Co‐national and Cosmopolitan Obligations towards Foreigners

This article specifically argues against those who think that, by appealing to Thomas Hurka's argument for co‐national obligations in his ‘The Justification of National Partiality’, these co‐national obligations take priority over certain cosmopolitan obligations towards foreigners, when the shared history of the co‐nationals is (a) a history of shared suffering, (b) a shared history of mutual benefit or (c) a shared history of jointly benefiting others. I shall argue that if this is the case, then Hurka's account surprisingly gives us a reason to fulfil our cosmopolitan obligations towards foreigners first before fulfilling our special obligations towards co‐nationals.