In terms of international relations, the invasion by Colombian troops to Ecuadorian territory, which meant the assassination of two men (one Ecuadorian and one Colombian), has weakened the diplomatic bonds between the two nations. The controversial Venezuelan government has also shown disapproval over the event occurred. Officials of both the offended countries had deployed troops to their borders with Colombia as they argued that what had happened meant a violation of the nation’s sovereignty over its own territory. Furthermore, Ecuadorian president, Correa, and his homologous Venezuelan part, Chavez, removed their government officials from Colombia.
How to asses this situation in ethical terms? When analyzing the situation from an end-based perspective, it can be argued that the measures taken by the Colombian government to cross troops to Ecuadorian territory with the intention of bringing down one of the FARC’s head figures was morally correct and thus ethical. This is the justification the Colombian government used when it gave explanations to the international community. In recent years, the government of this country has been more successful in fighting the terrorist guerrilla and gaining control over previously FARC occupied territory. Having both the US and the EU as allies in this “fight against terrorism” Colombia has gotten stronger. I think that when weighing the goods and evil of this intervention the Government found the grater good in debilitating the FARC –until the moment its biggest enemy. In consequentialist thinking, this machiavelic strategy would be considered morally correct as the government sought to maximize the good for its people. But the fact that the consequences cannot be fully anticipated is one of the limitations of this line of thought.
It is a given that the means to achieve the desired end was what Ecuador and Venezuela questioned and condemned, thus their view on the situation can be paralleled with the deontological, rule-based, ethics of action. Since the main issue of international relations is, in this case, the disapproval of the means utilized by the Colombian military I find the rule-base scope the fittest to criticize the actions taken by Colombia. Nevertheless, through an end-based approach we can obtain a better understanding of the actions undertaken by the infringing Government.
