Just War Theory (JWT) An evolving doctrine

Lecture outline History of JWT The principles of JWT Jus ad bellum Jus in Bello Jus post bellum Is JWT anachronistic? Features of modern wars Terrorism Conclusion Religion, Peace and Conflict

Contributors Cicero (106 BC-43 BC) Emerich de Vattel (1714-1767) St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430) St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) Stanislaw of Skarbimierz (1360-1431) Francisco de Vitoria (1492-1546) Francisco Suarez (1548-1617) Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) Baron von Pufendorf (1632-1694) Emerich de Vattel (1714-1767) Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Paul Tillich (1886-1965) George Barry O'Toole (1886-1944) Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971) H. Richard Niebuhr (1894-1962) Paul Ramsey (1913-1988) Michael Walzer (1935-) Religion, Peace and Conflict

Starting points Just War Position Pacifism Taking life is never justified so war can never be justified Just War Position Taking life is wrong, with rare exceptions, e.g. self-defence Just war is a kind of national self-defence There is always a presumption against war Religion, Peace and Conflict

Early formulations St. Augustine (d.430) The just war is a cruel necessity. Religion, Peace and Conflict

St Thomas Aquinas (d.1274) ‘In order for a war to be just, three things are necessary’ The Summa Theologica Part II, Question 40 Religion, Peace and Conflict

1. Rightful authority First, the authority of the sovereign by whose command the war is to be waged. For it is not the business of a private individual to declare war. Augustine: "The natural order conducive to peace among mortals demands that the power to declare and counsel war should be in the hands of those who hold the supreme authority." Religion, Peace and Conflict

2. A Just Cause Secondly, a just cause is required, namely that those who are attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault. Augustine: "A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished." Religion, Peace and Conflict

3. Right Intent Thirdly, it is necessary that the belligerents should have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil. Augustine: "True religion looks upon as peaceful those wars that are waged not for motives of aggrandizement, or cruelty, but with the object of securing peace, of punishing evil-doers, and of uplifting the good." For it may happen that the war is declared by the legitimate authority, and for a just cause, and yet be rendered unlawful through a wicked intention. Hence Augustine says: "The passion for inflicting harm, the cruel thirst for vengeance, …, the lust of power, and such like things, all these are rightly condemned in war." Religion, Peace and Conflict

(justification for war) Further development Just War Jus ad bellum (justification for war) Jus in bello (fair combat) Religion, Peace and Conflict

Jus ad bellum SIX CONDITIONS A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defence against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause A just war can only be fought with right intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury. A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable. The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. Religion, Peace and Conflict

Jus ad bellum - Queries Last resort (sanctions? Pre-emptive strikes?) Legitimate authority (Parliament, UN, Hamas?) Redress a wrong (how great a wrong?) Right Intentions (ulterior motives?) Religion, Peace and Conflict

Jus in bello Three Principles Religion, Peace and Conflict

Proportionality The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered. Religion, Peace and Conflict

Discrimination The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target Religion, Peace and Conflict

Military Necessity Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of minimum force. An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective. This principle is meant to limit unnecessary death and destruction Religion, Peace and Conflict

Jus in bello - queries Proportionality: carpet bombing, nuclear weapons? Discrimination: role of civilians in war Military necessity: damage to infrastructure Religion, Peace and Conflict

Jus post bellum? Peace treaties Reconstruction War crimes tribunals Reparation Religion, Peace and Conflict

Is JWT anachronistic? Evolved during a time when warfare was different Lines of battle clear (one king v another) Pitched battles, over in a day Rules of engagement derived from codes of chivalry Religion, Peace and Conflict

Features of modern wars Wars are internal. Over 90% of modern wars have not been conducted between sovereign states and are 'internal‘. Civilians are targeted. Little or no distinction is drawn between men with or without weapons, and women, children, the elderly and the sick are not spared. Legitimate authority is highly diversified as a result of the growing complexity of modern government. Religion, Peace and Conflict

Terrorism Term first used by French revolutionaries in the 1790s Adopted by C.19th revolutionary groups practising political assassination (e.g. in 1914) Widely used today to describe activities such as bombing of public places, car bombs, hostage taking, plane hijacking, suicide bombings, etc. Religion, Peace and Conflict

Definition ‘The calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature: this is done through intimidation, or coercion, or instilling fear’. Wordnet dictionary, Princeton University Religion, Peace and Conflict

UN General Assembly ‘reiterates that criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstances unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be used to justify them’ UN Legal Committee, 2001 Religion, Peace and Conflict

Terrorism v Just War Terrorism typically infringes: Jus ad bellum condition of legitimate authority Jus in bello principle of discrimination Religion, Peace and Conflict

Terrorist/Freedom Fighter/Politician? Paramilitary groups often have a political wing: Viet Cong in South Vietnam IRA in Northern Ireland ANC (UK and USA governments, 1987-8) Hamas in Palestine Agim Ceku, prime minister of Kosovo Religion, Peace and Conflict

Conclusion JWT evolves out of Christian teachings as an alternative to absolute pacifism Always a presumption against war Governed by two principles: jus ad bellum and jus in bello Easy to state the principles but can be difficult to apply in practice Nature of modern warfare and regional disputes complicates its application JWT rules out terrorism Religion, Peace and Conflict