Just War Theory

2710 Words6 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Is just war theory out of date? essays

Essay 1

Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and Jus Post Bellum are the three stages of Just War Theory. Jus ad Bellum pertains to the ethics of starting a just war, with the principles being having just cause, being a last resort, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used. Jus in Bello covers the conduct of individuals at war, with discrimination and proportionality being the guidelines. Meaning, only use force against legitimate targets in war, and only use an amount of force that is morally appropriate. Jus Post Bellum discusses how justice should be served following the cessation of a war, with discrimination being a big factor once again. In this case, that means that punitive measures are only to affect the ones directly responsible for the conflict, not civilians.
I believe Just War Theory plays a big role in the study of genocide, war crimes and international law. International Law is at the forefront of regulating the conduct of war. Just War is one of the theories that international law uses to dictate proper and just warfare. Therefore, if a participant of war violates a principle of Just War Theory, then that participant is subject to committing a war crime and can be tried by an international court. Genocide consists of acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. This is a complete disregard to Jus in Bello, using maximum force against illegitimate targets in war. Jus Post Bellum states that a victor in war should be responsible to help aid the rehabilitation of the defeated nation or state post war, and clearly trying to eliminate a ...

... middle of paper ...

...h Stalin, is a good example, as well, involving a large-scale purge of the Communist Party, repression of peasants, Red Army leadership, and persecution of unaffiliated persons.
5. The ICC or International Criminal Court is the first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court created in order to stop privilege and special treatment for the most violent and serious offenders to the international community. The ICC differs from other international courts with the fact that it is an autonomous court, whereas tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, as well as other similar courts established within the framework of the United Nations, have a limited mandate and jurisdiction. The ICC also differs from the International Court of Justice, since the ICC tries individuals, while the International Court of Justice settles disputes between nation-states.

Show More
Related

  • The Rifle John Byam

    736 Words  | 2 Pages

    Next in 1899, 1907, 1954 the International Peace Convention (originally The Hague Convention) where held because, in the last wars multiple cultural, art, literature and artifacts pieces were destroyed. Also, the community notice the rise in technology of weapons. The rules of war from the two convention consist of National and Cultural Symbols, Chemical and Biological warfare, Wounded and Sick Soldiers, POW (Geneva III), Civilians and Occupation, and Cultural Property. All of those are rules of war and the are severe consequences if they are broken. The United Nations and International Court of Justice (also known as the World Court) will take care of war crimes. Multiple other organizations were made by the U.N. to take care of certain wars for people such as, Nazi's and The Civil war in Yugoslavia. All countries are suppose to respect and follow the rules of war no matter the

    Read More

  • Military Ethics – Humanitarian Aid in Somalia

    2908 Words  | 6 Pages

    Jus ad bellum is defined as “justice of war” and is recognized as the ethics leading up to war (Orend 31). Orend contends that an...

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Just War Theory And The US Counterterror War

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    Just War Theory has three components jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum. Each of the components can explain what makes a war just and moral. Jus ad bellum or just initiation of war is achieved if a state has a just cause, uses armed conflict after all other means are exhausted, if it has a right intention to go into war, if there is a chance of success, and if it the ends of the war are equal to the means of war. The

    Read More

  • Just war theory

    1005 Words  | 3 Pages

    The idea of war and how it can be justified, is a rather trick topic to touch on, as there are diverse ethical and sociological implications that have to be weighed on every step. Mainly we could look at the “Just War Theory” and see how that could possibly apply to the real world. To be able to enter a “Just War” nations must meet six criteria in Jus ad Bellum (Going to War). The criteria is as follows: “Just Cause”, “Right Intention”, “Proper Authority and Public Declaration”, “Last Resort”, “Probability of Success”, and lastly “Proportionality”. However the tricky bit of the Just War theory, is that all six of those elements must be met, to go to war in a morally justifiable way. This could make an easy blockade for nations to veto another nation's effort to enter a war, even if morally justifiable. The problem with an internationally mandated “war-committee”, means that the fate of another nation's well-being could very well be in the hands of a nation with an ulterior motive. It could also fall into the grounds of new found illegal activity. Lets give a hypothetical situation, say nation 'X' wants to go to war with nation 'Y' in an act of self-defence, but it doesn't meet some of the requirements for “Just War theory” and is thus blocked by the war-committee. Then as a consequence, nation 'X' is invaded and annexed due to lack of defence. Nation 'X' could have made an effort to prepare for war, but at the cost of possibly being condemned and sanctioned by the war-committee. In an overall view, it's easy to see why the UN or other major international coalitions will not adopt a system based around Just War Theory.

    Read More

  • The Correct Decision of Dropping the Bombs on Hiroshima

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    McDonald. “Just War Theory.” Humanities. Boston University. College of General Studies, Boston. 24 February 2014. Lecture.

    Read More

  • Debunking Bin Laden's Just War Theory Claims

    1112 Words  | 3 Pages

    September 11th, 2001. An organization denoted as terrorists by the United States, Al-Qaeda, attacked the U.S on our own soil. In his “Letter to the American People”, the leader of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, takes a defensive stance regarding the attack, giving his justifications of why the attack on the U.S was warranted and acceptable in the terms of Just War Theory, citing examples of the Right to Self-Defense and reasons why he was justified in targeting American civilians. Just War Theory is comprised of ideas of values to determine when acts of aggression are morally justified or not, and it is primarily split into two categories, Jus Ad Bellum (Justice of War) and Jus In Bello (Justice in War) (Walzer 21). In this essay, I will be arguing against Bin Laden’s claims of the justification of Al-Qaeda’s attack, using the failure of Bin Laden’s attack to meet the requirements for a just war in terms of Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello.

    Read More

  • The Just War Theory

    1705 Words  | 4 Pages

    “Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” As depicted in the quote by Ernest Hemingway war is a difficult situation in which the traditional boundaries of moral ethics are tested. History is filled with unjust wars and for centuries war was not though in terms of morality. Saint Augustine, however, offered a theory detailing when war is morally permissible. The theory offers moral justifications for war as expressed in jus ad bellum (conditions for going to war) and in jus in bello (conditions within warfare).The theory places restrictions on the causes of war as well as the actions permitted throughout. Within early Christianity, the theory was used to validate crusades as morally permissible avoiding conflict with religious views. Based on the qualifications of the Just War Theory few wars have been deemed as morally acceptable, but none have notably met all the requirements. Throughout the paper I will apply Just War Theory in terms of World War II as well as other wars that depict the ideals presented by Saint Augustine.

    Read More

  • St. Augustine: The Theory Of Just War

    1344 Words  | 3 Pages

    Augustine illustrated on the prevailing Roman doctrine of justum bellum and the Old Testament stories of wars fought on Israel’s behalf, as demanded by God. Augustine aimed that fighting on behalf of the Roman Empire was a Christian obligation since the empire was Christian. Augustine maintained that this was fighting on behalf of God against God’s enemies, just as Israel defended itself against God’s enemies in Old Testament times. Augustine’s thinking has backed greatly to the discussion of what makes warfare justifiable right up until the modern day.

    Read More

  • Opposition to the Vietnam War

    2708 Words  | 6 Pages

    Many, including the Catholic Church, judge the justifications of a war based on several factors given in the “just war theory,” which is used to evaluate the war based on its causes and means. The first required factor is a just cause, meaning that a nation’s decision to begin a war must be due to “substantial aggression” brought about by the opposition which cannot be resolved through non-violent solutions without excessive cost whereas armed conflict is not hopeless or excessively costly (“Just War Theory”1). In most cases, wars are started for a reason; however, many of these reasons are for the benefit of the governments who start the wars. The just war theory is widely accepted as a way to determine the moral standing of the reasons. This part of the theory is to ensure that the objective of a war is a reasonable and moral one. It prevents the needless bloodshed and loss of human lives over petty disputes while still protecting the rights and lives of the innocent by acknowledging the necessity of war in dire situations.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations

    1192 Words  | 3 Pages

    justice of war and the justice in war in a great depth, and uses numerous historical

    Read More

  • Slobodan Milosevic and Genocide in the Former Yugoslavia

    2158 Words  | 5 Pages

    In the late 1980s through the 1990s, the republics of the former Yugoslavia experienced serious ethnic tensions, escalating into all-out war which resulted in some of the worst war crimes committed in Europe since World War II. In 1993, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was formed with the goal of punishing perpetrators who carried out acts of genocide and crimes against humanity in the wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina and to prevent any such atrocities from ever occurring again. One of the most significant and high-profile trials of this tribunal was that of Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of both Serbia and the former Yugoslavia, who was accused of committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, and abuses of power and corruption. Milosevic died in 2006, and his trial was never concluded. Whether or not he would have been convicted of these crimes is a subject of debate.

    Read More

  • The History Of Stalin's Great Purges

    790 Words  | 2 Pages

    One of the worst nations to suffer from Stalin’s great purges in the Soviet Union was not the Russians. Fascist sought to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity which individuals are bound together by ancestry, culture, and blood which are all super personal connections. However, even though Stalin did enforce Russia of the Soviet Union the main enemies of his were the political opponents and their followers. His most ferocious acts of terror “The Great Purges” took place between 1934 and 1939.

    Read More

  • Just War Theory Essay

    763 Words  | 2 Pages

    The just war theory can be broken down into three components: jus ad bellum, jus en bello, and jus post bellum. Translated from Latin, these mean “justice before war, justice in war, and justice after war.” In this way, the Catholic Church is able to reconcile Jesus’s lofty teachings about loving your neighbor and causing no harm with protecting the innocent (Massaro 104).

    Read More

  • Anti-War Pacifism

    1408 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...oal of such violence is to obtain a greater moral good. But antiwar pacifists maintain that the ends do not justify the means, if the means are murderous. It is a tragic mistake to believe that there are great moral goods that can only be claimed by war and the amount of moral good obtained by war is often greatly exaggerated and inequitable.

    Read More

  • An Analysis of Communism

    646 Words  | 2 Pages

    The leaders of communist nations have shown an insatiable desire for power. They take what the workers produce and give back only what is necessary (Orwell 10). Purges took place in communist governments under the leadership of dictators such as Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong. Under Stalin's rule "30,000 communists [were] killed in Paris" (Joseph Stalin). George Orwell narrowly escaped Stalin's purges in Spain where "many of [his] friends were shot, and others spent a long time in prison or simply disappeared" (Orwell 5). In this purge Stalin successfully executed Trotsky, who had been a key figure in establishing communism in the U.S.S.R (Joseph Stalin). Communist governments are unstable ...

    Read More

More about Just War Theory

Open Document