Just War Research Articles

Burdens of History, Ethics of Engagement: German Film and the Afghan War

Based on the analysis of two contemporary German films on the war in Afghanistan – Auslandseinsatz (Till Endemann, 2012) and Zwischen Welten (Feo Aladag, 2014) – through the philosophical lens of the ‘just war theory’, this article discusses how the classic genre of the ‘boots on the ground’ war film is used to reflect on the ethical justifiability of military force in the context of Germany’s strategic culture at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The article argues that these two films are paradigmatic examples of a new and specifically German subgenre of the war film I suggest calling the ‘humanitarian military film’ that has its roots in the particular historical constellation that led to the development of the country’s current military culture.

African Ethics, Personhood, and War

In this article, I look at the African theory that the formation of personhood is relevant to the morality of war. I start by justifying the project of decolonizing the ethics of war. Then I proceed to clarify that some of the African theories that relate to personhood and war should not be taken at face value, but that the concept of personhood does play a role in the morality of war. I then provide examples of how this concept is relevant for jus ad bellum, jus in bello and jus post bellum. Keywords: African Ethics; Personhood; Just War Theory; Jus ad Bellum; Jus in Bello; Jus Post Bellum

Proportionality, Defensive Alliance Formation, and Mearsheimer on Ukraine

In this article, I consider the permissibility of forming defensive alliances, which is a neglected topic in the contemporary literature on the ethics of war and peace. Drawing on the jus ad bellum criterion of proportionality in just war theory, I argue that if permissible defensive force requires that its expected harms must be counterbalanced by its expected goods, then, permissible defensive alliance formation seems to also require that its expected harms must be counterbalanced by its expected goods, as the latter can result in much the same consequences as the former. Moreover, due to the incommensurability of values in play when making proportionality judgments, I argue for a value pluralist understanding of the criterion. On this view, defensive alliance formation is proportionate if the expected gains in certain values (goods) intuitively justify the expected losses in others (harms) when compared to the alternative expected value trade-offs of not allying. To explore the implications of my theoretical claims I consider them in relation to John Mearsheimer’s influential account of the causes of the Russo-Ukrainian War. On this account, the West’s strategy to assimilate Ukraine and Ukraine’s pursuit of NATO membership post-annexation of Crimea were disproportionate because the expected harms were unjustified when compared to the alternative expected goods and harms of forgoing Ukrainian membership of NATO. This does not imply that Russia’s aggression is just, but it does imply that the West and Ukraine are partially responsible for the war and that they acted impermissibly in attempting to expand/join NATO. Keywords: Proportionality, alliances, just war theory, Ukraine, Mearsheimer

Ethics of War And Peace: An Approach in the Matter of Religious Texts, International Law and No-Governmental Organizations

Savaş ve barış olgusu, başlangıçtan günümüze insanlık tarihini şekillendiren önemli bir konudur. Dolayısıyla bu çalışma insanların, ulusların, niçin savaştıkları, mensuplarının çokluğu nedeniyle büyük dinlerin ve günümüz evrensel yaklaşımlarının savaşı önleme ve barışı sağlama hususundaki hukukî ve ahlâkî sınırlarının neler olduğu ve bu soru(n)lara barış eğitiminin çözüm sunabilme imkânlarını problem edinmiştir. Bu bağlamda teorik olarak savaşın meşruluğu, ahlâkî ölçüsü, barış yoluyla çözümü, çatışmalarda sivillerin hakkı, hukuku, kayıplarının engellenebilirliği; dinlerin özellikle İslâm’ın savaş, barış yaklaşımları, hukukî, ahlâkî, toplumsal sınırları; uyulacak kurallar açısından evrensel yaklaşımlar, çözüm arayışlarından barış hareketleri, barış eğitimi konuları sosyolojik bakış açısından literatür taraması yöntemiyle tartışılmıştır. Bu çalışmayla savaşın önlenmesi ve barışın sağlanması hususlarında çözüm önerilerinin sunulması amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırma sonuçlarında; dinlerin zorunlu durumlarda savaşa izin vermekle birlikte teşvikte bulunmadığı, teşvik, çağrı söylemlerinin dinlerin ilahi kaynağı yerine din temsilcilerinin dini anlama, algılama, yaşantı biçimlerini yansıttığı; arka planında farklı ekonomik, politik, sosyolojik saikleri meşrulaştırmak için dini araç olarak kullandıkları gibi bulgulara ulaşılmıştır. İslâm’ın tutumu; savaşı önleme ve savaş halinde hukukî, insanî değerleri öncelemedir. Uluslararası hukuk güçlü devletlerce şekillendirilmekte ve onların lehine işlemekte, şeklî bağlılık göstermekten öteye geçememektedir. Uluslararası sözleşmelerde/beyannamelerde, barış eylemlerinde kamuoyunun dikkati çekilse de emperyalist güçleri, silah üreticilerini engellemekte cılız kalmaktadır. Barışı sağlamaya yönelik ülkelerde akademik, içerikli ve sistemli barış eğitiminin örgün, yaygın eğitim kurumlarında verilmesinin ve yaygınlaştırılmasının dinlerin, özellikle İslâm’ın barış mesajlarının metotlu işlenmesinin önemli yöntem/imkân olabileceği anlaşılmaktadır.

МОИСТСКОЕ ОТНОШЕНИЕ К ВОЙНЕ: ПРЕДИСЛОВИЕ К ПЕРЕВОДУ

Chapters 17–19 of the Mozi are among the earliest philosophical texts – not only in the Chinese tradition, but in world philosophy as well – concerning the ethics of war and the theory of just war. Their text is of paramount importance for the study of ancient Chinese ethical and political thought. The article serves as a foreword to the publication of their first complete and commented translation from the ancient Chinese into Russian. For the first time in Russian sinology, the author presents a critical edition of their original text. The article, which precedes the translation, analyzes the dating, purposes of writing, textual characteristics, composition and content of these chapters.

Combatants, Masculinity, and Just War Theory

Over that last several decades the ethics of war has grown into a major subfield in philosophy at the same time as large literatures have developed on the relation between gender and war as well as feminist approaches to the ethics of war. This article aims to contribute to these literatures and to bring them into closer contact. It argues that canonical just war theorists such as Grotius, Pufendorf, Vattel, and Walzer rely on appeals to masculinity to help ground the obligations of soldiers to participate in war upon command. This appeal helps them overcome their otherwise weak arguments for the political subordination of soldiers, or what I call the Internal Problem of the soldier. It also helps explain a problem that has vexed contemporary ethics of war scholars, namely, the supposed equal right to kill combatants in war, or what I call the External Problem of the soldier. If this is true, then just war theorists should be much more concerned with the gender and war literature and find common ground with feminists who have treated the problem of the political standing of soldiers as a philosophical priority.

Discourses on War and Peace in a Professional Ethics Classroom

Empty seats, uninterested faces and distracted student behaviour are general characteristics of the classroom where humanities subjects are taught to students of science and technology. In this article, I discuss my experience of teaching a course, Professional Ethics, that is generally discarded by the students as ‘an additional burden’ made mandatory by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for securing a bachelor of technology degree from Indian institutes of higher education. The teaching note documents the initial attitude of students towards the course content, the process of their transformation into imbibing the essence of the course, and finally the outcomes of the adapted teaching method. Socratic questioning on memes and news reports was used to sensitise the students towards the ethics of war and weapon development. In other words, the teaching process was a discourse of peace building by engaging students in sustainability dialogues.

“Only a God Can Save Us Now”: Why a Religious Morality Is Best Suited to Overcome Religiously Inspired Violence and Spare Innocents from Harm

It is common to hear the refrain that religion is a major cause of violence today. And this claim is not without merit. Religious differences can fuel animosity and lead to societal conflict. On the other hand, scholars have increasingly recognized the role of religion in overcoming societal divides and helping people to heal and forgive. This paper will examine the latter capacity of religion to minimize the harms that occur during violent conflicts. It will be argued that secular ethical theories often fail to provide any principles or foundations that can help moderate passions, alleviate tensions, or provide frameworks for what is licit in war. In fact, the world views of terrorists and secular ethicists of war are often strikingly similar. Religious ethicists, on the contrary, have often encouraged practices (prayer for one’s enemies, forgiveness) and provided principles (dignity of every human, non-combatant immunity, just war theory) that can help moderate the violent tendencies of war and bring about a more peaceful and equitable resolution. While religion is not entirely off the hook for promoting violent conflict, religion can provide ethical frameworks and principles that help minimize the harms of conflicts and promote world peace.

Just War Theory and Literary Studies: An Invitation to Dialogue by Ty Hawkins and Andrew Kim (review)

Just War Theory and Literary Studies: An Invitation to Dialogue by Ty Hawkins and Andrew Kim (review)

존 롤즈(J. Rawls)의 전쟁과 핵무기에 대한 이론

This article tries to examine John Rawls’ theories of war and nuclear weapons especially from the perspective of international law. Rawls's theory of war is based on the just war theory of Western tradition. It rejects realism and does not adopt pacifism. Rawls's theory of jus ad bellum is similar to the position of current international law in that it recognizes a war of self-defense and exceptionally a war of humanitarian intervention. HIs theory of jus in bello largely reflects the principles of existing International Humanitarian Law(IHL), such as the distinction between combatants and civilians, protection of human rights, and restrictions on military necessity. However, Rawls deviates from international humanitarian law in that it permits military action against civilians in the case of the so-called supreme emergency. Regarding nuclear weapons, it differs from the existing International Court of Justice (ICJ) theory of nuclear permitting by permitting nuclear weapons only to well-ordered peoples and presenting human rights standards for nuclear use. In addition, by evaluating the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombings as great wrongs, it presents a precedent in international humanitarian law for the use of nuclear weapons. The official position of the United States regarding the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombings was that it was a justifiable measure to end the war early. However, Rawls rejects the U.S. government's arguments and says that the atomic bombing was a representative case of the failure of so-called 'statesmanship'. This article attempted to support Rawls's perspective from the perspective of international humanitarian law. The claim that the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombings were intended to reduce the casualties of U.S. soldiers does not comply with the principle of military necessity under international humanitarian law. Additionally, the claim that it was an inevitable choice to reduce the damage to Japanese civilians that would result from a prolonged war is not valid in that there was room for a third option to end the war. The dropping of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic bombs reflected America's political interest for the victory of unconditional surrender and ending the war before Russia (the former Soviet Union) entered the war. This did not comply with the principles of military necessity or humanitarian necessity of international humanitarian law.

Some Legal Aspects of Western Military Aid to Ukraine

The article deals with the some legal aspects of Western military aid to Ukraine. The first part briefly analyzes the Russian Federation's attack on Ukraine from a "just war" perspective. The following part is devoted to individual perspectives of different branches of international law on military aid to Ukraine - the law of neutrality, ius ad bellum, ius in bello, issues of co-belligerency and state responsibility for complicity in internationally illegal actions. The conclusion summarizes the findings and gives an answer to the question why Western aid to Ukraine mostly does not violate the norms of international law.

Dedoxifying Syrian War Rhetoric through the Lens of Just War Theory in A Land of Permanent Goodbyes

Dedoxifying Syrian War Rhetoric through the Lens of Just War Theory in A Land of Permanent Goodbyes

War and Peace Journalism in Mass Shootings Coverage - Case Study of a School Shooting in the U.S. Uvalde

Research objective: Analysis of the problem of using the theory of war and peace journalism in reporting mass shootings in the American media on the example of a school shooting in Uvalde. 
 Problem and methods: The article answers the question whether theories about war and peace journalism can be helpful in the analysis of media coverage of mass shootings. The text analyzes how the leading media broadcasters in the U.S. (CNN and Fox News) use war- and peace-oriented mechanisms. The article uses research methods standard for social sciences and humanities, including content analysis with elements of framing analysis, comparative analysis and the case study. 
 Process of argumentation: The starting point for the research was the theories on war and peace journalism by Johan Galtung. The reason for undertaking the research was also the record number of mass shootings in the U.S. in 2021 and the significant importance of the Uvalde shooting in the American public debate on gun control in 2022. The article focuses on the first week of coverage of the shooting. 
 Results: American media use war journalism more often. Coverage is influenced by ideological profile and political affiliation. Political issues and the reconstruction of events come to the fore. Contexts such as victims, solutions, roots of the problem or fate of the perpetrator are discussed less frequently. The shooting in Uvalde became an instrument in the political conflict in which the media took part. 
 Conclusions, innovations, and recommendations: War journalism mechanisms favor media polarization in bipartisan conflict conditions and help show sensational events in a 24-hour cycle. In turn, the mechanisms of peace journalism support reporting on the perpetrator, victims and potential solutions. The article intends to increase awareness of various ways of publicizing extraordinary events and political conflicts and serve for more profound research in the future.

Mapping the factors behind ongoing war stress in Ukraine-based young civilian adults.

While the literature on well-being and stress following natural disasters is well-developed, it is less so when it comes to ongoing war experiences. Between September and October of 2022, 223 Ukraine-based civilian adults (156 women and 67 men) completed a survey measuring symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), peritraumatic experiences, paranoia, quality of life, death anxiety, anxiety about weapons of mass destruction and depression (i.e. assumed 'war consequence' factors), as well as perceived social support, resilience, loneliness and expected military support from the West (i.e. assumed 'buffer' factors). Our exploratory structural equation model (SEM) suggests that Perceived Social Support predicted fewer PTSD Symptoms and more Peritraumatic Experiences. The regression modelling, however, shows that Perceived Social Support was also positively correlated with Peritraumatic Experiences. Highlighting the need for a civilian war stress buffer disruption theory, we argue that when composed of one's circle of family and friends, social support could likely mean greater exposure to war stressors through the mutual sharing of ongoing war experiences with no end in sight. Such a possible war stress sharing deterioration effect would imply that Perceived Social Support may compound peritraumatic distress if the support in question is offered by those facing the same grim reality.

“In Defence of Jus Ad Bellum Criteria”

AbstractIn this contribution, I defend the standard list of jus ad bellum principles. In The Ethics of War and the Force of Law: A Modern Just War Theory, Uwe Steinhoff endorses only three principles of jus ad bellum (right intention, just cause, and proportionality) and claims that the others are redundant. I argue that, although fundamentally all jus ad bellum principles can be reduced to proportionality, in practice it is vital to retain the main jus ad bellum criteria as separate principles.

Hezbollah’s Diversionary War in Lebanon: Continuity and Change in the Threat Perception

Hezbollah intervened in the civil war in Syria when the Assad regime was under threat of overthrow. Its intervention caused criticism from Lebanese actors and therefore required the organization to find legitimate foundations upon which to base its involvement. Discourse and rhetoric were the first elements that changed following the organization’s decision to intervene. Hezbollah revised its traditional discourse of security, which refers to Israel as the main threat, in 2013 and added an external enemy, the takfiris, which referred to fundamentalist groups in the civil war, as a new threat. However, it returned to its traditional discourse due to the domestic criticisms that followed. This study aims to explain the changing rhetoric of Hezbollah during the civil war in Syria through the frame of the diversionary theory of war. This theory claims that Hezbollah used a diversionary tactic to justify its intervention in the civil war and invented an external enemy as a threat to Lebanese security and territorial integrity.

Getting on to the Same Page: War, Moral Fundamentalism, and Convention

Uwe Steinhoff’s The Ethics of War and the Force of Law contains an extended critique of ‘moral fundamentalism’, or the project of uncovering an individualist ‘deep morality’ of war governed by the same moral principles and rules that govern ordinary moral life, as well as a more positive account of war that depicts it as a social practice. Much of Steinhoff’s account is indebted to a series of claims involving the standing to blame, reciprocity, and the necessity and proportionality conditions on self-defence. On all these claims, Steinhoff is open to challenge. First, he is arguably over-dependent on ‘standing to blame’ considerations. Second, his commitment to reciprocity is under-explained. Third, the necessity condition does not clearly explain how conventional elements explain the formation of defensive standards. Fourth, there are problems in explaining how the distinct defensive conventions adopted by distinct communities can actually be made to get on to the same page when these communities go to war with each other.

Animals and the ethics of war: a call for an inclusive just-war theory

Animals have been almost entirely absent from scholarly appraisals of the ethics of war. Just-war theory concerns when communities may permissibly resort to war; who may wage war; who they may harm in war; and what kinds of harm they may cause. Each question can be complicated by animals’ inclusion. After introducing just-war theory and the argument for an animal-inclusive just-war theory, this paper reviews ethical appraisals of war on animals’ behalf and wars against animals. It then turns to consider harm to and use of animals in war. It concludes by considering questions in the ethics of war beyond just-war theory as traditionally construed.

PERANG AFGANISTAN ANTARA AMERIKA SERIKAT DAN TALIBAN TAHUN 2021: ANALISIS TRINITAS PERANG CLAUSEWITZ

This article analyzes the Afghanistan war between the United States and the Taliban in 2021 through the Clausewitz war trinity in terms of the success or failure of the war. Analysis used a qualitative-explanative approach and literature study methods in collecting data, and using the Trinity of War theory as an analytical tool. The results of the study show that the trinity of war aspect, which consists of the people, the military and the government, has a major influence on the outcome of the US war in Afghanistan. The US decision to withdraw all its troops and allies in the Afghanistan war is considered a form of failure in this war. Nevertheless, this article does not deny that these conditions do not describe the failure to achieve the US political goals themselves, namely the assassination of the leader of the international terrorist organization (al-Qaida) Osama bin Laden as the main objective of the war

Précis of the Ethics of War and the Force of Law: A Modern Just War Theory

Précis of the Ethics of War and the Force of Law: A Modern Just War Theory