Seumas Miller
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190626136
- eISBN:
- 9780190626174
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190626136.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
In this chapter it is argued that humanitarian armed intervention in relation to large-scale human rights violations is in some cases morally justified (e.g., the Rwanda genocide), and that ...
More
In this chapter it is argued that humanitarian armed intervention in relation to large-scale human rights violations is in some cases morally justified (e.g., the Rwanda genocide), and that intervention is best understood as a collective moral responsibility. Moreover, collective moral responsibility is to be understood as the joint moral responsibility of individual human actors. Here two notions are utilized: multilayered structures of joint actions and joint institutional mechanisms. It is further argued that humanitarian armed intervention can, at least in principle, be morally justified in the case where there is large-scale violation of (basic) positive rights (e.g., subsistence rights). This is the case, even if it is held that a single individual would not be morally justified in using lethal force against someone violating his or her (basic) positive rights. The critical difference is the scale of the rights violations.Less
In this chapter it is argued that humanitarian armed intervention in relation to large-scale human rights violations is in some cases morally justified (e.g., the Rwanda genocide), and that intervention is best understood as a collective moral responsibility. Moreover, collective moral responsibility is to be understood as the joint moral responsibility of individual human actors. Here two notions are utilized: multilayered structures of joint actions and joint institutional mechanisms. It is further argued that humanitarian armed intervention can, at least in principle, be morally justified in the case where there is large-scale violation of (basic) positive rights (e.g., subsistence rights). This is the case, even if it is held that a single individual would not be morally justified in using lethal force against someone violating his or her (basic) positive rights. The critical difference is the scale of the rights violations.
John W. Lango
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- September 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780748645756
- eISBN:
- 9780748697182
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748645756.003.0002
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
This chapter scrutinises just war theory generally, and later chapters concentrate specifically on the core just war principles of just cause, last resort, proportionality, and noncombatant immunity. ...
More
This chapter scrutinises just war theory generally, and later chapters concentrate specifically on the core just war principles of just cause, last resort, proportionality, and noncombatant immunity. The chapter is divided into five parts. The first part addresses the question of how received just war principles should be elucidated or revised or supplemented, so as to be applicable from the standpoint of the Security Council. The second part considers the pertinence of just war theory to the intertwined topics of armed humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect. With the aim of ensuring that uses of armed force are sufficiently morally constrained, the third part discusses how a demanding just cause principle ought to be counterbalanced especially by a stringent principle of last resort. In the fourth part, the main thesis that received just war principles should be generalised is illustrated by means of the particular case of genocide in Rwanda. The fifth part introduces the related main thesis that received just war principles should be temporalised.Less
This chapter scrutinises just war theory generally, and later chapters concentrate specifically on the core just war principles of just cause, last resort, proportionality, and noncombatant immunity. The chapter is divided into five parts. The first part addresses the question of how received just war principles should be elucidated or revised or supplemented, so as to be applicable from the standpoint of the Security Council. The second part considers the pertinence of just war theory to the intertwined topics of armed humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect. With the aim of ensuring that uses of armed force are sufficiently morally constrained, the third part discusses how a demanding just cause principle ought to be counterbalanced especially by a stringent principle of last resort. In the fourth part, the main thesis that received just war principles should be generalised is illustrated by means of the particular case of genocide in Rwanda. The fifth part introduces the related main thesis that received just war principles should be temporalised.
John W. Lango
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- September 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780748645756
- eISBN:
- 9780748697182
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748645756.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
In this book, some distinctive approaches to the ethics of armed conflict are interwoven: (1) A revisionist approach that involves generalising traditional just war principles, so that they are ...
More
In this book, some distinctive approaches to the ethics of armed conflict are interwoven: (1) A revisionist approach that involves generalising traditional just war principles, so that they are applicable by all sorts of responsible agents to all forms of armed conflict. Such principles should be applicable not only to large-scale military operations (e.g., the 2003 invasion of Iraq) but also to small-scale military actions (e.g., the use of air power to enforce no-fly zones). (2) A cosmopolitan approach that features the Security Council. (3) A preventive approach that emphasises alternatives to armed force, including negotiation and mediation, nonviolent action, and peacekeeping missions. (4) A temporalist approach that prioritises the application of just war principles prospectively to present and future armed conflicts. (5) A coherentist approach that interrelates just war principles, general moral principles (e.g., distributive justice) and real-world cases (e.g., the Rwandan genocide). (6) A human rights approach that encompasses not only armed humanitarian intervention but also armed invasion, armed revolution, and all other forms of armed conflict. The book includes extensive discussions of generalised principles of just cause, last resort, proportionality, and noncombatant immunity. An assortment of other topics are considered, including moral dilemmas of armed conflict, standards of evidence for moral judgements, legitimate authority, the goal of peace, deterrence, escalation, intelligence, terrorism and counterterrorism, targeted airstrikes, and peace agreements. Recent real-world cases are utilised as illustrations, for example, the cases of Afghanistan, Darfur, the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, Libya, and South Sudan.Less
In this book, some distinctive approaches to the ethics of armed conflict are interwoven: (1) A revisionist approach that involves generalising traditional just war principles, so that they are applicable by all sorts of responsible agents to all forms of armed conflict. Such principles should be applicable not only to large-scale military operations (e.g., the 2003 invasion of Iraq) but also to small-scale military actions (e.g., the use of air power to enforce no-fly zones). (2) A cosmopolitan approach that features the Security Council. (3) A preventive approach that emphasises alternatives to armed force, including negotiation and mediation, nonviolent action, and peacekeeping missions. (4) A temporalist approach that prioritises the application of just war principles prospectively to present and future armed conflicts. (5) A coherentist approach that interrelates just war principles, general moral principles (e.g., distributive justice) and real-world cases (e.g., the Rwandan genocide). (6) A human rights approach that encompasses not only armed humanitarian intervention but also armed invasion, armed revolution, and all other forms of armed conflict. The book includes extensive discussions of generalised principles of just cause, last resort, proportionality, and noncombatant immunity. An assortment of other topics are considered, including moral dilemmas of armed conflict, standards of evidence for moral judgements, legitimate authority, the goal of peace, deterrence, escalation, intelligence, terrorism and counterterrorism, targeted airstrikes, and peace agreements. Recent real-world cases are utilised as illustrations, for example, the cases of Afghanistan, Darfur, the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, Libya, and South Sudan.
Norrie MacQueen
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748636969
- eISBN:
- 9780748672035
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748636969.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This book explores the United Nations' track record of military action, from Cold War ‘brushfire’ peacekeeping to the fractured globalisation of the contemporary world. The book assesses armed ...
More
This book explores the United Nations' track record of military action, from Cold War ‘brushfire’ peacekeeping to the fractured globalisation of the contemporary world. The book assesses armed humanitarian intervention on a region-by-region basis, from the Balkans to Africa, the Middle East to Southeast Asia. Using empirical evidence, it compiles a ‘balance sheet’ of the UN's successes and failures, and asks hard questions about humanitarian intervention's short- and long-term value.Less
This book explores the United Nations' track record of military action, from Cold War ‘brushfire’ peacekeeping to the fractured globalisation of the contemporary world. The book assesses armed humanitarian intervention on a region-by-region basis, from the Balkans to Africa, the Middle East to Southeast Asia. Using empirical evidence, it compiles a ‘balance sheet’ of the UN's successes and failures, and asks hard questions about humanitarian intervention's short- and long-term value.
Seumas Miller
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- November 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190626136
- eISBN:
- 9780190626174
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190626136.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Terrorism, the use of military force in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and the fatal police shootings of unarmed persons have all contributed to renewed interest in the ethics of police and military ...
More
Terrorism, the use of military force in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and the fatal police shootings of unarmed persons have all contributed to renewed interest in the ethics of police and military use of lethal force. In this book the various moral justifications and responsibilities involved in the use of lethal force by police and military combatants are analyzed, relying on a distinctive normative teleological account of institutional roles. The resulting conception provides a novel theoretical alternative to prevailing reductive individualist and collectivist accounts. Police and military uses of lethal force are morally justified in part by recourse to fundamental natural moral rights and obligations, especially the right to personal self-defense and the moral obligation to defend the lives of innocent others. Yet the moral justification for police and military use of lethal force is to some extent role-specific. Police have an institutionally based moral duty to use lethal force to uphold the law, and military combatants have an institutionally based moral duty to use lethal force to win just wars. Two key notions in play are joint action and the natural right to self-defense. A relational individualist theory of joint actions is used to construct the notion of multilayered structures of joint action in order to explicate organizational action. A novel theory of justifiable killing in self-defense is also provided. Specific topics covered include: police shootings of armed offenders and suicide bombers; military necessity; targeted killing, autonomous weapons, humanitarian armed intervention, and civilian immunity.Less
Terrorism, the use of military force in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and the fatal police shootings of unarmed persons have all contributed to renewed interest in the ethics of police and military use of lethal force. In this book the various moral justifications and responsibilities involved in the use of lethal force by police and military combatants are analyzed, relying on a distinctive normative teleological account of institutional roles. The resulting conception provides a novel theoretical alternative to prevailing reductive individualist and collectivist accounts. Police and military uses of lethal force are morally justified in part by recourse to fundamental natural moral rights and obligations, especially the right to personal self-defense and the moral obligation to defend the lives of innocent others. Yet the moral justification for police and military use of lethal force is to some extent role-specific. Police have an institutionally based moral duty to use lethal force to uphold the law, and military combatants have an institutionally based moral duty to use lethal force to win just wars. Two key notions in play are joint action and the natural right to self-defense. A relational individualist theory of joint actions is used to construct the notion of multilayered structures of joint action in order to explicate organizational action. A novel theory of justifiable killing in self-defense is also provided. Specific topics covered include: police shootings of armed offenders and suicide bombers; military necessity; targeted killing, autonomous weapons, humanitarian armed intervention, and civilian immunity.
