“War Theories”
Training Session 7 Jan 2014
Just War Theory (i)
•“Jus ad bellum” - Right to go to War
1. Just Cause
2. Last Resort
3. Declared by Legitimate Authority
4. Right Intention
5. Reasonable Chance of Success
6. End Proportional to Means
Just War Theory (ii)
•“Jus in bello” – Right conduct within War
–Discrimination
•Who are legitimate targets of war?
–Proportionality
•How much force is appropriate?
–Responsibility
•Maintaining responsibility amongst soldiers
Just War Theory (iii)
•“Jus post bellum”
–Compensation
–Rehabilitation
–Punishment
Realism
•Moral concepts should not be employed neither asdescriptions of, nor as prescriptions for, statebehaviour on the int. scene.
•War ought to be resorted to only if it makes sense interms of national self-interest; and that, once war hasbegun, a state ought to do whatever it can to win.
•Descriptive realism = States do not (for reasons ofmotivation) and cannot (for reasons of competitivestruggle) behave morally
•Prescriptive realism = States ought to behaveamorally in the int. arena
Pacifism
•Jenny Teichman: “anti-war-ism”
•Two kinds to consider:
–(1) A more consequentialist form of pacifism whichmaintains that the benefits accruing from war can neveroutweigh the costs of fighting it;
–And (2) a more deontological form of pacifism whichcontends that the very activity of war is intrinsically wrong,since it violates foremost duties of justice, such as notkilling human beings.
Consequentialism
•“The ends justify the means”
•It does not matter what actions we take interms of their morality as long as they have theconsequences we want.
Golden Arches Peace Theory
Statistically speaking seemed towork pretty well!
Fails:
NATO/Serbia (2005)
India/Pakistan (Kashmir 1998)
Israel/Lebanon (2006)
Georgia/Russia (2008)
No two countries with McDonalds in them will go to war
-Level of Economic Development; Middle Class tosupport McDonald’s Network
-Symbol of economic interdependence
Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention
“No two countries that are both part of a major global supplychain, like Dell’s, will ever fight a war against each other aslong as they are both part of the same global supply chain.”
Nations are unwilling to risk the employment generated byglobalization, and don’t fight.
Use to argue why economic ties area positive; e.g. in sanctions debates
Examples:
India/Pakistan Nuclear Standoff
Taiwan/China
?
Democratic Peace Theory
Democracies almost never fight with each other – lackof any real wars between real democracies in 20th C
-Normative Reasons
-Structural Reasons
Argue that promoting democracyhas broader benefits to protectingthe security of existing democraticnations
(democratic crusade)
1)Other explanations; e.g.political similarity
2)Just a matter of time
3)Promoting democracy canbackfire – increase conflict
Debating about Invasions /Assassinations etc
PROP
•Establish Imperative
–Identify a tipping point (why we can’twait)
–Last Resort (all other options havebeen tried)
•Provide clear mechanism
–Outline a military strategy that willwork
•Initial conflict
•Continuing conflict (insurgency?)
–Include amnesty option forcombatants / suggest won’t fight
•Show path to a better future
–Reconstruction efforts?
–Who will take power afterwards?
•Creates important positiveprecedents
OPP
•Throw mess around
–War is never clean or simple
•Civilians & Soldiers will die
–Responsibility on our hands
•Show how will mobiliseopposition
•EVEN IF invasion works
–Show most likely scenario willbe at best sub-optimal and mostlikely even worse than to start
•Undermines precedents ofinternational law