210 likes | 306 Views
Justice in War. Dr. Steve Hays BKHS Leadership and Ethics Spring 2014. Overview. Three principal areas: The just conditions for entering into a war. When is it just to go to war? The just conditions for conducting a war.
E N D
Justice in War Dr. Steve Hays BKHS Leadership and Ethics Spring 2014
Overview Three principal areas: • The just conditions for entering into a war. • When is it just to go to war? • The just conditions for conducting a war. • What are we permitted to do in carrying out a war and what is forbidden as unjust? • The just conditions of peace. • What are the conditions of peace that insure the just conclusion of a war?
Acknowledgement • This presentation is based on the excellent article by Brian D. Orend, "War ,“ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Jus ad bellum:The Just Conditions for Going to War • Just cause • Right intention • Proper authority and public declaration • Last resort • Probability of success • Proportionality
Just cause • Protection from external attack is the first and foremost—and in the eyes of some, the only--just cause of war; based on the right of self-defense. • Some have maintained the humanitarian intervention is also justified, where we go to war to save the lives of innocent people who are being attacked by an aggressor.
Right intention • The war must be pursued for a just cause. • Unacceptable intentions: • Revenge • Political expansion • Land acquisition
Proper authority and public declaration • Traditionally, only nations have the authority to declare war. • Wars must be publicly declared, not pursued in secret. • Question: Can terrorist groups be said to declare war? If not, is the response to terrorism really war?
Last resort • If there are other means of achieving the same objectives, such as negotiations or economic blockades, they should be pursued exhaustively first.
Probability of success • The rationale here is clear and simple: war is a great evil, and it is wrong to cause such killing, suffering, and destruction in a futile effort. • Question: what about countries that feel they are resisting evil even when there is little or no chance of success? For example, small European countries being invaded by the Nazis.
Proportionality • Are the possible benefits (especially in terms of a just peace) proportional to the death, suffering, and destruction that the pursuit of the war will bring about?
Jus in bello:The Just Conditions for Conducting a War Three principal conditions: • Discrimination • Proportionality • No means that are evil in themselves.
Discrimination • The key requirement here is to discriminate between those who are engaged in harm (soldiers) and those who are not (civilians). • This has increasingly become an issue as countries such as the United States have turned to high altitude bombing campaigns that are more likely to put civilians at risk.
Proportionality • Onoe should only use the amount of force that is proportional to the (just) ends being sought. • This raises interesting issues in the use of massive air strikes against bin Laden by the United States.
No Means Evil in Themselves • Orend lists a number of means that count as evil in themselves. • “mass rape campaigns; • “genocide or ethnic cleansing; • “torturing captured enemy soldiers; and • “using weapons whose effects cannot be controlled, like chemical or biological agents.”
Jus post bellum:Creating a Just Peace Brian Orend gives 5 conditions for a just peace: • Just cause for termination. • Right intention. • Public declaration and legitimate authority. • Discrimination. • Proportionality.
Just cause for termination • Orend: “a reasonable vindication of those rights whose violation grounded the resort to war in the first place.” • Unjust gains from aggression have been eliminated • Victims’ rights reinstated • Formal apology • Acceptance of reasonable punishment
Right intention • Excludes motives such as revenge • Prosecution of war crimes needs to be applied to all, not just the vanquished.
Public declaration and legitimate authority • This requirement is fairly straightforward and uncontroversial.
Discrimination • Differentiate between • Political and military leaders • Military and civilian populations • Punish the elite responsible for prosecuting the war, not the uninvolved civilians.
Proportionality • The vanquished do not lose their rights • No ‘witch hunts’ • Proportional to reasonable rights vindication