeing to these loans and policies, the asymmetrical power relations between lenders and borrowers must also be considered. The role of the Western-dominated IMF and World Bank in pushing for SAPs, often with little flexibility, reflects an unequal global power structure that continues to influence third-world economies to this day.

In conclusion, determining the responsibility of Western countries for the debt crisis and SAPs is a complex endeavor that involves accounting for the historical dynamics of international finance, the role of global institutions, the actions of third-world governments, and the principles of international law and justice. The dialogue on this subject continues, as does the debate about how to create a more equitable global financial system that supports the sustainable development of third-world nations.

4.1 Humanitarian Interventions and Responsibility to Protect (R2P)

In the field of international relations, the concept of humanitarian intervention and the more recently established norm of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) have become central to debates concerning the responsibilities of Western countries towards third-world countries. Humanitarian interventions are actions undertaken by states or international organizations, often without the consent of the targeted state, with the aim to prevent or end widespread suffering or harm to populations, particularly in cases of war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. The concept of R2P was endorsed by the United Nations in 2005 and holds states accountable for protecting their populations from such atrocities, with the international community having a responsibility to assist and, as a last resort, to intervene.

An examination of historical interventions reveals both the strengths and failings of Western-led actions under the guise of humanitarian concerns. Take, for example, the NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999, which was justified on humanitarian grounds to prevent further ethnic cleansing (Wheeler, 2000). The intervention was done without the explicit authorization of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), highlighting the contentious nature of such actions, where the imperative to prevent suffering was balanced against the principles of state sovereignty and the legalities of international law.

Another significant case is the 2011 intervention in Libya, where R2P was directly invoked with UNSC authorization (Bellamy, 2011). Although initially successful in averting a large-scale massacre in Benghazi, the long-term outcome of the intervention led to political instability and conflict, raising questions about the responsibility of intervening states for post-conflict reconstruction and governance.

Critics argue that Western-led interventions are often driven by ulterior motives that align with strategic interests rather than purely humanitarian concerns (Chomsky, 2013). This argument implies a selective application of humanitarian principles, which risks undermining the legitimacy of R2P as a normative framework. Furthermore, the efficiency and ethics of these interventions are scrutinized, considering their disproportionate impacts on civilian populations and the sovereignty of third-world states.

The discussions on R2P and humanitarian intervention also bring to the fore issues related to the post-colonial context, where former colonial powers engage with their former colonies under new conditions — sometimes viewed as neo-colonialism (Mamdani, 2009). The interventionist policies can reflect continuity of paternalistic attitudes towards third-world countries, neglecting the complexity of internal dynamics and the capacity of local actors to address their own challenges.

Despite these challenges, proponents assert that inaction in the face of mass atrocities would be morally reprehensible. They argue that interventions, when carried out in line with international laws and norms and with proper multilateral support, can indeed fulfill a protective role for vulnerable populations (Evans, 2008). In their view, R2P offers a framework that, if applied consistently and impartially, may ensure that the international community’s responsibility is both recognized and operationalized thoughtfully.

As such, the narrative on the responsibility of Western countries through the lens of humanitarian interventions and R2P is fraught with political, ethical, and practical dilemmas. As a subject within the field of international relations at the master’s level, the academic pursuit is to examine these interventions critically and to consider if and how the West can justifiably navigate the delicate balance between respect for national sovereignty and an international moral imperative to prevent suffering and abuse.

4.2 The Role of Economic Policies and Institutions in Shaping Third-World Economies

Economic policies and institutions, particularly those influenced or controlled by Western countries, have played a critical role in shaping the economies of third-world or developing countries. This subchapter aims to explore the extent of this influence and evaluate the responsibilities of Western countries in the economic conditions of these nations.

Firstly, Western dominance in global economic institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) has greatly influenced economic policies in developing countries, often under the guise of promoting economic stability and growth (Stiglitz, 2002). These institutions often prescribe market-oriented reforms, liberalization, and privatization as part of their conditional lending strategies. The impacts of these reforms have been widely debated, with some scholars noting how they have sometimes exacerbated poverty, inequality, and economic dependency (Bello, 2009).

Another key influence has been the implementation of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) initiated by the IMF and the World Bank in the 1980s and 1990s. SAPs prioritized debt repayment and fiscal austerity over social spending, leading to significant social and economic disruptions in affected countries (Easterly, 2005). Critics argue that the West, through these policies, effectively dictated economic policy in sovereign nations, with little regard for the resultant social costs (Klein, 2007).

Trade agreements and policies, often favoring the interests of Western countries, have also had significant effects on third-world country economies. These agreements have sometimes forced developing countries to open their markets to Western products while facing obstacles in accessing Western markets due to subsidies and protectionist measures (Chang, 2008). The repercussions on local industries and agriculture have sometimes been devastating, with small-scale producers unable to compete with heavily subsidized Western goods.

The promotion of foreign direct investment (FDI) by Western countries into third-world economies is perceived in two lights: while investment may stimulate growth and job creation, it can also lead to resource extraction and profits that disproportionately flow back to the investor country, contributing little to the host country’s sustainable development (Rodrik, 1999). Moreover, the conditions attached to such investments and the power imbalances often result in the transfer of wealth from poor to wealthy nations, reinforcing dependency and underdevelopment.

Finally, questions of responsibility arise when considering the role of multinational corporations, many of which are headquartered in Western countries, in exploiting labor and environmental resources in third-world countries. These corporations often operate with insufficient regulation, and their practices can lead to human rights abuses and environmental degradation, calling into question the ethics and responsibilities of their home countries in ensuring corporate accountability (Kobrin, 2009).

In summary, the role of Western-influenced economic policies and institutions in developing countries has been instrumental in shaping their economies. While the stated goals of such engagement often include stability and development, the outcomes have not always align with these objectives. Therefore, Western responsibility is a contentious issue that demands close examination of both the driving intentions behind policy implementations and their long-term impacts on third-world economies.

5.1 The Debate on Reparations and Rectifying Historical Wrongs

The question of whether Western countries are responsible for third-world countries has led to an intense debate on the subject of reparations and efforts to rectify historical wrongs. Proponents argue that the legacy of colonization, slavery, and exploitation by Western powers has had lasting effects on the socio-economic development of these countries. The debate encompasses not just the historical and moral dimensions, but also the contemporary implications of such actions on global inequality and international relations.

One of the central arguments in favor of reparations is that the wealth and development of many Western nations have been significantly bolstered by the resources and labor extracted from third-world countries during colonial times (Hickel, 2017). Advocates suggest that this historical exploitation has led to persistent economic disparities and has hindered the capacity of these nations to progress. Hickel also outlines the structural imbalances embedded in the global economic system that continue to disadvantage the Global South. Therefore, reparations are seen as a moral imperative to address these injustices and as a practical step towards leveling the global economic playing field.

However, critics of reparations contend that the practicalities of assessing, administering, and implementing such policies are fraught with complexities. How does one measure the extent of exploitation and calculate the appropriate recompense? There is also the perspective that current generations should not be held accountable for the sins of their ancestors, reflecting a more conservative stance on the issue (Manby, 2019).

Conversely, there are arguments that emphasize the ongoing nature of Western responsibility and suggest that reparations could take forms other than direct financial compensation. These might include debt cancellation, fairer trade policies, and increased developmental assistance tailored to bolster self-sufficiency rather than perpetuating dependency (Stiglitz, 2002). It is observed that current global trade structures still often benefit the industrialized nations, making the idea of reparations extend to systemic reforms of these structures.

Furthermore, within the realm of international law and human rights, the concept of reparations is not unprecedented. Post-conflict reparations have been a part of peace treaties and reconciliation processes, which provide a legal precedent for considering reparations on a larger scale (Teitel, 2006). These legal frameworks offer insight into how principles of restorative justice can be applied to address historical grievances between Western and third-world countries.

Lastly, the discourse on reparations intersects with broader initiatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which seek to rectify global inequalities and encourage development that is inclusive and equitable (United Nations, 2015). Advocates for reparations see alignment with such global initiatives as essential, underlining the interconnectedness of past injustices and present-day development challenges.

This discussion on reparations relates deeply to the philosophical underpinnings of international relations, with ethical considerations of international responsibilities and the pursuit of a more just global order. It is clear that any discussion on the responsibilities of the West towards third-world countries cannot be divorced from the historical context within which those relationships were formed.

5.2 Proposals for Sustainable and Equitable International Relations

The debate on the responsibility of Western countries towards third-world countries is not just a matter of historical analysis or theoretical discussion; it encompasses the formulation of forward-looking strategies that ensure a more balanced and fair global order. In envisioning future international relations that embody sustainability and equity, we must consider proposals that address the systemic inequities between the developed and developing worlds and foster cooperative multilateralism.

The premise underpinning proposals for sustainable international relations is the recognition that current inequalities stem from a complex history of exploitation, flawed policy prescriptions, and an often paternalistic approach to aid and development (Sachs, 2005). Critics argue that Western-led interventions have frequently resulted in economic policies and political structures that benefit wealthy nations at the expense of poorer ones (Moyo, 2009). To rectify these patterns, proposals often highlight the necessity of significantly reforming international financial and trade institutions, which are currently perceived to propagate a status quo biased in favor of Western interests (Stiglitz, 2002).

One area where reform is widely called for is in the structures and processes of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. By advocating for greater representation and say in decision-making procedures for third-world countries, these institutions can become more democratically accountable and attuned to the specific needs of those they aim to assist (Pogge, 2010). Furthermore, there is a need to reassess the conditionalities associated with loans and financial assistance, which have sometimes led to the erosion of social safety nets and the prioritization of debt repayment over critical public services in recipient countries.

Another proposal focuses on the enhancement of fair trade practices. Advocates for a more equitable trade system argue for the relaxation of protectionist policies in the West, such as agricultural subsidies that make it difficult for third-world farmers to compete in international markets (Narlikar, 2014). There is also a push for the protection of indigenous knowledge and industries, ensuring that local economies are not unduly harmed by the entrance of transnational corporations that may lead to monopoly situations or industries that rely on exploitative labor practices.

In the realm of environmental policies, sustainable international relations must also address the disproportionate effects of climate change on the global South. The recognition of this disparity underpins calls for increased financial and technological support for third-world countries to not only adapt to climate-related impacts but also to contribute to global mitigation efforts without sacrificing their developmental goals (Klein, 2014).

Finally, the concept of global citizenship and shared responsibility has emerged as a powerful idea in reshaping international relations to be more equitable. This perspective emphasizes the moral obligations that individuals and governments have to support global public goods and confront challenges that are transnational in nature, such as pandemics, terrorism, and human trafficking (Held, 2010). The realization of global citizenship reiterates the value of multilateral cooperation, human rights, and a shared vision for peace and prosperity for all nations.

The proposals for a more sustainable and equitable international relationship landscape are underpinned by a philosophy that promotes fair distribution of resources, a balance of power, and shared responsibilities. It requires a collaborative effort and a willingness to adopt transformative policies that foster resilience and mutual benefit across the globe.

References:


real article (Adger (2006), Vulnerability):
            Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability.

real article (Bellamy (2011), Libya and the Responsibility to Protect: The Exception and the Norm):
            Bellamy, A. J. (2011). Libya and the Responsibility to Protect: The exception and the norm. Ethics & International Affairs, 25(3), 263-269.

real book (Bello (2009), The food wars):
            Bello, W. (2009). The Food Wars. London: Verso Books.

real book (Bräutigam (2009), The dragon’s gift):
            Brautigam, D. (2009). The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa. Oxford University Press.

real book (Chang (2007), Bad Samaritans):
            Chang, H-J. (2008). Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism. Bloomsbury Press.

check:
            Chomsky, N. (2013). Humanitarian intervention: the human rights gift that keeps on giving to U.S. imperialism. Counterpunch, 20.

real book (Collier (2007), The bottom billion):
            Collier, P. (2007). The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It. Oxford University Press.

real book (Doty (1996), Imperial encounters):
            Doty, R. L. (1996). Imperial Encounters: The Politics of Representation in North-South Relations. University of Minnesota Press.

real book (Easterly (2002), The Elusive Quest for Growth):
            Easterly, W. (2001). The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists’ Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics. MIT Press.

real book (Easterly (2006), The White Man’s Burden):
            Easterly, W. (2005). The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. Penguin Books.

real book (Evans (2008), The responsibility to protect):
            Evans, G. (2008). The Responsibility to Protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All. Brookings Institution Press.

real article (Finnemore (1998), International Norm Dynamics and Political Change):
            Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.

real book (Frank (1967), Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America: historical studies of Chile and Brazil):
            Frank, A. G. (1967). Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil. Monthly Review Press.

real book (Held (2013), Cosmopolitanism):
            Held, D. (2010). Cosmopolitanism: Ideals and Realities. Polity.

real book (Herbst (2000), States and Power in Africa):
            Herbst, J. (2000). States and Power in Africa: Comparative Lessons in Authority and Control. Princeton University Press.

real book (Hickel (2017), The Divide):
            Hickel, J. (2017). The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions. Heinemann.

real book (Kant (2016), The Critique Of Pure Reason):
            Kant, I. (1781). Critique of Pure Reason.

real book (Klein (2007), The Shock Doctrine):
            Klein, N. (2007). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books.

real book (Klein (2014), This Changes Everything):
            Klein, N. (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate. Simon & Schuster.

real article (Kobrin (2009), Private Political Authority and Public Responsibility: Transnational Politics, Transnational Firms, and Human Rights):
            Kobrin, S. J. (2009). Private Political Authority and Public Responsibility: Transnational Politics, Transnational Firms, and Human Rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3), 349-374.

check:
            Leffler, M. P., & Westad, O. A. (Eds.). (2010). The Cambridge History of the Cold War (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.

real book (Mamdani (1996), Citizen and subject):
            Mamdani, M. (1996). Citizen and Subject: Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism. Princeton University Press.

real book (Mamdani (2008), Saviors and Survivors):
            Mamdani, M. (2009). Saviors and Survivors: Darfur, Politics, and the War on Terror. Pantheon Books.

real book (Manby (2018), Citizenship in Africa):
            Manby, B. (2019). Citizenship in Africa: The Law of Belonging. Hart Publishing.

real book (Mearsheimer (2001), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics):
            Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.

real article (Moravcsik (1997), Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics):
            Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553.

real book (Morgenthau (1948), Politics among Nations):
            Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace. New York, NY: Knopf.

real book (Moyo (2009), Dead aid):
            Moyo, D. (2009). Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

real book (Narlikar (2010), New Powers How To Become One And How To Manage Them):
            Narlikar, A. (2014). New Powers: How to Become One and How to Manage Them. Columbia University Press.

real article: (Bhola (1987), Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature):
            Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o. (1986). Decolonising the Mind: the Politics of Language in African Literature. Heinemann.

real book (Nkrumah (1965), Neo-colonialism):
            Nkrumah, K. (1965). Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. Thomas Nelson & Sons.

real book (Nye (1991), Bound to lead):
            Nye, J. S. (1990). Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. Basic Books.

real book (Nye (2004), Soft Power):
            Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy, No. 80, Twentieth Anniversary, 153-171.

real book (Nye (2004), Soft Power):
            Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs.

real book (Pogge (2008), World Poverty and Human Rights):
            Pogge, T. (2010). World Poverty and Human Rights. Polity.

real article (Gerhart (1997), How Europe Underdeveloped Africa):
            Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications.

real book (Rodrik (1999), The New Global Economy and Developing Countries):
            Rodrik, D. (1999). The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness Work. Policy Essay No. 24, Overseas Development Council.

real article: (Zahidogli (2020), The End of Poverty: How We Can Make it Happen in Our Lifetime):
            Sachs, J. (2005). The End of Poverty: How We Can Make It Happen In Our Lifetime. Penguin Books.

real article (Said (2019), 35 ORIENTALISM RECONSIDERED):
            Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.

real book (Stiglitz (2002), Globalization and its discontents):
            Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and Its Discontents. W. W. Norton & Company.

real article (Teitel (2014), Transitional Justice):
            Teitel, R. G. (2006). Transitional Justice. Oxford University Press.

check:
            United Nations. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations.

real book (Wallerstein (1996), Historical Capitalism With Capitalist Civilization):
            Wallerstein, I. (2010). Historical Capitalism with Capitalist Civilization. Verso.

real book (Waltz (1979), Theory of international politics):
            Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

real article (Wendt (1995), Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics (1992)):
            Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425.

real book (Westad (2005), The Global Cold War):
            Westad, O. A. (2007). The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times. Cambridge University Press.

real book (Wheeler (2000), Saving strangers):
            Wheeler, N. J. (2000). Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford University Press.

real book (Williams (2005), The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations (Cambridge Studies in International Relations)):
            Williams, M. C. (2005). The Realist tradition and the limits of international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

real article (WOODS (2008), Whose aid? Whose influence? China, emerging donors and the silent revolution in development assistance):
            Woods, N. (2008). Whose Aid? Whose Influence? China, Emerging Donors and the Silent Revolution in Development Assistance. International Affairs, 84(6), 1205-1221.

Photo by Danique Godwin on Unsplash