Misplaced Pages

Just war theory: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:05, 28 January 2005 editHadal (talk | contribs)Administrators31,685 editsm Reverted edits by 161.184.23.134 to last version by 69.180.29.210← Previous edit Revision as of 01:22, 31 January 2005 edit undo128.151.71.19 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit →
Line 6: Line 6:


*War can only be waged for a just cause, such as ] against an armed attack. *War can only be waged for a just cause, such as ] against an armed attack.
*War can only be waged under legitimate ]. The ] power of the state is usually considered to be legitimate authority. This means that ] at their own will cannot attack another country without the permission of the sovereign. *War can only be waged under legitimate ]. Usually the constitution and the laws of a nation state specify the institutions and personnel authorized to make war decisions. The U.N Charter authorizes the Security Council to make the internaitonal community's war decisions. ] at their own will cannot attack another country without the permission of the legitimate authority. Conversely, in a democratic nation state, statesmen with legitimate authority will need to convince citizens that their course of action is legal and proper.
*War can only be waged with the right intention. Correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right ], while material gain is not. Thus a war that would normally be just for all other reasons would be made unjust by a bad intention. *War can only be waged with the right intention. Correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right ], while material gain is not. Thus a war that would normally be just for all other reasons would be made unjust by a bad intention. Right intention requires that democratic statesmen accept the decision of their nations' courts and electorates on the legitimacy and the justice of their action.
*War can only be waged with a reasonable chance of success. It is considered unjust to meaninglessly waste human life and economic resources if defeat is unavoidable. *War can only be waged with a reasonable chance of success. It is considered unjust to meaninglessly waste human life and economic resources if defeat is unavoidable.
*War must be waged with proportionality in mind. The suffering which existed pre-War should not be overshadowed by the suffering the War may cause.] *War must be waged with proportionality in mind. The suffering which existed pre-War should not be overshadowed by the suffering the War may cause.]

Revision as of 01:22, 31 January 2005

"Just war" is the name of a tradition that believes that war is permissible but only if it satisfies a set of moral or legal rules. Though in origin a Christian doctrine, Francisco de Vitoria based his arguments on reason and so put the tradition on a more universal basis. The rules applied may be ethical, religious, or formal (such as international law). The rules classically cover the justification for the war (Jus ad Bellum) and the conduct of the participants in the war (Jus in Bello).

Just war theory has ancient roots. Cicero discussed this idea and its applications. Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas later codified a set of rules for a just war, which today still encompass the points commonly debated, with some modifications.

In modern language, these rules hold that to be just, a war must meet the following criteria before the use of force:
(Jus ad Bellum)

  • War can only be waged for a just cause, such as self-defense against an armed attack.
  • War can only be waged under legitimate authority. Usually the constitution and the laws of a nation state specify the institutions and personnel authorized to make war decisions. The U.N Charter authorizes the Security Council to make the internaitonal community's war decisions. Citizens at their own will cannot attack another country without the permission of the legitimate authority. Conversely, in a democratic nation state, statesmen with legitimate authority will need to convince citizens that their course of action is legal and proper.
  • War can only be waged with the right intention. Correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain is not. Thus a war that would normally be just for all other reasons would be made unjust by a bad intention. Right intention requires that democratic statesmen accept the decision of their nations' courts and electorates on the legitimacy and the justice of their action.
  • War can only be waged with a reasonable chance of success. It is considered unjust to meaninglessly waste human life and economic resources if defeat is unavoidable.
  • War must be waged with proportionality in mind. The suffering which existed pre-War should not be overshadowed by the suffering the War may cause.]
  • War can only be waged as a last resort. War is not just until all realistic options which were likely to right the wrong have been pursued.

Once war has begun, just war theory also directs how combatants are to act:
(Jus in Bello)

  • The force used must be proportional to the wrong endured, and to the possible good that may come.
  • The acts of war should be directed towards the inflictors of the wrong, and not towards civilians caught in circumstances they did not create. Some theologians believe that this rule forbids weapons of mass destruction of any kind, for any reason (such as the use of an atomic bomb).
  • Torture, of combatants or of non-combatants, is forbidden.
  • Prisoners of war must be treated respectfully.
  • Many throughout history have considered conscription an unjust means, e.g.
"It is debasing human dignity to force men to give up their life, or to inflict death against their will, or without conviction as to the justice of their action." -- Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi in the Manifesto Against Conscription and the Military System

The condition of proportionality is often misunderstood. A quote from Ambrosius may well clarify it. Taking an example of a traveler coming to the aid of a fellow traveler who has been attacked by a robber he says "At the same time, the Christian should use no more force than necessary to subdue the attacker, for that person too is someone for whom Christ died. Charity thus justifies the resort to force in defense, not in self but of the other; yet at the same time it limits the force that can be used against the evildoer to what is necessary to end the evil." Hence minimum force is used here in the ethical sense of minimum harm. It is not in conflict with the Powell doctrine of overwhelming force. If overwhelming force in the military sense produces less harm then it can be seen as minimum force in the ethical sense used by Just War theorists.


Just War Theorists

See also

External links

Against:

Categories: