Ans: 1 Introduction

Ethics in international relations goes with international humanitarian values and importance of National interest. Article 51 of the Indian constitution always promoted peace and progress in international affairs. Above mentioned case study is a perfect example of the dilemma about National interest vs international peace and respecting important world institutions vs protecting groupings integrity .

Case analysis:

1. BRICS summit essential for economic development and bringing cooperative ideas between countries.
2. As an IFS, Suman is responsible for making India’s image correct in world affairs.
3. India is not a part of ICC and not bound by the ruling of ICC.
4. As a continuous effort India always criticised wars on humanitarian ground and supported war affected people by humanitarian assistance.

Suman should carefully consider the request made by ICC and weigh the potential consequences of either complying or refusing to comply with it. India is not a signatory to the ICC and is not legally bound to comply with its decisions. However, as a responsible member of the international community, India should consider the moral implications of harbouring an individual accused of war crimes and genocide.

in this case,

Suman has different options available like

1. Harshly reply to ICC ,about not to interfere with bilateral relationship.
2. Giving assurance of the arrest of that leader to the ICC.
3. Explaining India’s correct position in grouping and explaining different provisions and past cases about how bilateral and multilateral grouping functions goes on

Answer to ICC

1. From independence, India evolved as an independent state and always took the correct stand for humanity by non-joining any grouping in the past.
2. With that, India always criticised wars and violence as a means to acquire territory in the past and in this particular war too.
3. But that doesn’t mean India will go against any particular country in this situation. India’s stand may be different and not one but both the countries responsible for war .
4. As a BRICS member and host of the summit, a peaceful and successful summit is essential for socio economic development of the region.
5. Arresting heads of any state because of that country’s internal interest hampers India’s position as a global guiding power.

Reasons for this answer:

1. India’s sovereignty: In international relations countries sovereignty is the first criteria and value to take decisions.
   
2. Policy of de-hyphenation: India always criticised war on both the front and criticising both countries responsible to that war .That’s why India could not arrest the head of any country.
3. BRICS and socio-economic development: Country first attitude is essential while making any decision. For example if that particular country provides tariff free goods , a new market then it supports India’s economic growth.
4. World peace: India always criticised war but arresting the head of BRICS escalated the wars.
5. Ethical issue of National interest: India should have claims, objectives, goals, demands and interests which a nation always tries to preserve, protect, defend and secure

Suman should consult with the Ministry of External Affairs and other relevant stakeholders to determine the best course of action. It may be possible to negotiate with ICC and find a solution that satisfies both parties. Alternatively, India could choose to deny the request and provide reasons for doing so, such as concerns about the validity of the charges or the potential impact on diplomatic relations with the country in question.

Ans: 2 Ethical issues

1. Ethics of the war: Most people think that a soldier doesn’t do wrong simply by fighting in a war, even if that war is an unjust one.
2. Issue of International peace: Peace is a fundamental value for society and progress of the world .War threatens the peace .
3. Ethical issue of National interest: India should have claims, objectives, goals, demands and interests which a nation always tries to preserve, protect, defend and secure
4. Economic development of the region: Ethics in international relations always promoted the development perspective and un development created a base for amoral activities .
5. Integrity of the official with countries interest: Answerability and accountability of officers essential to handle such critical situations.
6. Responsibility to uphold international law: As a member of the global community, India has a responsibility to uphold international law and cooperate with international organisations like the ICC.
7. Moral responsibility to prevent war crimes: India has always been a vocal critic of war crimes and genocide, and has a moral responsibility to prevent such crimes from occurring.
8. Balancing diplomatic relations and ethical considerations: India’s participation in the BRICS initiative is important for its economic growth and diplomacy, but arresting a foreign delegate could potentially harm these relations. Suman must balance these diplomatic considerations with ethical considerations.
9. Ensuring fair trial: If India decides to arrest the foreign delegate, it must ensure that he is given a fair trial. This includes providing him with legal representation and ensuring that his rights are protected.

In such situations National interest is prime. Indian values of peace and non-violence are always promote a cooperative global order. Efforts like NAM shows India is always looking for new solutions. Recent assistance to Ukraine refugees confirmed India’s humanitarian values. Ultimately, Suman and the Ministry of External Affairs must carefully balance these competing ethical concerns  and make a decision that upholds India’s values and interests while also respecting international law and norms.