...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
... 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
...‘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
...War and Peace All peoples, regardless of how far back into history you look, have the goal of establishing some sort of peace where they can thrive and prosper. However, the enemy of peace is war, and that is yet another thing that all cultures have, they have wars or other violent conflicts, whether it be an uprising, revolutions, ect. So we have peace in one hand, and in the other, we have war. It is my believe that in order to have peace, you first must have some sort of war or conflict. Through out the history of man kind, no matter what cultures you look back at, they have all had two things, a period of war, and a period of peace. Why is it that they don’t just have a period of peace? Well, for starters, how did that country form? In most cases, the new country had to start with a war or an act of violence in order to separate from the old country, because what ruler is just going to let part of his kingdom up and leave? So at the very birth, this new country has already had a war. Now afterwards, yes, they may have had some period of peace, but somewhere along the lines, they had another period of war. Depending on the culture, they were trying to expanding their empire, defending their territory and lands, or maybe just settle some old rivalry. Whatever their reasons were, all countries sooner or later end up in another war or conflict of some type, because you cannot have peace without some sort of war. No matter what culture you look at they have all had a...
Words: 684 - Pages: 3
...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
...Causes of war and conflict Nationalism; Nationalism is when people are loyal and devoted to their country, they are passionate about protecting their way of life from other peoples cultures, this can be applicable to small tribes to whole countries. Nationalism can easily lead to war or conflicts because nationalism can make people blind to another culture bar their own and makes them less understanding this can lead to persecution of those people that do not belong in the dominant culture. An example of a war or conflict caused by nationalism is Kashmir, The Kashmir conflict is a territorial conflict between India and Pakistan which started just after partition of India. India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir. Politics; Politics is a group of people who run a country from there parliament, if a political party disagrees with another party (whether that’s in the same country or another) this can cause major agro and lead to war or conflict. Loads of wars and conflicts have happened because of politics for example the cold war. The cold war this was when two of the biggest superpowers (U.S.A and Russia then named Soviet Union) had a stand off which caused the earth to come to the brink of destruction even when there was no physical fighting going on, America was a Democracy and the soviet union was a dictatorship and basically the two countries disagreed on how both their countries were run, this caused tension and scare all over the world. Some recent conflicts...
Words: 1911 - Pages: 8
...The Concept of “Just War” BY: Ahmed Bayoumy Moter 201400746 Philosophy 101 Massacre at first glance is not an accepted act by humanitarian authorities. As Predominantly killing people cannot be considered a moral action if we defined the ethical acts according to the cultural relativism or even ethical subjectivism. Nonetheless, the concept of Just War (JW), developed from the time of St. Augustine, has another point of view regarding butchery. As it states that to start an ethically justifiable war it must be for a just cause, declared by a lawful authority, the last solution after trying all the possible ways of solving the problem, and have a high probability of success [1]. The theory of JW is divided into three main segments:...
Words: 1515 - Pages: 7
...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
...Conflict and war are inevitable and sometime necessary Of the many wondrous and beneficial qualities we as a society possess, our inclination toward war and conflict is not one of them. In fact it is one of our most destructive and damaging activities humans do. As horrifying, catastrophic and fatal as war may be, it is a necessary element for the survival for humans as a species. Before we talk about why war might be necessary, let us first discuss some of the major causes of war. The most dominant reason for war in human history is ideology, or most specifically religious ideology. From the crusades that begun with Pope Urban II speech at the Church Council at Clermont in 1095 and ended with the expulsion of the Hospital of St John from Malta by Napoleon in 1798 to the current conflict in Israel religion has been a cause for conflict. “…Hubristic identities are a possible cause of war …He defines the term ‘hubristic identities’ as ‘the aspiration for recognition’ of one’s superiority, which is not recognized by other major international actors’… Fascist and communist regime from this hypothesis, and further integrate the notion of ‘image’ – for example, monumental works in the capital city – emphasised by the leaders of such regime. Logically, such ‘hubristic identities’ require some kind of proof for both the domestic and foreign audience to strengthen their claim of their superiority. In such a scenario, winning the war is perhaps the most viable and most credible...
Words: 2077 - Pages: 9
...Aquinas’s just war theory can be applied to modern armed conflicts today. Using the attack on Pearl Harbor as an example you can still apply these ancient ideas to provide a useful way to look at events. The just war theory states three rules for a just war. First, a proper authority must command the war. Those in authority are supposed to protect the people. It is lawful for them to use weapons or force to keep peace and order inside their city/country and to punish people who break the laws and do evil. In the same way, those in authority are responsible for defending the community against external enemies, and can therefore use force against enemies. Second, there must be a just cause for the war. “… Those who are attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault.” Third, those fighting must “have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil.” The first rule is clearly the most important rule; it sets the tone for everything that follows. A state may launch a war only for the right reason. A just cause most frequently mentioned includes self-defense from external attack. Thus far, Pearl Harbor could be considered a just war because the United States declared a state of war with Japan after they were “suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.” as stated by President Franklin Roosevelt in his “Day of Infamy Speech”. However, we must remember how morally complex...
Words: 794 - Pages: 4
...Conflict in Disguise The Civil War, it is a defining moment in America’s history. The Civil War happened between the years of 1861-1865. The war determined what America’s future would hold. Two sides participated in the war; the North and the South. However, the North would claim victory. Within that victory was 625,000 lives lost. It was perhaps one of the most destructive wars in the United States’ history. The Civil War started over conflict because of the differences between the free states and the slave states. Many thought that the war went on due to the act of abolishing slavery within the southern states, but was that really the cause? While reading through sources, a common question re-appears, was it really slavery that caused the...
Words: 1872 - Pages: 8
...There were many events that lead to World War One however there were four causes that were the ultimate factors, these were nationalism, imperialism, militarism and alliance systems. Each cause did not single-handedly cause the war but it was the combination of these factors that ultimately led to the war, a war that would change the world forever. Undoubtedly one of the major causes of WWI was nationalism and it truly fuelled the hatred between European countries. In the years prior to the war many Europeans cherished a firm belief in the cultural, economic and military supremacy of their nation. Nationalism assured citizens of the moral integrity of their nation and in contrast demoralised rival nations. It insured citizens that in the...
Words: 961 - Pages: 4
...How does Ted G. Goertzel claim C.W Mills’ s The Cause of World War III C. Wright Mills, who was a famous sociologist of America, claimed that a new world war is coming up and the cause of World War III is the military industrial complex. He states his opinion about new world war detailedly in his book The cause of World War III. In addition, we can know more about Mills’ s opinion about how does he regard the military industrial complex and the power elites. The Ted G. Goertzel clamed that Mills’ s opinion about new world war was wrong in his article The Cause of World War III, Thirty Years Later. However, Mills’ s opinion about new world war is partly right and partly wrong. It will be some local wars caused by the military industrial complex. But the nuclear wars will never happen between. Charles Wright Mills was born in 1916 and died in 1962. He was one of the famous sociologist at that time. Also, as a sociology professor at Columbia University, some of his works are remaining until nowadays, such as The Power Elite; White Collar; The Sociological Imagination. The Power Elite is about the class alliances in the U.S. Military; economy elite and political. The White Collar is an introduction of middle class in the U.S. He proposed the proper relationship in sociological scholarship between biography and history in the book named The Sociological Imagination. And this book was considered as the most influential book of Mills. He was so influential that The...
Words: 1649 - Pages: 7
...gods are in fact less moral than the humans. Often those who start or refuse to stop an unjust war are considered to be immoral people, or in the case of the Iliad as immoral gods. According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on War, “War can be necessary and proportionate only if it serves an end worth all this death and destruction” (Lazar 3.1). Meaning war may be needed if there is a just reason and if the war will prevent even more catastrophe. The gods in the Iliad time and time again act immoral by provoking unjust wars and frequently encouraging wars to continue that are coming to an end, such as when Athena "stirs" the fighting at the wishes of Zeus, Zeus telling Athena to "Urge on the Danaans" (Book 17, 537-543). In the Iliad each god has their own self-serving plan for what they wish to happen and every one of them uses the...
Words: 1072 - Pages: 5
...Wars are constantly being fought in the world. Bloodshed had taken place as top leaders ponder their every move in their game of victories and conquests. Behind each and every war that has taken place, there will always be a reason for it. The most predominant causes are greed and rising ambitions. Greed is inborn and present in the character of every human being. Hence we can see unscrupulous leaders, at the expense of the people, go to wars as a result of their quest for power and territorial gains. One example will be the recent internal strife in Angola, Africa. Foday Sankoh exploited the country's natural resources---diamonds for his personal wealth, which resulted in the deaths of many innocent parties. World War II was also started by Hitler's rising demands for territorial gains, conquering states after states. Hence wars that were fought for personal gains are the most common. The World Trade Organisation (WTO) can step in here. In face of such unscrupulous leaders, the countries in the organisation can stop trading with them and place an international boycott on such countries. For example, Iraq was slapped with an international boycott whereby countries such as Britian, France and America refused to buy oil ffom them during the invasion of Kuwait in the nineties. Next the fight for basic human rights is also one of the main reasons as to why wars were fought. In some countries, citizens do not enjoy equal rights. Widespread discrimination of minority can easily spark...
Words: 1093 - Pages: 5
