In an increasingly interconnected world, the problems of one nation can quickly become the problems of all. From climate change and pandemics to economic crises and humanitarian disasters, global challenges require global solutions. This raises a fundamental and difficult question for every government and its citizens: Where does our responsibility lie? Should we focus on solving problems within our own borders first, or do we have a moral obligation to address suffering and instability wherever it occurs? In this lesson, we will explore this complex ethical dilemma through a structured debate.
The Palace of Nations in Geneva, a United Nations office, symbolizes the commitment to multilateral cooperation.
Vocabulary
To discuss this topic effectively, you will need to use precise academic language. Study the key vocabulary below.
| Word | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| accountability | The state of being responsible for one’s actions and decisions, and the expectation of being called to explain them. | Activists are demanding greater accountability from multinational corporations for their environmental impact. |
| intervention | The action of becoming intentionally involved in a difficult situation in order to improve it or prevent it from getting worse. | There was much debate about whether military intervention was justified to protect the civilian population. |
| cooperation | The action or process of working together to the same end. | International cooperation is essential to combat climate change effectively. |
| multilateral | Agreed upon or participated in by three or more parties, especially the governments of different countries. | The country signed a multilateral agreement to reduce nuclear weapons. |
| obligation | An act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment. | Many people believe that wealthy nations have a moral obligation to provide aid to developing countries. |
| sovereignty | The authority of a state to govern itself or another state; self-governing power. | The principle of national sovereignty means that other countries should not interfere in its internal affairs. |
Grammar Focus
When debating and negotiating, using the correct modal verbs and conditional structures is crucial for expressing your position clearly and persuasively.
Modals of Obligation
Modals of obligation help you express the level of necessity or duty you are arguing for. Notice the different strengths.
Must / Have to: These express strong obligation. 'Must' often implies a moral or internal duty, while 'have to' often refers to an external rule or requirement.
"We must act now to prevent a humanitarian crisis." (A moral imperative)
"According to the treaty, our government has to reduce its carbon emissions by 20%." (A legal requirement)
Should / Ought to: These express a recommendation or a weaker, moral obligation. They are perfect for giving advice or suggesting a course of action.
"Developed nations should contribute more to climate funds." (A recommendation)
"I believe we ought to reconsider our position on foreign aid." (A suggested moral duty)
Conditionals for Negotiation
Conditional sentences are essential for discussing potential actions and their consequences, which is the heart of any negotiation or debate.
Second Conditional (Hypothetical Present/Future): Use this to talk about imaginary situations and their likely results. Structure: If + past simple, ...would/could/might + base verb.
"If our country invested more in international aid, our own infrastructure projects might be delayed."
"If we took a multilateral approach, we could solve the problem more efficiently."
Third Conditional (Hypothetical Past): Use this to discuss past situations that did not happen and their imagined results. Structure: If + past perfect, ...would/could/might have + past participle.
"If the international community had acted sooner, the conflict could have been prevented."
"We would have seen more progress if there had been better cooperation between the nations."
The Debate
Now, it's time to put your language skills to the test. You will participate in a mock international summit to debate the following prompt:
“Should countries prioritize global problems or their own citizens first?”
Warm-up: Watch & Listen
Watch the following video, which presents a thought experiment about our ethical obligations to others. Consider the main question it asks.
The Life You Can Save
A book trailer for Peter Singer's work on our responsibility to end world poverty.
Activity: Prepare Your Arguments
Your class will be divided into groups, each representing a different perspective. Prepare to argue your position based on the role you are assigned. Use the vocabulary and grammar from this lesson to build a strong, persuasive case.
Role 1: Representative of a High-Income Nation (e.g., Germany, Canada)
- Your country has a stable economy and a high standard of living. You face domestic pressure to spend tax money on national issues like healthcare and infrastructure.
- However, you are also a major player on the world stage and are expected to contribute to global solutions.
- Argument: Argue for a balanced approach. While you have a moral obligation to help, your primary duty is to your own citizens. National security and economic stability must come first.
Role 2: Representative of a Low- to Middle-Income Nation (e.g., Bangladesh, Nigeria)
- Your country is facing significant challenges, such as the effects of climate change, economic instability, or public health crises.
- You rely on international cooperation and aid to address these problems.
- Argument: Argue that global problems are interconnected. The problems you face were often caused or made worse by the actions of wealthier nations. Therefore, they have a strong obligation to provide support through funding and technology.
Role 3: Head of an International Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) (e.g., Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders)
- Your organization works directly on the ground in crisis zones. You see the human cost of global problems firsthand.
- You are politically neutral and believe in universal human rights.
- Argument: Argue that humanity should come before nationality. The concept of sovereignty should not be a barrier to intervention when human lives are at stake. A global-first approach is the only ethical choice.
Reflection
After the debate, you will write a short reflection. Think about the arguments that were presented from all sides.