1 / 20

Justice in Action: Just War Theory

Justice in Action: Just War Theory. Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy Co-Director, Center for Ethics in Science & Technology University of San Diego hinman@sandiego.edu November 16, 2014. Overview. Three principal areas: The just conditions for entering into a war.

jonah-vega
Télécharger la présentation

Justice in Action: Just War Theory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Justice in Action:Just War Theory Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D.Professor of PhilosophyCo-Director, Center for Ethics in Science & Technology University of San Diegohinman@sandiego.edu November 16, 2014

  2. Overview Three principal areas: • The just conditions for entering into a war. • When is it just to go to war? • The just conditions for conducting a war. • What are we permitted to do in carrying out a war and what is forbidden as unjust? • The just conditions of peace. • What are the conditions of peace that insure the just conclusion of a war? (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  3. Acknowledgement • This presentation is based on the excellent article by Brian D. Orend, "War ,“ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  4. Jus ad bellum:The Just Conditions for Going to War • Just cause • Right intention • Proper authority and public declaration • Last resort • Probability of success • Proportionality (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  5. Just cause • Protection from external attack is the first and foremost—and in the eyes of some, the only--just cause of war; based on the right of self-defense. • Some have maintained the humanitarian intervention is also justified, where we go to war to save the lives of innocent people who are being attacked by an aggressor. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  6. Right intention • The war must be pursued for a just cause. • Unacceptable intentions: • Revenge • Political expansion • Land acquisition (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  7. Proper authority and public declaration • Traditionally, only nations have the authority to declare war. • Wars must be publicly declared, not pursued in secret. • Question: Can terrorist groups be said to declare war? If not, is the response to terrorism really war? (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  8. Last resort • If there are other means of achieving the same objectives, such as negotiations or economic blockades, they should be pursued exhaustively first. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  9. Probability of success • The rationale here is clear and simple: war is a great evil, and it is wrong to cause such killing, suffering, and destruction in a futile effort. • Question: what about countries that feel they are resisting evil even when there is little or no chance of success? For example, small European countries being invaded by the Nazis. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  10. Proportionality • Are the possible benefits (especially in terms of a just peace) proportional to the death, suffering, and destruction that the pursuit of the war will bring about? (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  11. Jus in bello:The Just Conditions for Conducting a War Three principal conditions: • Discrimination • Proportionality • No means that are evil in themselves. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  12. Discrimination • The key requirement here is to discriminate between those who are engaged in harm (soldiers) and those who are not (civilians). • This has increasingly become an issue as countries such as the United States have turned to high altitude bombing campaigns that are more likely to put civilians at risk. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  13. Proportionality • Onoe should only use the amount of force that is proportional to the (just) ends being sought. • This raises interesting issues in the use of massive air strikes against bin Laden by the United States. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  14. No Means Evil in Themselves • Orend lists a number of means that count as evil in themselves. • “mass rape campaigns; • “genocide or ethnic cleansing; • “torturing captured enemy soldiers; and • “using weapons whose effects cannot be controlled, like chemical or biological agents.” (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  15. Jus post bellum:Creating a Just Peace Brian Orend gives 5 conditions for a just peace: • Just cause for termination. • Right intention. • Public declaration and legitimate authority. • Discrimination. • Proportionality. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  16. Just cause for termination • Orend: “a reasonable vindication of those rights whose violation grounded the resort to war in the first place.” • Unjust gains from aggression have been eliminated • Victims’ rights reinstated • Formal apology • Acceptance of reasonable punishment (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  17. Right intention • Excludes motives such as revenge • Prosecution of war crimes needs to be applied to all, not just the vanquished. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  18. Public declaration and legitimate authority • This requirement is fairly straightforward and uncontroversial. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  19. Discrimination • Differentiate between • Political and military leaders • Military and civilian populations • Punish the elite responsible for prosecuting the war, not the uninvolved civilians. (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

  20. Proportionality • The vanquished do not lose their rights • No ‘witch hunts’ • Proportional to reasonable rights vindication (c) Lawrence M. Hinman

More Related