Rethinking the Just War

Abstract

The article offers a retrospective analysis of the genesis of the just war theory and analyzes the reasons behind controversies over the concept in modern ethical thinking. The author emphasizes that the development of the just war theory throughout its history since Augustine was generally governed by a uniform approach rooted in common ethical concepts through each succeeding era. From the nineteenth century to the end of the twentieth, the theory evolved in close coordination with international law; at the conceptual level the just war theory began to merge with the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions. Just war theory is now the starting point for both the professional military establishment and also for anyone judging the morality of a conflict. Nevertheless, the definitive status of this set of ethical views is increasingly coming into question. These doubts are to a great extent connected with transformations in the practice of war itself. The changing actors in armed conflicts constitute a challenge to the view that states rather than individual combatants are responsible for them. The true subject of just war theory is not law but morality, a fact often overlooked in the practical application of its ideas. Traditional just war theory has only limited application when the increasing inclusion of civilians in armed conflicts is taken into account. The theory papers over a number of contradictions rooted in the desire to create a set of codified rules for management of conflict while excluding the question of the justice of war itself. All these considerations lead ultimately to a revisionist theory of just war, which will be free from the shortcomings exposed by the author.