Purpose of the Research
The objective of this paper is to give a comprehensive synthesis on the analysis of War or Conflict, drawn from the perspective of the ‘Just War’ theory. This research also aims to specify the core values and points of a just war; it tackles further the theory’s bounds, especially the justification of the use of armed forces, the principles of a humane and reasonable warfare and the three categories directly central to the so-called just war.
This will also focus on the possible arguments that arise in this specific case, inquiries that most likely occur when stumbling upon this idea and the conclusions made by most people, both distinguished and lay – which has been or will be mentioned in some parts of the research and presentation.
With the findings of the research, this paper hopes to establish the relevance and possibility of a just war to obtain an established and lasting peace.
Research Methodology
With the influx of information on the Internet, this research aims maximize those information, but with caution of all sited data being facts. Through in-depth research, this paper will provide substantial and necessary information to fulfill the objectives stated in the purpose.
The presentation being its major source, will guide the flow of the exploratory study on war, justice, peace – its principles and theories – how each is essential to the other and what is of greater significance in the lives of people.
Research Findings
Sated below are the findings vital and fundamental to this topic, only essential are written, considering the wide variety of facts to tackle the following statements are the more important once that I have researched upon and have learned in the presentations.
Introduction
Starting with the question ‘why there is war and how it started’ will already be an overload; this being the case let us asks the question ‘is it appropriate’ instead. War has been in this earth longer than any living person has – and with it is also a very old belief: the Just war theory. This has been tracked as early as the 5thcentury; many names have been associated to it too, including Saints Augustine and Aquinas, Hugo Grotius, James T. Johnson and many more.(The Ethics of War and Peace, p. 2, 2012)
The history of this Theory began through the works of some important philosophers as mentioned earlier. Augustine (354-430) for one provided the bedrock for Just War Theory back then on the times of Western literature. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) on the other hand categorized Augustine's thoughts, which brought about the known categories we have today. He divided it to distinct criteria that remain as our basis till this day. (Dorbolo, 2001)
“The constantnecessity a civil society has today is to provide sound justification for going to war, and this is one of the many important influences Philosophy impacted on civilization.” (Dorbolo, 2001)Together with time this “Just War Theory” has evolved but the definition and rationale of it hasn’t, the just war theory is a doctrine or a tradition, a basis of military ethics that has been rooted in theology, ethics and policy or laws.
The idea of this is ensuringthat any war should be morally justifiable – this is done through a set of criteria, criteria to be considered for warfare to be just.
What possible criteria could justify murder, death and chaos brought by war you could ask, but throughout the discovery of the three criteria we can agree to at least say that the weight may or may not justify each life taken by war.At first there were on two criteria: ‘the justification to go to war’ (jus ad bellum) and‘right conduct in war’ (jus in bello).
The first concerns the ethics or the morality of deciding to go to war and the second tackles the rightful conduct when within a war.But due to heavy demands that spurred in time, a third was called – the third category of just war theory isjuspost bellum– it is about dealing with the morals of all the post-war resolution and renovation.
Jus Ad Bellum
The jus ad bellum is the very important decision making part, it is also called the justification for going to war. The weighing of the correct call stands in this criteria and it has six diverse conditions.
Upon the acceptance that a war is needed, it must be considered a person with high authority must make that the cause is just – this. The people who will be going to the war must also be driven by the right intentions and most importantly this war must be the last resort. The goal should focus on the peace it aims to obtain and this war must be balanced.
“The total evil of a just war cannot outweigh the good achieved by the war” (The Ethics of War and Peace, p. 2, 2012). Each of the indicatedneed to be independently fulfilled before making a decision to go to a war and before referring to it as a just war (Just War Theory, n.d.)
Jus In Bello
The moment war begins; there is no turning back only minimizing the deaths and acquiring the peace or the objectives. Jus in bello, helps this by directing how combatants are to decide act or react to various situations in the field. (McGeddon, 2015) This criterion says that all agents of war will be held responsible for their own actions, which is connected to their actions in terms of morality in general.
The rules of just conduct within war fall under the two broad principles of discrimination and proportionality. (Moseley)In engaging in a war it is undue and unjust to attack haphazardly since there are surely non-combatants or innocents in the perimeter or field, “the lack of identification does not give a government the right to kill indiscriminately” (Just and Unjust Wars, 1977).
The considerations in this criterion are Distinction, where only the enemy must be the targets, Proportionality where the extent and violence of warfare must be minimized together with the destruction and casualties and Military Necessity which seeks to minimize overall suffering.
Jus post bellum
In the latter part or end of war we are looking at three possibilities: either defeated, victory, or a draw has been decided and both sides have agreed upon a ceasefire.
When this comes ‘jus post bellum’ or ending a war comes in, it is mainly concerned in the justice after a war. Some cases there can be peace treaties, trials for the war criminals, renovation and reconstruction or war amendments.
This category is guided by these principles: Just cause for termination, where a war is only ended if there is a rationalproof of the rights that were violated together with the willingness to negotiate and put terms of surrender, the second is Right intention, an objective intention must be seen, revenge and sorts like it are not acceptable, a Public declaration and authority where a only a legitimate authority files the terms of peace, and last are Discriminationand Proportionality.
Conclusion
The understanding and fulfillment of these criteria will always be an ongoing debate among philosophers, politicians, and military planners, till today even if it hasn’t been settled the theory has played enormous role in the field of war but simultaneous with it is the argument between opposing sides. “In order for a civil society to uphold itself with the commission of unjust wars preventable as an objective, there should be a precarious dialog among the citizens.” (Dorbolo, 2001)
In some cases a summary of this theory presents principles, which trace back to centuries ago, started by the philosophers. Just war theory can be abridged as Principles of Just-War Theory, Last Resort, where a just war can only be conducted after all peaceful options are considered. With a Legitimate Authority waging it, not just individuals or groups but an authentic head. Driven by a Just Cause, because just wars are required to be a retort to something wrings wrong. Also considered is the Probability of Success with the Right Intention. (Mtholyoke, n.d)
The mainpurpose of a just war is to re-establish peace. In a more particular term, the peace that is the result after the war should most definitely exceed the harmony that was possible if they have succeeded doing it without the use of force. ‘The aim of the use of force must be justice.’ With this there should be Proportionality and Civilian Casualties are highly considered.(Mtholyoke, n.d)
But in a more precise discussion, here is a paragraphed synthesis to the criteria: Jus in Bellum covers the ‘before’ part of a war, thinking thoroughly and planning, this is where all the consideration comes and where the decision if war is necessary for peace determined. It is when war weighs greater because it is the only way to obtain peace.
Jus in Bello is the ‘during part’, once war is inevitable, there are certain conduct a person within the war field must possess, a way to minimize the collateral damage and the destruction as a whole. It also guides the soldiers and everyone affected by the war on how they could manage and weigh their decision once put in a tricky situation.
The last part, the ‘after’ effect of the war is undertaken in Just post bellum, it provides the much needed management on how to proceed after a war. This targets the application of just decisions for both sides of the war.
In war,people say nobody wins, it is true because both sides have too much casualties and too much loss even before the war ends. But the fact is, there are times that war is needed to obtain the bigger objective, and in those times, the Just War theory is the biggest help of all.
It suggests that war althoughhorrible, is not always the most horriblechoice. There are duties of utmost importance, violence that can’t be prevented and outcomes so unfortunatethat these occurrences actually justify a war.
We may have different stands on this topic but the undeniable fact is that this theory or tactic is something we cannot live without, it has been present even before all living person today was born – so the best thing to do now would be to settle it and improve it further for the sake of civilization.
References
Americancatholic.org. (2016).Terrorism and War: A Catholic Response. [online] Available at: http://www.americancatholic.org/News/JustWar/justwar.asp [Accessed 19 Mar. 2016].
Bbc.co.uk. (2016). BBC - Ethics - War: Just War - introduction. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/introduction.shtml [Accessed 19 Mar. 2016].
Dorbolo, J. (2001). Oregonstate.edu. (2016).Just War Theory. [online] Available at: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/just_war_theory/criteria_intro.html [Accessed 19 Mar. 2016].
Just War Theory. (2016). 1st ed. [ebook] University of Hawaii, pp.1-10. Available at: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil320/23.%20Just%20War%20Theory.pdf [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
Just War Theory. (n.d.). [online] Available at: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/just_war_theory/criteria_intro.html [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
Moseley, A. (n.d.). Just War Theory | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [online] Iep.utm.edu. Available at: http://www.iep.utm.edu/justwar/#H4 [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
Mtholyoke.edu. (2002).Just War Principles. [online] Available at: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/justwar.htm [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
Orend, B. (2000). War. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/ [Accessed 19 Mar. 2016].
Ritchie, D. (1901). War and Peace.ETHICS, 11(2), Available at https://www.coursehero.com/file/6406373/The-Ethics-of-War-and-Peace/ p.137.
Rigstad,, M. (n.d.). JustWarTheory.com. [online] Justwartheory.com. Available at: http://www.justwartheory.com/ [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
Walzer, M. (1977). Just and unjust wars. New York: Basic Books. [Accessed 17 Mar. 2016].
