...Just War theory is a doctrine, also referred to as a tradition, of military ethics studied by theologians, ethicists, policy makers and military leaders. The purpose of the doctrine is to ensure war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, all of which must be met for a war to be considered just. The criteria are split into two groups: ‘the right to go to war’ and ‘right conduct in war’ . The first concerns the morality of going to war and the second with moral conduct within war. Recently there have been calls for the inclusion of a third category of just war theory - jus post bellum - dealing with the morality of post-war settlement and reconstruction. Just War theory postulates that war, while very terrible, is not always the worst option. There may be responsibilities so important, atrocities which can be prevented or outcomes so undesirable they justify war. Origins The Indian epic, the Mahabharata, offers one of the first written discussions of a 'just war'. In it, one of five ruling brothers asks if the suffering caused by war can ever be justified, and then a long discussion ensues between the siblings, establishing criteria like proportionality, just means, just cause, and fair treatment of captives and the wounded. The war in Mahabharata is preceded by context that develops the "just cause" for the war including last minute efforts to reconcile differences to avoid war. At the beginning of the war, there is the discussion of "just conduct" appropriate...
Words: 1514 - Pages: 7
...Running header: Just War Theory The Just War Theory Regarding the War on Terrorism Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Abstract The modern interpretation of the Just War Theory list seven conditions which must met in order for a war to be considered “Just” (jus ad bellum). This paper demonstrates that, while it has been suggested that all wars, even the current war on terrorism, are unjust, the facts remain that any war that meets each of the seven criteria is a just war, regardless of opinion. Throughout the ages man has always looked to bring about the end of war, or when war has been waged to minimize the destruction caused when nations war. According to the text;”these rules were worked out in the late Middle Ages by the so-called Schoolmen or Scholars, building on the Roman law and early Christian thinkers such as Augustine and Ambrose. (The Moral of the Story, 2006) These rules were developed to first, deter wars, but when determined necessary, to limit the scope and suffering from the war. While not completely universal in scope, most advanced western societies have embraced the theory of just war as a bases for determining when, and if, a war is justified. As set forth by the Schoolmen, there are seven criteria that must be considered and met before nations can engage in war. They are; the Last Resort, a Just Cause, a Legitimate, Competent Authority, Comparative Justice, Right Intention, Probability of Success...
Words: 2037 - Pages: 9
...Just and Unjust Wars Do people ever fight unjust wars? I believe people do fight unjust wars. An unjust war is when one group tries to take over another group. This can be because of power, religious beliefs, economic gain, etc. The online definition I found for unjust war is “any conflict in which one party will attempt to enforce dominance on a different party. This may be carried out for a number of reasons like power, economic gain, religious differences and ethnic cleansing. Theory of unjust war is contrasted with just war theory” (ask.com). An unjust war is fought with the wrong intentions. If a group hasn’t tried all non-violent options to solve their issue, then I feel that the war they engage in is unjust. A good example of an unjust war is the war that is going on in Iraq. This war has been going on for over eleven years now. During this time span there have been no real answers to what we have accomplished, but yet our soldiers are still dying along with Iraqi civilians. In addition to the lives lost, our economy is horrible with a big impact being from oil and gas prices. Even though immense fighting still exists, our troops need to start leaving Iraq. How long must we continue to fight a war that seems to be leading us nowhere? Also, ever since the beginning of the human race, there has been war. One group feels that they can take over another group and not only take over their land, but also use their resources and people for their own profit...
Words: 520 - Pages: 3
... 1 | MUHAMMAD NAZRI BIN MOHMUD HUSSIN | 1031189 | 1 | | | | | Just War Theory: An Introduction. Just war theory is an interesting idea which constitutes both elements of ethics and politics to form a theory that describe the ethical and political relationship between states and sovereignty. Just War theory can be describes as an attempt to reconcile war with morality. Its main objective was to give justification for a state to launch an attack towards another state provided they have a valid reason to do so. From this we can come to define just war theory as a theory that specifies conditions for judging if it is just to go to war, and conditions for how the war should be fought (BBC, 2014). Just War theory is often associated with Christianity as it was first developed through biblical teachings by Christian theologians, St Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Even though Just war theory started from biblical teaching it does not mean that Christianity endorses violence or war but instead the ultimate goal is peace. War can only serve as the last resort action to achieve peace. After Christianity become dominant in the Roman civilization, the demand for a theory to justify the act of war lead St. Augustine to propose the Just War theory that was driven from biblical teachings (Catholic Answer, n.d). This was later perfected by St. Thomas Aquinas to form the Just War Theory that we know today. In his...
Words: 2655 - Pages: 11
...iustum or the Just War Theory is a military ethics doctrine derived from Episcopal philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church. As studied today, the Just War Theory is considered hugely informed by the Christian understanding of the justifications of wars of invasion. In ethicist literature as in moral theology and policy making, the Just War Theory is associated with the belief that conflicts can be justified under certain philosophical, political and religious criteria. This paradigm dates back to the times of Marcus Tullius Cicero, a Roman statesman, philosopher, lawyer, theorist and constitutionalist. The connection of the theory to medieval Christian theory and particularly, contemporary Catholicism is in the works of Thomas Aquinas and Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis (Gutman & Rieff, 2000). The former, also called Thomas of Aquin was an Italian Dominican priest, a theologian and a philosopher. The latter, also called St. Augustine, Blessed Augustine or Augustine of Hippo, was a onetime Bishop of Hippo Regius, a philosopher and theologian. This paper describes the tenets of the just war theory derived from the works of these philosophers and the utility of the theory within contemporary warfare. Specific focus is on the justification of the US invasion of Iraq and the consequences thereof. In the works of these three philosophers, the Just War Theory took a Christian connotation of the Roman Empire’s view of warfare. The Christian understanding of provocation to war and the ethics...
Words: 979 - Pages: 4
...Morality of War Nicholas S. Chavez University of Phoenix Introduction War has been around since the beginning of time; and the causes always differ from the last. Many questions arise in a society because of it, such as death, casualties due to involvement, the overall outcome projected, etc. The most highly debatable topic pertaining to any war that those causes play a factor in is whether it is justified or not. Sacrifices are made overseas as well as on the home front with the families of the men and women giving their lives for their country. In turn, those sacrifices can make those families believe their loss could have been for an unjust cause, making it difficult for war to be supported. On the other hand, there are sacrifices in a war taking place today, and have in the past that families and the ones fighting see as justifiable. To determine the justifiability of war, one must consider all sides and all factors, as well as their effect on the overall society. Sacrifices Made When a loved one is deployed overseas to defend his/her country, all that can get them through, is knowing that their family is waiting for them and hoping and praying that nothing happens to them. The death of a loved one, which many fortunate people, don’t have to experience, is extremely hard on a family and delivers a crushing blow which can cause anyone to break down. When a family member passes away from being sent overseas, it can take a toll on how someone feels about a war and if...
Words: 1761 - Pages: 8
...‘There are no just causes for war’ Many argue that there are just reasons for going to war however others state that there are no just reason at all, some reasons to go to war can be fighting for human rights or defending your religion however these can be overseen due to the amount of innocent people who die during war. A just reason for war may be to restore or protect human rights. Many people will claim or demand for better human rights and will want to oppose anyone who will go against them, this is a just reason for war as people are standing together and uniting as one to get what they want which is a better life. Augustine said that a just cause for going to war was ‘defending from attack’, if human rights were violated citizens may feel attacked and under threat therefore in order to restore peace they will have to go to war as they will see this as the only sensible response. The general rule is that only those people fighting you are legitimate targets of attack. Those who are not fighting should not be attacked as this would violate their human rights. Another just cause for going to war is self-defence; the clearest just cause is acting against an aggressor, for example in an invasion, many people are patriotic and would rather die instead of giving up their country to invaders therefore will start a war as a sense of self defence. Augustine said that a just cause for war was ‘recapturing things taken’; this view can be used here as invaders would be trying to...
Words: 648 - Pages: 3
...Augustine’s Just War Theory laid out certain tenants of what was to be considered a “just war.” One can ascertained from the Bible that God is a just God and at times, if there is just cause, He condones war. Augustine’s tenants of a just war consist of seven tenants that should be considered prior to engaging in war. These tenants are as follows: 1. There must be legitimate authority (leadership) in place. 2. A just Cause - i.e. a threat to freedom, ruthless/inhuman acts perpetrated on people, etc.). 3. There should be just Intent - war should not be for to gain, occupy, or destroy, control commodities, etc. 4. There must be specific and achievable goals - should not be a lashing out for vengeance or without strategies in place...
Words: 348 - Pages: 2
...War is a tricky subject, and in this case after the attacks from ISIS on our embassy’s, after the attacks on American civilians, we still cannot go to war according to Just War Theory and our moral values, as badly as the American people may want to go to war, we cannot and must not engage ISIS militarily with a full standing army, we have to punish them in other ways. Just War Theory is conducted in three parts, the initiation of war, known as jus ad bellum, the conducting of the war itself, jus in bello, and finally the aftermath of war, known as, jus post bellum (Moser and McDonald, 2016a). Jus ad bellum is the initiation of war and it states that war must have a just cause and that war must be taken by a legitimate authority, and in this situation, both of the characteristics mentioned previously are present. Yes, we have a just cause, and yes, the United States is a legitimate authority. However, we need to look at everything about jus ad bellum, “armed conflict is taken as a ‘“last resort’” and all other means have been exhausted.” Let us not forget that “a just war requires a “‘right intention”’ and to not be motivated by aggression” (Moser and McDonald, 2016a). In this situation, the American...
Words: 1040 - Pages: 5
...to reach its intended target because of heroic passengers. With nearly 3,000 civilians murdered, the United States began the “War on Terror” that targeted organizations designated as terrorist and those regimes accused of supporting them. The “War on Terror” took the fight to the mountains of Afghanistan and the deserts of Iraq. The Theory of Just War is an ethical look to help determine whether the use of armed forces is justified or unjustified. This Theory is guided by three sets of criteria: the right to go war (jus ad bellum), the rules of engagement of war (jus in bello) and justice after war (jus post bellum). While these wars have been surrounded with controversy and claims of being unjust, the “War on Terror” is a just war that does not exceed the moral boundaries set in the Just War Theory and today's society? The first criterion for a just war is the right to go to war. Is there a just cause? Will war be declared by a competent authority? Has all other options for peace been exhausted? What are the chances for success? Before the dust for the fallen towers settled and while eighty-six other countries mourned the loss of loved ones that were indiscriminately killed by Al Qaeda operatives, leaders around the globe heeded their citizens’ call to war, forming a coalition against terrorists. President George Bush stated “our 'war on terror' begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been...
Words: 3075 - Pages: 13
...With the discussion of unjust and just war has occurred in connection with whether terror-bombing is a just means to pursue a war, or the do it even mean to initiated one in accord with justice. Just war deontological theory is the relationship between duty and the morality rules of the military action, which will result in the good for the welfare of the people in the village that the war is taken place at. Failing to abide by the general rules that have been setup for the U.S. government will result in immorally behavior. When dealing with deontological, there is no room for subjective feelings, because it will leave room for question and it does not deal with ethics, but it does concentrate on prudence. Jus in Bello theory distinguishes how the military will are may treat the combatants and how we will treat noncombatants on the battlefield. The jus ad bellum doctrine is the standard war between the nation’s issues of what...
Words: 720 - Pages: 3
...The Second World War can be considered a just war using the criteria set forth in the “Just War Theory.” The war was properly declared by an act of Congress after an attack by the Empire of Japan on December 7, 1941. The US Constitution gives Congress the responsibility to declare war in Article 1, section 8. Because of the act of aggression by Japan and the proper declaration of war by Congress, World War II meets elements 1 and 2 of the Just War Theory. World War II also had the right intentions. Both Japan and Germany were sweeping through the Pacific and Europe repressing the people they had defeated. Both Axis powers were brutalizing, and in the case of Germany exterminating, certain groups of people. The United States had attempted to stay out of the European conflict, leaving it to regional powers such as Great Britain. Peace did not seem to have a chance because of the ambitions of the Japanese and German powers. As a result, war was the final option left to the Americans. The United States had a reasonable chance for success because they had not yet been involved in the fighting. They were also the industrial and manufacturing base for the British and Soviets; providing them with arms and material to fight the Germans. The United States was also not going to fight alone. They were joining with the Allied powers that had already been fighting for a few years. The Bible tells us “Never pay back evil with more evil. Do things in such a way that everyone can see you...
Words: 305 - Pages: 2
...Running Head: MHE505 MODULE 1 – CASE ASSIGNMENT Question 1: Global definitions of terrorism are presented in the background reading. Provide a critique of these definitions. What would you propose as a global definition of terrorism? |To Define Terrorism | |Debate over what constitutes a terrorist or a terrorist assault occurs with each mass violent attack. In remarks to the Center for | |International Policy in Washington DC, on November 2001, former Ambassador Keeley (2002) discussed the necessity to define | |terrorism, and illustrated the challenge of constructing a definition that can be applied steadily. (Keeley, 2002) Thirteen years | |later six different U.S. government agencies have differing definition of Terrorism, and there is no consensus on a definition. | | | |Critique of Definitions of Terrorism | |Although the wording used in the within the definitions varies, there are key words each of the agencies emphasize. The U.S. Code | |Of Federal Regulation does not distinguish between a government and sub national group who uses terrorism as a method. United | |States Code Title...
Words: 1455 - Pages: 6
...Can WAR ever be just? Can there be rules about war so that fair play is possible? Has there ever been a war with a just cause? This has been a debate for ages. It depends on who you are asking if you ask a Christian they will tell you any war is unjust because god would not want you to kill others. He would want you to turn the cheek. Others may say it is just if it’s in defense. In this paper, I will explain why the Vietnam War was just. The United States got involved in the Vietnam War from 1954 -1964 to prevent and contain communism. In Vietnam, an independence movement under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh rose to challenge French rule. The United States helped France by giving financial and military aid. The US had moral and ethical reasons to stand up and face unethical leaders that oppressed other weaker people and to contain the spread of communism. Communism is horrible because the government controls every move you make and you have no say in what happens in your life. Such as no right to vote, no freedom of speech, no right to a fair trial, etc. This is what the United States was trying to protect South Vietnam from. Communists used terrorism, murdered and subversion to destabilize countries. Just this alone was a just cause for the United States to get involved in the Vietnam War. Many feel that this wasn’t a good enough reason for the United States to get involved and was immoral unjust war, or that communism is not that bad. According to Aquinas four things...
Words: 830 - Pages: 4
...I will argue that the ‘war on terror’ declared by the Bush administration and so assessed for the US; is not a just war. It fails in the central interrelated criteria of just cause and last resort for jus ad bellum, which I detail first through assessment of the Bush administration’s self-proclaimed just reasoning behind resorting to war against a concept, and the alternatives available to it, I will then detail its failure in the jus in bello criteria of discrimination and proportionality, reasoning through the case of drone warfare. Jus ad bellum I shall firstly focus on the crucial jus ad bellum principle of just cause, holding the only just cause for war to be self-defence . The USA and its allies suffered unjust, unprovoked terror attacks, notably to embassies and battleships, as well as ultimately the 9/11 disaster, and further possessed reputable evidence of other failed attacks. Thus this essay acknowledges that they were under-attack from a powerful and effective enemy, which could be reliably pinpointed as Al Qaeda. These attacks were focused on non-combatants in landmark locations; deliberate targeting for maximum terror spreading effect, which further represented an attack on western freedoms. Hence the assailant satisfied neither jus ad bellum, nor jus in bello, and without immediate and effective action there existed great potential for further unjust attacks. This was the Bush administration’s argument for sufficient reason to declare war in self-defence . However...
Words: 2219 - Pages: 9
