IV.18               Just War Theory
We are mad, not only individually but nationally. We check manslaughter and isolated murders; but what of war and the much-vaunted crime of slaughtering whole peoples?
     There are no limits to our greed, none to our cruelty. And as long as such crimes are committed by stealth and individuals, they are less harmful and less portentous; but cruelties are practiced in accordance with acts of senate and popular assembly, and the public is bidden to do that which is forbidden to the individual. Deeds that would be punished by loss of life when committed in secret, are praised by us because uniformed generals have carried them out.
     Man, naturally the gentlest class of being, is not ashamed to revel in the blood of others, to wage war, and to entrust the waging of war to his sons, when even the dumb beasts keep the peace with one another.
                                                          Seneca (4 BCE-65 CE)
 
What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
                                                  Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)
 
Force always attracts men of low morality
Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.
Nationalism is an infantile sickness. It is the measles of the human race.
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.
Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!
I am not only a pacifist but a militant pacifist. I am willing to fight for peace. Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.
                                                          Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
 
 
Introduction
A.  When is a War Justified? (Jus ad Bellum)
B.   How should a Just War be Carried Out? (Jus in Bello)
C.   How should a War be Justly Ended? (Jus Post Bellum)
 
Introduction
Just War Theory attempts to distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable uses of organized armed forces. It is a set of ethical considerations on the justifiability, implementation, and secession of force. There is a strong presumption against the use of force. This presumption, however, can be trumped for maintaining peace that protects human rights.
     The broad standards of Just War Theory have found their way into various parts of international law. Hence, a citizen can determine his own proper role and responsibility in a conflict. If his nation's war violates international law, he can on legal grounds refuse to participate. Moreover, the international community has now established at The Hague a permanent court for the prosecution of war crimes and other crimes against humanity
     Just War Theory has evolved over many centuries with contributions from many thinkers. The contributors to this tradition include the Roman philosopher Cicero (106-43 BCE), the Latin church father Augustine (354-430), the Italian scholastic philosopher Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274?), and the Dutch jurist Grotius (1583-1645).

A.  When is a War Justified? (Jus ad Bellum)

  • Last resort: Force may be used only after all peaceful means, such as negotiations and economic sanctions, have been exhausted.

  • Just cause: Force may be used only to defend the lives, values, rights, and properties of citizens against aggression.

  • Comparative justice: The values, rights, etc., defended must be so significant that they outweigh the terrors of war. Moreover, since both sides of a conflict will accuse each other of wrong doing, the injustice endured by one party must significantly outweigh that endured by the other.

  • Right intension: The intension must be to defend the rights, values, etc., in question and not some hidden objective. For instance, it is wrong to impose ones economic system, such as capitalism, under the pretense of making the world safe for democracy.

  • Probability of success: There has to be a realistic belief that the war will accomplish its objectives. death and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

  • Proportionality of ends: The overall devastation from the use of force must be outweighed by the presumed benefits to be achieved.

  • Legitimate, competent authority: Only a legitimate government of sound mind may declare war within the boundaries of national laws and international laws that it has pledged to uphold.

B.   How should a Just War be Carried Out? (Jus in Bello)

  • Proportionality of means: The intensity of the force used must be proportional to the injustice suffered, and to the possible benefits that may materialize. 

  • Discrimination: The acts of war must be directed towards the perpetrators and not toward non-combatants. Civilians and their residences must not be bombed. Weapons of mass destruction do not allow for discrimination, and they should therefore be banned.

  • Torture: The inflicting of severe pain on combatants or non-combatants is forbidden.

  • Prisoners of war: Captive combatants and non-combatants must be at a minimum treated according to the Geneva Convention.

C.  How should a War be Justly Ended? (Jus Post Bellum)

This third category has been more recently proposed by various thinkers. In his Justice After War, Brian Orend suggests:

  • Just cause for termination - A state may terminate a war if there has been a reasonable vindication of the rights that were violated in the first place, and if the aggressor is willing to negotiate the terms of surrender. These terms of surrender include a formal apology, compensations, war crimes trials and perhaps rehabilitation.

  • Right intention - A state must only terminate a war under the conditions agreed upon in the above criteria. Revenge is not permitted. The victor state must also be willing to apply the same level of objectivity and investigation into any war crimes its armed forces may have committed.

  • Public declaration and authority - The terms of peace must be made by a legitimate authority, and the terms must be accepted by a legitimate authority.

  • Discrimination - The victor state is to differentiate between political and military leaders, and combatants and civilians. Punitive measures are to be limited to those directly responsible for the conflict.

  • Proportionality - Any terms of surrender must be proportional to the rights that were initially violated. Draconian measures and any attempt at denying the surrendered country the right to participate in the world community are not permitted.