In the traditional study of international relations, benevolence is often understood through two main prisms: neutrality and hegemony. Historically, neutrality developed as a wartime posture based on non-intervention and impartiality, gaining legal recognition in the 19th century as a mechanism for peace and stability. Benevolent hegemony, on the other hand, has roots in antiquity, exemplified in the contrast between Athenian imperialism and Spartan restraint as described by Thucydides. Modern liberal theories have built on this, portraying great powers as guarantors of order who promote diplomacy through multilateral institutions. This narrative has justified post-Cold War claims of ‘benevolent empires’, applied to actors like the United States, and more recently, China.
However, both models have limitations. Neutrality has been historically fragile, often violated in times of conflict, and increasingly sidelined in the age of collective security and regional integration. The idea of a stabilising hegemon is also problematic, particularly when such powers act unilaterally or prioritise self-interest.
This conventional framing creates several blind spots. First, it restricts benevolence to state actors, excluding civil society and individuals. Second, it implies that only a few exceptional states can act benevolently. Third, it reduces motivation to strategic interest, overlooking the emotional and ethical dimensions of international life.
A broader understanding of benevolence is needed – one that acknowledges both its moral potential and emotional force. Benevolence can be defined as a calm, attentive disposition towards oneself, others and the world. It encompasses a spectrum of actions, from refraining from harm to actively supporting others. It is both spontaneous and cultivated and often influenced by proximity: empathy tends to diminish with physical or emotional distance. Yet in today’s interconnected world, encounters with strangers are frequent and morally significant. Any person may suddenly become a ‘neighbour’ in need.
Global society is no longer the exclusive domain of states. Non-state actors, local communities and transnational networks increasingly shape international dynamics. Benevolence in this context requires moving beyond the limited framework of national interest to recognise shared vulnerabilities and mutual responsibilities. While some philosophers have argued that humans are incapable of genuine concern for distant others, conditions today challenge this assumption. The expansion of communication, travel and global interdependence creates fertile ground for the extension of moral concern beyond immediate circles.
Benevolence as recognition of vulnerability
Genuine benevolence often emerges in moments of shared crisis. Following the earthquakes in Turkey and Syria in February 2023, historical enmities temporarily gave way to solidarity. Armenia opened a border crossing with Turkey for the first time in decades to deliver aid. Egypt resumed communication with Syria, and regional actors pushed for its reintegration into the Arab League. These gestures, though brief and politically charged, reflected a basic human response to suffering: the refusal to remain indifferent in the face of vulnerability.
Other forms of benevolence are less spectacular but equally significant. Along migratory routes, certain towns – such as Tiznit or Taza in Morocco – have developed cultures of welcome. There, relationships between local populations and migrants are shaped by respect, reciprocity and shared experiences of vulnerability. This ‘civility of transit’ echoes the Kantian idea of cosmopolitan hospitality, grounded in mutual recognition. This idea is increasingly vital as climate-induced migration accelerates, with disasters such as the Pakistan floods (2022) and East African droughts driving new patterns of forced displacement.
In the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, acts of benevolence – including temporary ceasefires to allow humanitarian aid – highlight the fragile but crucial role of compassion in deeply polarised conflicts.
Benevolence as respectful affection
Respectful benevolence is not purely abstract. It includes sympathy, a disposition that decentred the self and opens one to the singularity of others. This emotional component, described in ethical philosophy as the ‘pulp’ of respect, also plays a role in diplomatic life.
In informal diplomacy, sympathy often emerges in private interactions, away from the spotlight. Digital communication has transformed this dynamic: encrypted chats, emojis and spontaneous exchanges can build trust in ways official discourse cannot. While social media has been used aggressively in public diplomacy – from cyber-influence campaigns to combative rhetoric – it also offers opportunities for empathetic connection.
Benevolence also shapes peace-building practices. Many post-Cold War interventions have failed due to inefficiency or external imposition. Alternative models emphasise local agency and cultural relevance. On Idjwi Island (DR Congo), peace is sustained through community-led education and dialogue. In Somaliland, peace building has emerged from local initiative rather than international pressure. Organisations such as the Life & Peace Institute support these bottom-up approaches by fostering dialogue and mutual recognition.
Benevolence as a foundation of solidarity
Benevolence is a moral possibility inherent in all humans, though not automatically realised. It depends on personal commitment and the cultivation of favourable conditions. In a global context marked by cultural conflict and ideological confrontation, such commitment is not easy. There are some traces of social multilateralism. The proximity generated by globalisation can feel overwhelming, producing defensiveness or even hostility. And benevolence is not without risk. It can mask paternalism, especially when one party denies the agency or identity of the other. It should not be mistaken for justice but rather considered a complementary force – one that sustains recognition, care and empathy in a fragile world.
Nonetheless, the call to benevolence persists. Benevolence does not replace justice, but it complements it. If fraternity expresses the emotional warmth of solidarity, benevolence represents its quieter, respectful form. A world governed solely by interest or by rigid identities is unworkable. Benevolence offers an alternative – a way to acknowledge our interdependence while preserving the dignity of others.
Frédéric Ramel is Professor of Political Science at Sciences Po Paris, France.
Benevolence in International Relations by Frédéric Ramel is available to on Bristol University Press for £75.00.
Bristol University Press/Policy Press newsletter subscribers receive a 25% discount – sign up here.
Follow Transforming Society so we can let you know when new articles publish.
The views and opinions expressed on this blog site are solely those of the original blog post authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Bristol University Press and/or any/all contributors to this site.
Image: Basma Alghali via Unsplash