Thinking on the current state of affairs in the international politics, I came to the conclusion that there are fundamentally two approaches one can take in making a case.
First approach is to concede that the states are not bound to the ethical obligations of the individuals, and must follow their interests, how ever they are defined inside the state, no matter what the moral results are. Those who favor this view however, loose their right to criticize the actions of other states, as any action can be matched to these state interests. Furthermore, they are obliged -in my opinion- to present a model, in which this type of behavior of individual states can sustain a world in which the dignity of individuals are not hurt by the immoral relations between the states.
Second approach assumes that the states by definition composed of ethical individuals, and being so subject to such obligations by definition. Of course there will be cheaters. I think the more people take the second approach, and the more their voices are heard in a democratic way, the higher the political costs will be of cheating, that is claiming to follow the second approach, where in reality professing the latter.