New Directions In Just War Theory Book in PDF, ePub and Kindle version is available to download in english. Read online anytime anywhere directly from your device. Click on the download button below to get a free pdf file of New Directions In Just War Theory book. This book definitely worth reading, it is an incredibly well-written.
New Directions in Just-war Theory by J. Toby Reiner Pdf
"One of the major developments in international law since World War II is the growth of human rights law dedicated to ensuring the protection of individuals from violence wherever they are, including from their own state. Tracking such changes, in recent decades, just-war theory has evolved from its traditional focus on state sovereignty in the direction of a rights-based approach that treats just wars as a form of global law enforcement. This monograph provides a survey of these developments, focusing on the increased scope for humanitarian intervention, principles of justice after war, and on the question of the responsibility of combatants for assessing the justice of their military's cause. It concludes by considering the call for strengthening international institutions and training programs in military ethics"--Publisher's web site
New Directions in Just-War Theory by Toby Reiner,Strategic Studies Institute Pdf
Just-war theory has a long and distinguished history that stretches back to the Christian theologians of medieval Europe. Yet principles of just war must develop alongside social norms, standards of military practice and technology, and civilian-military relationships. Since World War II, and especially since American involvement in Vietnam, military ethics has developed into an academic cottage industry. As commonly taught to undergraduates and military practitioners, contemporary just-war theory seeks to ensure the political sovereignty and territorial integrity of nation-states. The theory insists that the only just wars are defensive ones and forbids wars of national aggrandizement. On this view, because of the right to collective self-determination, wars must not seek to remake the world order, as that would undermine state sovereignty.In recent decades, however, cosmopolitan philosophers have challenged various aspects of the traditional edifice in an attempt to use just-war theory to enhance the protection of human rights around the world. Scholars have argued for greater scope for humanitarian intervention to protect individuals against their own government, for principles of justice after war to ensure that all states are legitimate, and most radically, for the responsibility of ordinary combatants to assess for themselves the justice of their military's cause. On this last argument, because combatants whose cause is just have done nothing to lose their immunity from harm, attacking them is unjust, and combatants whose cause is unjust cannot fight with discrimination.This publication surveys these recent developments, and it finds that they provide a radical challenge to both the theory and the practice of contemporary warfare. Of particular importance is its insistence on the need to strengthen international institutions, so as to provide combatants with an impartial perspective on their side's cause, and to strengthen military ethics education; and its suggestion that policies on dishonorable discharge be rethought. However, this monograph also challenges certain aspects of the new approach, suggesting important connections between military ethics and democratic theory and practice.
New Directions in Just War Theory by J. Toby Reiner Pdf
This monograph provides an overview and analysis of recent developments in military ethics that conceptualize just wars as a form of global law enforcement in defense of socially basic human rights and, in different ways, deny the sovereignty of independent states. Having first considered the arguments in favor of humanitarian intervention and for principles of jus post bellum (justice after war) that insist upon the rehabilitation of aggressive regimes, the analysis then focuses on a new revisionist approach to just-war theory, which it shows to be an extension of the other arguments. According to this approach, the traditional bipartite structure of just-war theory, which divides questions of military ethics into the justice of resort to war (jus ad bellum) and justified combat during war (jus in bello), must be abandoned. On this argument, the division wrongly absolves ordinary combatants of responsibility for judging the justice of their side's cause, as jus ad bellum is normally thought of as the responsibility only of civilian leaders.This increases the ease with which states may fight unjust wars and allows warriors prosecuting unjust wars to get away with murder. In the new view, soldiers become liable to attack in war only if they do something to forfeit their moral immunity to harm. This makes warriors prosecuting a just cause illegitimate military targets and emphasizes the gravity of taking a human life, no matter what the circumstances. As the discussion shows, this is an important challenge to both the theory and practice of contemporary warfare. It suggests the need both to strengthen international institutions, so as to provide for neutral judgments of the justice of resort to war, and to ensure that Armed Forces increase their focus upon jus ad bellum and the justice of particular causes within military ethics education. However, this monograph also queries the moral foundations of the new revisionism, and holds that we should reconceive just-war theory as a collective enterprise that is continuous with democratic theory, which suggests that expecting each combatant to make an individual decision about a war's justice may be in tension with civilian control over the Armed Forces.
The Moral Status of Combatants by Michael Skerker Pdf
This book develops a new contractualist foundation for just war theory, which defends the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants and associated egalitarian moral norms. Traditionally it has been viewed that combatants on both sides of a war have the same right to fight, irrespective of the justice of their cause, and both sides must observe the same restrictions on the use of force, especially prohibitions on targeting noncombatants. Revisionist philosophers have argued that combatants on the unjust side of a war have no right to fight, that pro-war civilians on the unjust side might be targetable, and that lawful combatants on the unjust side might in principle be liable to prosecution for their participation on the unjust side. This book seeks to undercut the revisionist project and defend the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants. It does so by showing how revisionist philosophers fail to build a strong foundation for their arguments and misunderstand that there is a moral difference between collective military violence and a collection of individually unjustified violent actions. Finally, the book develops a theory defending the traditional view of military ethics based on a universal duty of all people to support just institutions. This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics philosophy, and war studies.
Michael W. Brough,John W. Lango,Harry van der Linden
Author : Michael W. Brough,John W. Lango,Harry van der Linden Publisher : State University of New York Press Page : 280 pages File Size : 42,7 Mb Release : 2012-02-01 Category : Political Science ISBN : 9780791479698
This book offers a renewed defense of traditional just war theory and considers its application to certain contemporary cases, particularly in the Middle East. The first part of the book addresses and responds to the central theoretical criticisms levelled at traditional just war theory. It offers a detailed defense of civilian immunity, the moral equality of soldiers and the related dichotomy between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, and argues that these principles taken together amount to a morally coherent ethics of war. In this sense this project is traditional (or "orthodox"). In another sense, however, it is highly relevant to the modern world. While the first part of the book defends the just war tradition against its revisionist critics, the second part applies it to an array of timely issues: civil war, economic warfare, excessive harm to civilians, pre-emptive military strikes, and state-sponsored assassination, which require applying just war theory in practice. This book sets out to reaffirm the basic tenets of the traditional ethics of war and to lend them further moral support, subsequently applying them to a variety of practical issues. This book will be of great interest to students of just war theory, ethics, security studies, war and conflict studies, and IR in general.
Most individuals realize that we have a moral obligation to avoid the evils of war. But this realization raises a host of difficult questions when we witness harrowing injustices such as ""ethnic cleansing"" in Bosnia or starvation in Somalia. With millions of lives at stake, is war ever justified? And, if so, for what purposes? In this book, Richard J. Regan confronts these controversial questions by first considering the basic principles of just- war theory and then applying those principles to historical and ongoing conflicts. Part One presents two opposing viewpoints: first, that war is not subject to moral norms and, second, that war is never morally permissible. The author rejects both perspectives, and moves to define the principles of just-war theory. He evaluates the roles of the president, Congress, and, most importantly, the U.N. Security Council in determining when long-term U.S. military involvement is justified. The moral limits of war conduct and the moral problem of using, or threatening to use, nuclear weapons are also discussed. On the just cause to wage war, Regan argues that defense of nations and nationals--whether in self-defense or in defense of others--remains the only classical cause that in the modern world would justify resorting to war. With respect to military intervention in secessionist and revolutionary wars, he contends that such intervention might be justified, but that prudence dictates extreme caution. In considering acceptable war conduct, Regan elaborates the specific principles of discrimination and proportionality; he maintains that civilians uninvolved in the enemy's war should not be directly targeted and that the costs of military action must be proportionate to the anticipated benefits of destroying military targets. The second part of the book presents case studies of eight historical wars--World War I, the Vietnam War, the Falklands War, the revolution and civil war in Nicaragua, the civil war in El Salvador, the Gulf War, the intervention in Somalia, and the Bosnian War--and poses several provocative questions about each. It invites readers and students to apply just-war principles to complex war-related situations and to understand the factual contingencies involved in moral judgments about war decisions. The book will be of particular interest to students of international relations and to readers interested more generally in philosophy, theology, and political science. Richard J. Regan, a Jesuit priest, attended Harvard Law School and received a doctorate in political science from the University of Chicago. He is professor of political science at Fordham University and is the author of several books, including God and Creation, The Moral Dimensions of Politics, and Conflict and Consensus.
Routledge Handbook of Ethics and War by Fritz Allhoff,Nicholas G. Evans,Adam Henschke Pdf
This new Handbook offers a comprehensive overview of contemporary extensions and alternatives to the just war tradition in the field of the ethics of war. The modern history of just war has typically assumed the primacy of four particular elements: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, the state actor, and the solider. This book will put these four elements under close scrutiny, and will explore how they fare given the following challenges: • What role do the traditional elements of jus ad bellum and jus in bello—and the constituent principles that follow from this distinction—play in modern warfare? Do they adequately account for a normative theory of war? • What is the role of the state in warfare? Is it or should it be the primary actor in just war theory? • Can a just war be understood simply as a response to territorial aggression between state actors, or should other actions be accommodated under legitimate recourse to armed conflict? • Is the idea of combatant qua state-employed soldier a valid ethical characterization of actors in modern warfare? • What role does the technological backdrop of modern warfare play in understanding and realizing just war theories? Over the course of three key sections, the contributors examine these challenges to the just war tradition in a way that invigorates existing discussions and generates new debate on topical and prospective issues in just war theory. This book will be of great interest to students of just war theory, war and ethics, peace and conflict studies, philosophy and security studies.
The Just War Tradition by Davis Brown,Henrik Syse Pdf
This book examines the new and ongoing dilemmas and challenges to world public order in an environment in which international law is more restrictive but state practice is more permissive. The chapters use criteria from the just war tradition to attempt to resolve the tensions posed by the challenges of anticipatory self-defense, humanitarian intervention, and developments in asymmetrical warfare. This book is based on a special issue of the Journal of Military Ethics.
Michael Walzer's Just War Theory by Elena Mertel Pdf
Essay from the year 2018 in the subject Sociology - War and Peace, Military, grade: 8,0, University of Groningen, course: Theories of International Relations, language: English, abstract: Michael Walzer’s "Just and Unjust War" from 1977 is considered a major work in traditional Just War Theory. Many of his assumptions are still the basis for modern warfare considerations. However, the author suggest that Walzer’s concept of jus in bello (the conduct of war) needs further revision, especially to provide an appropriate notion of combatants. In this respect, the theoretical conception of soldiers will be examined on three different levels of analysis. These include the combatants' contradictory responsibilities in jus ad bellum (the justification for war), jus in bello and the debate on the value of a soldier's life. Firstly, the contradictory role of combatants' responsibilities in jus ad bellum and jus in bello by referring to Graham Parsons' criticism on the dualism of Just War Theory will be outlined. Then, the author elaborates on Walzer's claim that all soldiers are morally equal. The following critical analysis of the value of combatants' lives as individual human beings will further demonstrate the need for a revised perception of combatants in modern warfare and point out why Walzer's assumptions are insufficient. While the role of civilians and their need for protection has developed over time and even restrictions for cruel methods of killing were introduced, the status of soldiers has basically remained the same. In this work the author arugues that striving toward more just warfare also requires reconsidering the highly inhumane status of soldiers in traditional approaches.
Author : Steven C. Roach,Amy E. Eckert Publisher : State University of New York Press Page : 248 pages File Size : 45,6 Mb Release : 2020-09-01 Category : Political Science ISBN : 9781438480022
Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare by Steven C. Roach,Amy E. Eckert Pdf
2021 CHOICE Outstanding Academic Title Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare explores the complex relationship between just war theory and the ethics of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). One of the challenges facing ethicists of war, particularly just war theorists, is that AWS is an applicative concept that seems, in many ways, to lie beyond the human(ist) scope of the just war theory tradition. The book examines the various ethical gaps between just war theory and the legal and moral status of AWS, addresses the limits of both traditional and revisionist just war theory, and proposes ways of bridging some of these gaps. It adopts a dualistic notion of moral responsibility—or differing, related notions of moral responsibility and legitimate authority—to study the conflicts and contradictions of legitimizing the autonomous weapons that are designed to secure peace and neutralize the effects of violence. Focusing on the changing conditions and dynamics of accountability, responsibility, autonomy, and rights in twenty-first-century warfare, the volume sheds light on the effects of violence and the future ethics of modern warfare.
