Uwe Steinhoff
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199217373
- eISBN:
- 9780191712470
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199217373.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This book describes and explains the basic tenets of just war theory and gives a precise, succinct, and highly critical account of its present status and of the most important and controversial ...
More
This book describes and explains the basic tenets of just war theory and gives a precise, succinct, and highly critical account of its present status and of the most important and controversial current debates surrounding it. Rejecting certain traditional, in effect medieval assumptions of just war theory and advancing a liberal outlook, it argues that every single individual is a legitimate authority and has, under certain circumstances, the right to declare war on others or the state. It also argues that just cause cannot be established independently of the other criteria of ius ad bellum (the justification for entering into war), except for right intention, which the book interprets more leniently than is traditional. Turning to ius in bello (which governs the conduct of a war) the book criticizes the doctrine of double effect and concludes that insofar as wars kill innocents, albeit as ‘collateral damage’, they cannot be just, but at best justified as the lesser evil. The book gives particular attention to the question why soldiers, allegedly, are legitimate targets and civilians not. Discussing four approaches to the explanation of the difference, it is argued that the four principles underlying them should all be taken into account and outlines how their comparative weighting can proceed when applied to concrete cases. The resulting approach does not square the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate targets with that between soldiers and civilians: this has extremely important consequences for the conduct of war. Finally, the book analyses the concept of terrorism, arguing that some forms of ‘terrorism’ are not terrorism at all and that, under certain circumstances, even terrorism proper can be justified.Less
This book describes and explains the basic tenets of just war theory and gives a precise, succinct, and highly critical account of its present status and of the most important and controversial current debates surrounding it. Rejecting certain traditional, in effect medieval assumptions of just war theory and advancing a liberal outlook, it argues that every single individual is a legitimate authority and has, under certain circumstances, the right to declare war on others or the state. It also argues that just cause cannot be established independently of the other criteria of ius ad bellum (the justification for entering into war), except for right intention, which the book interprets more leniently than is traditional. Turning to ius in bello (which governs the conduct of a war) the book criticizes the doctrine of double effect and concludes that insofar as wars kill innocents, albeit as ‘collateral damage’, they cannot be just, but at best justified as the lesser evil. The book gives particular attention to the question why soldiers, allegedly, are legitimate targets and civilians not. Discussing four approaches to the explanation of the difference, it is argued that the four principles underlying them should all be taken into account and outlines how their comparative weighting can proceed when applied to concrete cases. The resulting approach does not square the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate targets with that between soldiers and civilians: this has extremely important consequences for the conduct of war. Finally, the book analyses the concept of terrorism, arguing that some forms of ‘terrorism’ are not terrorism at all and that, under certain circumstances, even terrorism proper can be justified.
Uwe Steinhoff
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199217373
- eISBN:
- 9780191712470
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199217373.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
The introduction describes the aims of the book, gives an outline of the central tenets of just war theory, and informs the reader about the book's structure. It also points out that jus ad bellum ...
More
The introduction describes the aims of the book, gives an outline of the central tenets of just war theory, and informs the reader about the book's structure. It also points out that jus ad bellum (when may a war be fought) and ius in bello (how may a war be fought) cannot be completely separated.Less
The introduction describes the aims of the book, gives an outline of the central tenets of just war theory, and informs the reader about the book's structure. It also points out that jus ad bellum (when may a war be fought) and ius in bello (how may a war be fought) cannot be completely separated.
Sir Adam Roberts
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Along with identifying a number of pitfalls to be avoided in this project of conceptualizing a Just Peace, Roberts proposes using the term ‘justifiable force’ rather than Just War. This would move ...
More
Along with identifying a number of pitfalls to be avoided in this project of conceptualizing a Just Peace, Roberts proposes using the term ‘justifiable force’ rather than Just War. This would move the tradition away from appearing to approve of war as a whole, and towards recognizing something more conditional and cautious — that the threat and use of military force by a particular state or group of states may, in precise circumstances, be justifiable. Roberts writes about how the development of the European Union has affected the nations of this region, and encourages an idea of ‘induction’ through adherence to human rights law as the way to become a part of this union. It is through processes at the regional level that we can find positive illustrations of how justice can be maximized without the introduction of force. Since a desire to proliferate the ‘good’ has long been what has shaped human relations, this examination of ‘induction’ provides an example of how an internal focus on justice can create an environment that promotes promulgation.Less
Along with identifying a number of pitfalls to be avoided in this project of conceptualizing a Just Peace, Roberts proposes using the term ‘justifiable force’ rather than Just War. This would move the tradition away from appearing to approve of war as a whole, and towards recognizing something more conditional and cautious — that the threat and use of military force by a particular state or group of states may, in precise circumstances, be justifiable. Roberts writes about how the development of the European Union has affected the nations of this region, and encourages an idea of ‘induction’ through adherence to human rights law as the way to become a part of this union. It is through processes at the regional level that we can find positive illustrations of how justice can be maximized without the introduction of force. Since a desire to proliferate the ‘good’ has long been what has shaped human relations, this examination of ‘induction’ provides an example of how an internal focus on justice can create an environment that promotes promulgation.
Pierre Allan
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter distinguishes Just Peace from its closest ‘moral’ neighbours — a stable (but usually unjust) peace and positive peace. Drawing on both consequentialist and deontological considerations, ...
More
This chapter distinguishes Just Peace from its closest ‘moral’ neighbours — a stable (but usually unjust) peace and positive peace. Drawing on both consequentialist and deontological considerations, Allan develops an international ethical scale to evaluate different acts from a moral standpoint, with different levels of conflict as the baseline of ethical behavior. The more extreme the discord, the worse it is considered on the scale; the more harmonious, the better. Arguing that absolute unhappiness (disappearance of humankind) and absolute happiness (agape-paradise) are not of this world, Allan presents eight intermediary moral situations, each being superseded by the next one in ethical terms: genocide, war, non-war, Just War, stable peace, Just Peace, positive peace, and Global Care. He develops an ethic of ‘global care’ based on feminist theories of care, religious and secular declarations on a global ethic, evolutionary theory arguments, and a critique of a liberal human rights approach.Less
This chapter distinguishes Just Peace from its closest ‘moral’ neighbours — a stable (but usually unjust) peace and positive peace. Drawing on both consequentialist and deontological considerations, Allan develops an international ethical scale to evaluate different acts from a moral standpoint, with different levels of conflict as the baseline of ethical behavior. The more extreme the discord, the worse it is considered on the scale; the more harmonious, the better. Arguing that absolute unhappiness (disappearance of humankind) and absolute happiness (agape-paradise) are not of this world, Allan presents eight intermediary moral situations, each being superseded by the next one in ethical terms: genocide, war, non-war, Just War, stable peace, Just Peace, positive peace, and Global Care. He develops an ethic of ‘global care’ based on feminist theories of care, religious and secular declarations on a global ethic, evolutionary theory arguments, and a critique of a liberal human rights approach.
Pierre Allan and Alexis Keller (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
While an old doctrine of Just War exists, surprisingly little conceptual thinking has gone into what constitutes a Just Peace. This book presents various — and at times conflicting — viewpoints on ...
More
While an old doctrine of Just War exists, surprisingly little conceptual thinking has gone into what constitutes a Just Peace. This book presents various — and at times conflicting — viewpoints on this question of Just Peace from perspectives originating in political science, history, international law, political philosophy, cultural studies, and theology, as well as from a policy perspective. The book challenges a liberal perception of peace founded on norms claiming universal scope, and instead looks to negotiation for arriving at shared views that help build a consensus on what justice might mean in specific circumstances. Although some contributors explicitly outline and advocate specific cases for ‘justifiable violence’, it is made clear that alternative and non-violent ways to peace need to be contemplated, and conceptualized. Even though the path through justice is a demanding one, its accomplishment opens the way to a durable settlement accepted by the parties initially engaged in conflict. Clearly, the more ambitious goal of peace with justice can lead to smaller chances for success. It may even derail the whole enterprise and keep the flames of violent conflict alive through the search for ‘justice’, particularly because this concept is not necessarily the same for all concerned parties. Ultimately, an inter-subjective consensus needs to be built through negotiation with both parties to a conflict so that the concepts of shared history, and an often inextricable future, can be reached with a mutual understanding. In this collective process, it is more likely that a stable foundation can be created through recognition, renouncement, and rule, and thus a Just Peace can be achieved.Less
While an old doctrine of Just War exists, surprisingly little conceptual thinking has gone into what constitutes a Just Peace. This book presents various — and at times conflicting — viewpoints on this question of Just Peace from perspectives originating in political science, history, international law, political philosophy, cultural studies, and theology, as well as from a policy perspective. The book challenges a liberal perception of peace founded on norms claiming universal scope, and instead looks to negotiation for arriving at shared views that help build a consensus on what justice might mean in specific circumstances. Although some contributors explicitly outline and advocate specific cases for ‘justifiable violence’, it is made clear that alternative and non-violent ways to peace need to be contemplated, and conceptualized. Even though the path through justice is a demanding one, its accomplishment opens the way to a durable settlement accepted by the parties initially engaged in conflict. Clearly, the more ambitious goal of peace with justice can lead to smaller chances for success. It may even derail the whole enterprise and keep the flames of violent conflict alive through the search for ‘justice’, particularly because this concept is not necessarily the same for all concerned parties. Ultimately, an inter-subjective consensus needs to be built through negotiation with both parties to a conflict so that the concepts of shared history, and an often inextricable future, can be reached with a mutual understanding. In this collective process, it is more likely that a stable foundation can be created through recognition, renouncement, and rule, and thus a Just Peace can be achieved.
Yossi Beilin
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Beilin was a former chief negotiator for the Israeli government in the Oslo process at Camp David and Taba. He brings a valuable contribution to this volume as a practitioner and political scientist ...
More
Beilin was a former chief negotiator for the Israeli government in the Oslo process at Camp David and Taba. He brings a valuable contribution to this volume as a practitioner and political scientist involved directly in conflict negotiations. After fulfilling his post as the Minister of Justice for the Israeli government, he became one of the lead Israeli representatives in the Geneva Accord negotiations. In this sceptical work, Beilin points to the possible dangers of speaking about the combined concepts of justice and peace, believing that there cannot be one without the other. Peace treaties have often been signed and implemented by the victors of conflict, but have left the population on either side out of the determinations of justice. Beilin presents a history filled with examples in which political leaders have bypassed opportunities for peace because they did not deem the conditions just, and thus perpetuated conflict with untold costs.Less
Beilin was a former chief negotiator for the Israeli government in the Oslo process at Camp David and Taba. He brings a valuable contribution to this volume as a practitioner and political scientist involved directly in conflict negotiations. After fulfilling his post as the Minister of Justice for the Israeli government, he became one of the lead Israeli representatives in the Geneva Accord negotiations. In this sceptical work, Beilin points to the possible dangers of speaking about the combined concepts of justice and peace, believing that there cannot be one without the other. Peace treaties have often been signed and implemented by the victors of conflict, but have left the population on either side out of the determinations of justice. Beilin presents a history filled with examples in which political leaders have bypassed opportunities for peace because they did not deem the conditions just, and thus perpetuated conflict with untold costs.
Alia Brahimi
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199562961
- eISBN:
- 9780191595059
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562961.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory, International Relations and Politics
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of ...
More
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of the West and Islam. This book explores the moral‐theological arguments for war offered by the George W. Bush administration and al‐Qaeda. It examines the way in which these actors have drawn upon key just war concepts and, in some cases, reconceptualized their scope and content. The book's principal contention is that, in significant ways, the just war arguments of Bush and bin Laden are inconsistent with the moral requirements of their respective just war traditions. In two parts, the book examines these arguments in relation to the body of thought which comprises the Western just war tradition and that of Islamic jihad, and assesses the consistency of Bush and bin Laden's claims. The central argument of the book—that the Bush administration and al‐Qaeda depart from important consensuses about justified warfare—contains within it an alternative way of understanding the war on terror. Rather than a clash between civilizations, it is suggested that the war on terror can be accounted for by a clash within civilizations: in resorting to violence, both sides have acted against their own traditions and contravened the requirements of their own civilizations.Less
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of the West and Islam. This book explores the moral‐theological arguments for war offered by the George W. Bush administration and al‐Qaeda. It examines the way in which these actors have drawn upon key just war concepts and, in some cases, reconceptualized their scope and content. The book's principal contention is that, in significant ways, the just war arguments of Bush and bin Laden are inconsistent with the moral requirements of their respective just war traditions. In two parts, the book examines these arguments in relation to the body of thought which comprises the Western just war tradition and that of Islamic jihad, and assesses the consistency of Bush and bin Laden's claims. The central argument of the book—that the Bush administration and al‐Qaeda depart from important consensuses about justified warfare—contains within it an alternative way of understanding the war on terror. Rather than a clash between civilizations, it is suggested that the war on terror can be accounted for by a clash within civilizations: in resorting to violence, both sides have acted against their own traditions and contravened the requirements of their own civilizations.
Pierre Allan and Alexis Keller
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
War has always been a problem that has plagued our existence, and begged for civility and restriction in its use. The idea behind engaging in war has often been based on assuring a place for peace in ...
More
War has always been a problem that has plagued our existence, and begged for civility and restriction in its use. The idea behind engaging in war has often been based on assuring a place for peace in the not so distant future, whether the motivation was normative, as within the Just War Doctrine, or simply the hope that victory would lead to the end of organized violence. A group of scholars, intellectuals, and practitioners has been brought together in this volume to posit an alternative route — through justice — to what has thus far been elusive for humankind: a durable peace among and between peoples.Less
War has always been a problem that has plagued our existence, and begged for civility and restriction in its use. The idea behind engaging in war has often been based on assuring a place for peace in the not so distant future, whether the motivation was normative, as within the Just War Doctrine, or simply the hope that victory would lead to the end of organized violence. A group of scholars, intellectuals, and practitioners has been brought together in this volume to posit an alternative route — through justice — to what has thus far been elusive for humankind: a durable peace among and between peoples.
Simon Caney
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780198293507
- eISBN:
- 9780191602337
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019829350X.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
The aim of this chapter is to analyse a number of prominent views concerning the nature of a just war and, having criticized them, to outline the account of a just war that follows from a ...
More
The aim of this chapter is to analyse a number of prominent views concerning the nature of a just war and, having criticized them, to outline the account of a just war that follows from a cosmopolitan perspective. It explores different philosophical approaches at a general level, analysing their accounts of when war may be waged (jus ad bellum) and how it may be waged (jus in bello). To do this it begins, in Section I, with some methodological observations, and then, in the next three sections (II–IV), examines several leading perspectives on the nature of just war: Sections II and III explore Michael Walzer’s influential treatment of this subject in Just and Unjust Wars (1977), criticizing in particular his account of jus ad bellum and his derivation of rules of jus in bello; Section IV analyses Terry Nardin’s state-centric account of just war in Law, Morality and the Relations of States (1983). The following four sections (V–VIII) turn to more cosmopolitan perspectives: Section V outlines the general structure of a cosmopolitan theory of just war; Sections VI and VII examine particular cosmopolitan accounts of some aspects of just war, analysing utilitarian and deontological approaches; and Section VIII criticizes the utilitarian and deontological accounts given in the previous two sections, outlining an alternative cosmopolitan rights-based approach that avoids the objections levelled against these two theories. Sections IX–XI analyse realist misgivings about both traditional and cosmopolitan conceptions of jus ad bellum (IX) and jus in bello (X); and Section XI summarizes and concludes.Less
The aim of this chapter is to analyse a number of prominent views concerning the nature of a just war and, having criticized them, to outline the account of a just war that follows from a cosmopolitan perspective. It explores different philosophical approaches at a general level, analysing their accounts of when war may be waged (jus ad bellum) and how it may be waged (jus in bello). To do this it begins, in Section I, with some methodological observations, and then, in the next three sections (II–IV), examines several leading perspectives on the nature of just war: Sections II and III explore Michael Walzer’s influential treatment of this subject in Just and Unjust Wars (1977), criticizing in particular his account of jus ad bellum and his derivation of rules of jus in bello; Section IV analyses Terry Nardin’s state-centric account of just war in Law, Morality and the Relations of States (1983). The following four sections (V–VIII) turn to more cosmopolitan perspectives: Section V outlines the general structure of a cosmopolitan theory of just war; Sections VI and VII examine particular cosmopolitan accounts of some aspects of just war, analysing utilitarian and deontological approaches; and Section VIII criticizes the utilitarian and deontological accounts given in the previous two sections, outlining an alternative cosmopolitan rights-based approach that avoids the objections levelled against these two theories. Sections IX–XI analyse realist misgivings about both traditional and cosmopolitan conceptions of jus ad bellum (IX) and jus in bello (X); and Section XI summarizes and concludes.
Edward W. Said
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199275359
- eISBN:
- 9780191603686
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199275351.003.0008
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
In this chapter, Said argues that in the case of the Palestinians and Israelis, histories and cultures are inextricably linked ‘contrapuntally’ in symbiotic rather than mutually exclusive terms. When ...
More
In this chapter, Said argues that in the case of the Palestinians and Israelis, histories and cultures are inextricably linked ‘contrapuntally’ in symbiotic rather than mutually exclusive terms. When this understanding of circumstances occurs, it no longer seems viable to eliminate the opposition because there will always be a tomorrow in which retribution will be demanded by those who feel that an injustice had been forced upon family members or previous generations. Said emphasizes the need to think about and resolve two histories that have become interwoven, despite the fact that many have tried to define the other in contradictory terms. Part of arriving at a Just Peace entails recognizing a shared identity and common history even if this approach highlights differences. This might be a monumental task considering the trials and tribulations that have often come to pass in a conflict, but for Said, an ‘abridged memory’ is not an option that will lead to Just Peace.Less
In this chapter, Said argues that in the case of the Palestinians and Israelis, histories and cultures are inextricably linked ‘contrapuntally’ in symbiotic rather than mutually exclusive terms. When this understanding of circumstances occurs, it no longer seems viable to eliminate the opposition because there will always be a tomorrow in which retribution will be demanded by those who feel that an injustice had been forced upon family members or previous generations. Said emphasizes the need to think about and resolve two histories that have become interwoven, despite the fact that many have tried to define the other in contradictory terms. Part of arriving at a Just Peace entails recognizing a shared identity and common history even if this approach highlights differences. This might be a monumental task considering the trials and tribulations that have often come to pass in a conflict, but for Said, an ‘abridged memory’ is not an option that will lead to Just Peace.
Daniel Engster
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199214358
- eISBN:
- 9780191706684
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199214358.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This chapter explores the question: What does it mean to care for others in international relations? Sara Ruddick, Fiona Robinson, and others have outlined international relations theories based upon ...
More
This chapter explores the question: What does it mean to care for others in international relations? Sara Ruddick, Fiona Robinson, and others have outlined international relations theories based upon care ethics, but their accounts are fairly general and say little about the rights and policies necessary for establishing caring relations among people across the world. The first half of this chapter develops a human rights framework based upon human beings' universal duty to care for others. The chapter argues that this framework avoids the central shortcomings of other international rights frameworks, and more generally provides a standard of justice that should be reasonably acceptable to people from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds. The second half of the chapter outlines some specific strategies and policies for enforcing human rights abroad and caring for distant others. In the last section, the chapter discusses the conditions under which care theory might justify the use of military force, especially for the sake of intervening into other countries for humanitarian purposes.Less
This chapter explores the question: What does it mean to care for others in international relations? Sara Ruddick, Fiona Robinson, and others have outlined international relations theories based upon care ethics, but their accounts are fairly general and say little about the rights and policies necessary for establishing caring relations among people across the world. The first half of this chapter develops a human rights framework based upon human beings' universal duty to care for others. The chapter argues that this framework avoids the central shortcomings of other international rights frameworks, and more generally provides a standard of justice that should be reasonably acceptable to people from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds. The second half of the chapter outlines some specific strategies and policies for enforcing human rights abroad and caring for distant others. In the last section, the chapter discusses the conditions under which care theory might justify the use of military force, especially for the sake of intervening into other countries for humanitarian purposes.
Alia Brahimi
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199562961
- eISBN:
- 9780191595059
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562961.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory, International Relations and Politics
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These ...
More
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These arguments are explored in the context of seven jus ad bellum criteria: just cause, right authority, right intention, goal of peace, proportionality, last resort, and reasonable hope of success. It is argued that the main source of controversy arose from the Bush administration's shift away from the more narrow, modern understanding of the just war by making arguments which rested on the broader moral tradition of the just war and the larger moral agenda of the ‘war on terror’.Less
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These arguments are explored in the context of seven jus ad bellum criteria: just cause, right authority, right intention, goal of peace, proportionality, last resort, and reasonable hope of success. It is argued that the main source of controversy arose from the Bush administration's shift away from the more narrow, modern understanding of the just war by making arguments which rested on the broader moral tradition of the just war and the larger moral agenda of the ‘war on terror’.
Clark Ian
- Published in print:
- 1988
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198273257
- eISBN:
- 9780191684012
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198273257.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
What is war, and how should it be waged? Are there restraints on its conduct? What can philosophers contribute to the study of warfare? It might appear to some that the practical activity of the ...
More
What is war, and how should it be waged? Are there restraints on its conduct? What can philosophers contribute to the study of warfare? It might appear to some that the practical activity of the battlefield is a universe away from the sedate reflections of the philosopher, but this book argues that there is an important relationship between the concept of war and notions about its proper conduct, and that the practice of war requires a sound philosophical understanding of its nature. The author begins by discussing two traditional doctrines: the just war and the limited war. The first specifies the legitimate ends and means of warfare, viewed in essentially moral terms. The second adopts a more explicitly political view, asserting a need for the means to be proportionate to the objectives of war. Fresh insight is offered into the contrasts and comparisons between these two traditions. An exploration follows of the applicability of such ideas to issues in contemporary warfare: war crimes, choice of targets, restrictions on weapons, guerrilla warfare, and the particular problems associated with nuclear strategy and deterrence. What emerges is a synthesis of philosophy, history of warfare, political theory, and contemporary strategy, which describes how the ideas that are central to the nature of war have developed in the context of changing social, political, and technological environments, and proposes a meeting ground for the integration of the philosophy and practice of war.Less
What is war, and how should it be waged? Are there restraints on its conduct? What can philosophers contribute to the study of warfare? It might appear to some that the practical activity of the battlefield is a universe away from the sedate reflections of the philosopher, but this book argues that there is an important relationship between the concept of war and notions about its proper conduct, and that the practice of war requires a sound philosophical understanding of its nature. The author begins by discussing two traditional doctrines: the just war and the limited war. The first specifies the legitimate ends and means of warfare, viewed in essentially moral terms. The second adopts a more explicitly political view, asserting a need for the means to be proportionate to the objectives of war. Fresh insight is offered into the contrasts and comparisons between these two traditions. An exploration follows of the applicability of such ideas to issues in contemporary warfare: war crimes, choice of targets, restrictions on weapons, guerrilla warfare, and the particular problems associated with nuclear strategy and deterrence. What emerges is a synthesis of philosophy, history of warfare, political theory, and contemporary strategy, which describes how the ideas that are central to the nature of war have developed in the context of changing social, political, and technological environments, and proposes a meeting ground for the integration of the philosophy and practice of war.
G. I. A. D. Draper
- Published in print:
- 1992
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198277712
- eISBN:
- 9780191598890
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198277717.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Ideas about ‘just war’, having developed in ancient Rome, were adapted in the centuries after Christ as part of the thinking Western Church. St Augustine (ad 354–430), the most influential of the ...
More
Ideas about ‘just war’, having developed in ancient Rome, were adapted in the centuries after Christ as part of the thinking Western Church. St Augustine (ad 354–430), the most influential of the Western fathers, laid down conditions that had to be satisfied if war was to be permissible. His ideas, later elaborated by St Thomas Aquinas (1226–74), Francisco de Vitoria (1480–1546) and others, formed the background to the work of Grotius, who made an important contribution with his emphasis on the idea of temperamenta belli, i.e. moderation in the conduct of war. Modern ideas about the application of law to warfare, which were codified at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, are not strictly those advanced by Grotius, but they stand in the Grotian tradition.Less
Ideas about ‘just war’, having developed in ancient Rome, were adapted in the centuries after Christ as part of the thinking Western Church. St Augustine (ad 354–430), the most influential of the Western fathers, laid down conditions that had to be satisfied if war was to be permissible. His ideas, later elaborated by St Thomas Aquinas (1226–74), Francisco de Vitoria (1480–1546) and others, formed the background to the work of Grotius, who made an important contribution with his emphasis on the idea of temperamenta belli, i.e. moderation in the conduct of war. Modern ideas about the application of law to warfare, which were codified at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, are not strictly those advanced by Grotius, but they stand in the Grotian tradition.
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199233137
- eISBN:
- 9780191716270
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233137.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
This chapter argues that although Bush's preventive war in Iraq is morally wrong, and his policy is too broad, some exceptional preventive wars can still be morally justified. It develops and defends ...
More
This chapter argues that although Bush's preventive war in Iraq is morally wrong, and his policy is too broad, some exceptional preventive wars can still be morally justified. It develops and defends a version of consequentialism about war. It then criticizes the relevant part of the most common deontological alternative — just war theory. Finally, all of this theory is applied to preventive war in general and Bush's war and policy in particular.Less
This chapter argues that although Bush's preventive war in Iraq is morally wrong, and his policy is too broad, some exceptional preventive wars can still be morally justified. It develops and defends a version of consequentialism about war. It then criticizes the relevant part of the most common deontological alternative — just war theory. Finally, all of this theory is applied to preventive war in general and Bush's war and policy in particular.
Simon Caney
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- April 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780198293507
- eISBN:
- 9780191602337
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019829350X.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Examines which political principles should govern global politics. It explores ethical issues in justice that arise at the global level and addresses questions such as: are there universal values, ...
More
Examines which political principles should govern global politics. It explores ethical issues in justice that arise at the global level and addresses questions such as: are there universal values, and if so, what are they; what human rights, if any, are there; are there global principles of distributive justice; should there be a system of supra-state institutions; is national self-determination defensible; when, if ever, may political regimes wage war; and is humanitarian intervention justified?The book outlines and defends an egalitarian liberal brand of cosmopolitanism to address these questions, maintaining that there are universal principles, arguing that these include universal civil and political human rights, and defending the application of global principles of distributive justice. On this basis, it makes a case for a system of supra-state political institutions to promote these universal principles of justice further. Having set out principles of ideal theory, the book then examines what principles should apply when injustices are committed. To do this it examines when political regimes may wage war and when they may engage in intervention, and thereby draws on cosmopolitan principles to derive and defend a cosmopolitan conception of just war and humanitarian intervention. In arriving at these conclusions, the book engages in a sustained analysis of the competing arguments on all the above issues, examining the arguments of nationalists, realists, and those who affirm the ideal of a society of states. To do this, the book explores and integrates the work of philosophers, political theorists, and international relations scholars, and illustrates its ethical argument and theoretical analysis with empirical examples. Furthermore, it argues that the issues examined in the book cannot be adequately treated in isolation from each other but must be treated as an interlinked whole.Less
Examines which political principles should govern global politics. It explores ethical issues in justice that arise at the global level and addresses questions such as: are there universal values, and if so, what are they; what human rights, if any, are there; are there global principles of distributive justice; should there be a system of supra-state institutions; is national self-determination defensible; when, if ever, may political regimes wage war; and is humanitarian intervention justified?
The book outlines and defends an egalitarian liberal brand of cosmopolitanism to address these questions, maintaining that there are universal principles, arguing that these include universal civil and political human rights, and defending the application of global principles of distributive justice. On this basis, it makes a case for a system of supra-state political institutions to promote these universal principles of justice further. Having set out principles of ideal theory, the book then examines what principles should apply when injustices are committed. To do this it examines when political regimes may wage war and when they may engage in intervention, and thereby draws on cosmopolitan principles to derive and defend a cosmopolitan conception of just war and humanitarian intervention. In arriving at these conclusions, the book engages in a sustained analysis of the competing arguments on all the above issues, examining the arguments of nationalists, realists, and those who affirm the ideal of a society of states. To do this, the book explores and integrates the work of philosophers, political theorists, and international relations scholars, and illustrates its ethical argument and theoretical analysis with empirical examples. Furthermore, it argues that the issues examined in the book cannot be adequately treated in isolation from each other but must be treated as an interlinked whole.
Thomas Hurka
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195325195
- eISBN:
- 9780199776412
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195325195.003.0002
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, General
Several conditions in the traditional theory of the just war — the just cause, hope of success, last resort, and proportionality conditions — assess war morally in light of its consequences, but do ...
More
Several conditions in the traditional theory of the just war — the just cause, hope of success, last resort, and proportionality conditions — assess war morally in light of its consequences, but do so differently than the consequentialist view Jonathan Glover has shown sympathy for. Unlike consequentialism, just war theory does not count all a war's good effects as morally relevant, sometimes discounts good or bad effects because of how they came about, and instead of weighing good and bad effects equally against each other sometimes gives more weight to the one and sometimes more to the other. This chapter examines these complexities in the just war assessment of consequences and shows how the resulting theory is sometimes more permissive about the resort to war than consequentialism and sometimes less permissive.Less
Several conditions in the traditional theory of the just war — the just cause, hope of success, last resort, and proportionality conditions — assess war morally in light of its consequences, but do so differently than the consequentialist view Jonathan Glover has shown sympathy for. Unlike consequentialism, just war theory does not count all a war's good effects as morally relevant, sometimes discounts good or bad effects because of how they came about, and instead of weighing good and bad effects equally against each other sometimes gives more weight to the one and sometimes more to the other. This chapter examines these complexities in the just war assessment of consequences and shows how the resulting theory is sometimes more permissive about the resort to war than consequentialism and sometimes less permissive.
John D. Carlson
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199571833
- eISBN:
- 9780191722264
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571833.003.0014
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
This chapter considers the issues in relation to humanitarian interventions, arguing that moral compassion without a sense of the political realities can be disastrous. It also looks at Niebuhr's ...
More
This chapter considers the issues in relation to humanitarian interventions, arguing that moral compassion without a sense of the political realities can be disastrous. It also looks at Niebuhr's ethical realism in relation to the Just War tradition.Less
This chapter considers the issues in relation to humanitarian interventions, arguing that moral compassion without a sense of the political realities can be disastrous. It also looks at Niebuhr's ethical realism in relation to the Just War tradition.
Bruno Coppieters
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- January 2005
- ISBN:
- 9780199258710
- eISBN:
- 9780191601880
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199258716.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Analyses the historical background of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. Demonstrates that the parties in conflict invoked all individual jus ad bellum principles of ‘just cause’, ‘right intentions’, ...
More
Analyses the historical background of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. Demonstrates that the parties in conflict invoked all individual jus ad bellum principles of ‘just cause’, ‘right intentions’, ‘legitimate authority’, ‘likelihood of success’, ‘proportionality’ and ‘last resort’ in their legitimation of the use of force and of their position on the secession of Abkhazia.Less
Analyses the historical background of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. Demonstrates that the parties in conflict invoked all individual jus ad bellum principles of ‘just cause’, ‘right intentions’, ‘legitimate authority’, ‘likelihood of success’, ‘proportionality’ and ‘last resort’ in their legitimation of the use of force and of their position on the secession of Abkhazia.
Jennifer M. Welsh (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199267217
- eISBN:
- 9780191601118
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199267219.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged ...
More
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged tension between the principle of state sovereignty, and the evolving norms related to individual human rights. This edited collection examines the challenges to international society posed by humanitarian intervention in a post-September 11th world. It brings scholars of law, philosophy, and international relations together with those who have actively engaged in cases of intervention, in order to examine the legitimacy and consequences of the use of military force for humanitarian purposes. The book demonstrates why humanitarian intervention continues to be a controversial question not only for the United Nations but also for Western states and humanitarian organisations.Less
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged tension between the principle of state sovereignty, and the evolving norms related to individual human rights. This edited collection examines the challenges to international society posed by humanitarian intervention in a post-September 11th world. It brings scholars of law, philosophy, and international relations together with those who have actively engaged in cases of intervention, in order to examine the legitimacy and consequences of the use of military force for humanitarian purposes. The book demonstrates why humanitarian intervention continues to be a controversial question not only for the United Nations but also for Western states and humanitarian organisations.
