1 / 67

War

War. The Spirit of War. The moral significance of war. Jus ad bellum. Justice (in going) to war What would justify going to war?. Jus in bello. Justice in war What are the rules of conduct in war?. Arguments that War is sometimes justifiable. Rectificatory justice.

Download Presentation

War

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. War

  2. The Spirit of War

  3. The moral significance of war

  4. Jus ad bellum • Justice (in going) to war • What would justify going to war?

  5. Jus in bello • Justice in war • What are the rules of conduct in war?

  6. Arguments that War is sometimes justifiable

  7. Rectificatory justice • How can you right a wrong?

  8. Rectificatory justice • How can you right a wrong? Aristotle: • This must be done by a proper authority: a judge with authority to adjudicate • It is for a just cause: there must have been an injustice that harmed someone • It is intended for a just purpose: to set things right again, to make things as if the injustice had never occurred

  9. Going to war • Just war theory (Aquinas): Classic answer, based on rectificatory justice • A war is just if: • It is waged by a proper authority • It is for a just cause: the enemy deserves to be attacked for some fault • It is intended for a just purpose: to advance good and avoid evil

  10. Proper Authority • A war must be waged by a proper authority • Wars must be waged by legitimate governments or international organizations granted such authority by legitimate governments (e.g., NATO, the UN) • Decisions to go to war must be made by proper authorities within those governments or organizations

  11. Just Cause • Wars must be fought for just causes, on account of faults • Faults that might justify war: • Aggression (countries may defend themselves, their citizens, or one another, against attacks) • Danger (countries may attack a country preemptively if it endangers them?) • Human rights (countries may defend citizens from violations of their rights?)

  12. Just Purpose • Wars must be intended for just purposes: to advance good and avoid evil • Wars must be waged, not for self-interest, but because it’s the right thing to do • Good purposes: • Restore peace • Defend citizens • Save lives • Advance freedom and democracy • Protect human rights

  13. Just wars: World War II • Allies waged war by proper authority: official declarations of war by legitimate governments

  14. Just wars: World War II • Just cause: response to attacks (Germany attacked Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Russia, and Britain; Japan attacked China, various East Asian countries, and the United States)

  15. Just wars: World War II • Just purpose: intended to stop aggression and restore peace

  16. Unjust wars • Lack of just authority: Those not waged by the proper authority • Rebellions, revolutions not authorized by any legitimate body • Wars waged by illegitimate governments • Private wars, vigilante actions

  17. No just authority: Che Guevara

  18. No just authority: Sept. 11

  19. Unjust wars • Lack of just cause: Those not in response to some fault • Wars of aggression (Italy attacking Ethiopia; Germany attacking Poland et al.; Japan attacking China & the US; North Korea attacking South Korea; Iraq attacking Kuwait) • Wars based on misunderstanding • Wars to maintain unjust control (USSR invading Hungary, Czechoslovakia)

  20. Aggression: Blitzkrieg, 1940

  21. Unjust control: Hungary, 1956

  22. Unjust wars • Lack of just purpose: Those waged for a reason other than seeking good and avoiding evil, e.g., revenge, hatred, envy, aggrandizement, cruelty, the fever of revolt, the lust for power

  23. Unjust Purpose: Iran-Iraq War, 1980

  24. Unjust Purpose: Napoleon’s Invasion of Russia, 1812

  25. Unjust Purpose: Hitler’s Invasion of Russia, 1941

  26. Unjust Purpose: Iraq’s Invasion of Kuwait, 1990

  27. Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) • On the Law of War and Peace: “The grounds of war are as numerous as those of judicial actions. For where the power of law ceases, there war begins.”

  28. Justifiable Causes of War • Defense: “Injury, or the prevention of injury, forms the only justifiable cause of war.” • Indemnity: right to recovery, redress, damages, compensation for injury • Punishment: punish aggressor, deter future aggressors

  29. How does injury justify war? • Principle of self-preservation: you may kill an aggressor if • you are threatened with immediate danger • the danger can’t otherwise be avoided • Aggressor forces people to risk their lives for the sake of their rights • Aggression justifies forceful resistance

  30. The Domestic Analogy • There exists a society of independent states • This society has a law establishing rights of its members • Any use of force, or immanent threat of force, by one state against another is a criminal act • Aggression justifies wars of self-defense and of law enforcement • Nothing but aggression can justify war • Aggressors can be repulsed and punished

  31. Arguments for Pacifism

  32. Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) • Ahimsa: Non-violence • “Non-violence is infinitely superior to violence.” • Gandhi argues for pacifism: violence is morally unacceptable

  33. The Ethics of Killing • Killing is intrinsically wrong • The only exception: when it is in the interest of the one being killed • Even then, it would be hard to have confidence that killing is right

  34. Deontological Arguments • It is wrong to cause pain or kill • Out of anger • For a selfish purpose • Or with the intention of harming it • Non-violence ennobles those who lose their lives

  35. Consequentialist Arguments • Non-violent responses to aggression defuse anger • It is not weakness, but pitting oneself against the will of the tyrant • It can achieve political objectives • In the long run, it results in the least loss of life

  36. When Killing is Justified • One must destroy life to live— but one should do it as little as possible • One can kill to stop suffering • One can kill a crazed person running amok

  37. Justifying War • Some wars are justified: WWII, Korea • But the future is unpredictable • Unforeseen effects always outweigh foreseen effects • So, it’s impossible to know, at the time, that a decision to use violence is justified

  38. Objections to Pacifism • If killing is wrong, it must be because life has value • But then why can’t someone kill to protect or defend life? • Orwell: Gandhi gained independence for India, but from the British— would it have worked against a ruthless, totalitarian foe? • How can a pacifist protect the persecuted?

  39. Preventive War • Can one ever attack first? • Talmud: “If a man is coming to kill you, wake up early and kill him first.”

  40. Against Preventive War • Preventive war presupposes a standard for measuring danger • Fought to maintain balance of power • Utilitarian argument: • The balance of power maintains order that makes liberty possible • Fighting early reduces cost of defense

  41. Against Preventive War • Second-level utilitarian argument: • Accepting that argument leads to countless wars whenever shifts in power relations occur • Threats might justify war, but fear doesn’t; how can we tell them apart? • It’s best to rely on legalist paradigm

  42. For Preventive War • Sometimes, it really is less costly to fight early • Example: Nazi occupation of Rhineland, 1936; WWII could have been prevented • It’s hard top gauge likelihood or magnitude of future attacks • But cost the attack will impose, multiplied by probability, may be very high

  43. For Preventive War • Suppose there’s a 50% chance of an attack • Cost of that attack: 100 • Expected cost: 50 • If a preventive war would cost less than 50, it’s justified

  44. For Preventive War: Terror • This argument is especially strong when applied to terrorism • Terrorists can do vast damage • Retaliation and deterrence are difficult • Hard to track who’s responsible • Terrorists may be widely dispersed • Suicide bombers can’t be punished after the fact

  45. For Preventive War • Domestic analogy: we punish people for planning to commit crimes • Evidence has to be convincing, but standard is weaker for violent crimes • Individuals who can’t be deterred can be punished in advance

  46. Jus in bello • What are the proper rules of warfare? • Walzer: That one may not shoot someone in the act of surrendering shows that there are such rules • Not everything is permitted • “War is distinguishable from murder and massacre only when restrictions are established on the reach of battle.”

  47. Jus in bello • When and how can soldiers kill? Walzer: This appears largely conventional. • Limitations of weapons (e.g., chemical and biological weapons treaties); limitations on questioning, torture • But are these merely conventional?

  48. Treatment of prisoners • 235,000 American and British prisoners were held by the Germans and Italians; 4% died • 132,000 were held by the Japanese; 27% died • American aircraft machine-gunned Japanese survivors swimming for shore; Americans often shot surrendering Japanese • Japanese doctors performed horrendous experiments on prisoners • Johnson: “moral confusion”

  49. Rules of War • Whom can they kill? • War is a combat among combatants • Killing someone not currently engaged in the business of war is a crime

  50. Rules of War • Grotius: we may defend ourselves against allies of our enemy • We may attack even when the attack endangers innocent lives

More Related