The Role of Ontology in the Just War Tradition
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Texas A&M University “THAT TRUTH THAT LIVES UNCHANGEABLY”: THE ROLE OF ONTOLOGY IN THE JUST WAR TRADITION A Dissertation by PHILLIP WESLEY GRAY Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 2006 Major Subject: Political Science © 2006 PHILLIP WESLEY GRAY ALL RIGHTS RESERVED “THAT TRUTH THAT LIVES UNCHANGEABLY”: THE ROLE OF ONTOLOGY IN THE JUST WAR TRADITION A Dissertation by PHILLIP WESLEY GRAY Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Cary J. Nederman Committee Members, Elisabeth Ellis Nehemia Geva J. R. G. Wollock Head of Department, Patricia Hurley December 2006 Major Subject: Political Science iii ABSTRACT “That Truth that Lives Unchangeably”: The Role of Ontology in the Just War Tradition. (December 2006) Phillip Wesley Gray, B.A., University of Dayton Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Cary J. Nederman The just war tradition as we know it has its origins with Christian theology. In this dissertation, I examine the theological, in particular ontological, presuppositions of St. Augustine of Hippo in his elucidation of just war. By doing so, I show how certain metaphysical ideas of St. Augustine (especially those on existence, love, and the sovereignty of God) shaped the just war tradition. Following this, I examine the slow evacuation of his metaphysics from the just war tradition. Through the systemization of just war by St. Thomas Aquinas, aided later on by Bartolomé de Las Casas and Hugo Grotius, the doctrine became a shadowy reflection of the tradition. By analyzing the notions of morality in warfare by political realists (Waltz, Morgenthau), international law, and liberal thinkers (Rawls, Walzer), I show the incoherence of the doctrine when it is separated from its ontological and metaphysical roots. iv In Memory of Paul C. Gray 1944-2004 beati qui habitant in domo tua adhuc laudabunt te semper beatus homo cuius fortitudo est in te semitae in corde eius transeuntes in valle fletus fontem ponent eam benedictione quoque amicietur doctor ibunt de fortitudine in fortitudinem parebunt apud Deum in Sion Psalm 83: 5-8 v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation committee for their help throughout this process. I especially thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Cary J. Nederman, for all his suggestions and attention to detail during my years under his tutelage. This work would be much the worse if not for the constant assistance of many individuals, far too many to identify. However, some individuals do deserve special mention. Courtney Eschbach gave me great support in the initial writing. My fellow graduate students in the Department of Political Science, in particular Hassan Bashir, Jesse Chupp, David Rossbach, and Renat Shadkudinov, gave many helpful suggestions along the way. The greatest help came from my dear Sara R. Jordan, who read through the work, provided helpful suggestions, and brought comfort in stressful times. All help I received is appreciated, though all errors are, of course, my own. Finally, I thank my family, my mother, Linda, and brother, Justin, for their constant support during my time at Texas A&M University. My father, Paul, passed away before he could see this work completed. This dissertation is dedicated to him. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I INTRODUCTION: ONTOLOGY AND JUST WAR .................... 1 A note of clarification......................................................... 9 II ANTE AUGUSTINUM................................................................... 10 North Africa before St. Augustine.................................... 13 Church and State before St. Augustine ............................. 21 Aurelius before St. Augustine........................................... 35 Conclusion......................................................................... 45 III THE INEXPRESSIBLE AS CARITAS, SOVEREIGNTY, AND ORDER................................................................................ 47 Divinity as the Inexpressible............................................. 47 Caritas............................................................................... 50 Sovereignty........................................................................ 56 Order.................................................................................. 66 Conclusion......................................................................... 77 IV JUST WAR FROM A CHRISTIAN REALIST ........................... 79 Power and Justice in a Fractured World............................ 81 Peace and the Fractured World......................................... 81 The Just War, God’s Sovereignty, Order, and Caritas ... 103 Christian Political Realism: Between Immorality and Idealism ........................................................................... 114 Conclusion....................................................................... 120 vii CHAPTER Page V SYSTEMIZATION AND THE INEXPRESSIBLE ................... 122 St. Thomas Aquinas........................................................ 127 Bartolomé de Las Casas.................................................. 139 Hugo Grotius................................................................... 151 From Ontology to Morality............................................. 160 Conclusion....................................................................... 164 VI POLITICAL REALISM: SCIENTISM AND REALPOLITIK ... 166 Neorealism as Political Scientism................................... 171 Classical Political Realism and the Possibility of Morality........................................................................... 186 Morality, Warfare, Morgenthau...................................... 195 (False) Hope in a Hopeless World .................................. 200 Conclusion....................................................................... 212 VII INTERNATIONAL LAW AND LIBERALISM........................ 215 Law, Legalism, and Ontology......................................... 217 International Law and Legalism...................................... 223 Law and Liberalism......................................................... 234 Liberalism in an Illiberal World...................................... 247 Community, War, and Saeculum..................................... 261 Conclusion....................................................................... 274 VIII CONCLUSION: BEING IN THE JUST WAR .......................... 275 The Challenge of Pacifism.............................................. 276 Thick and Thin Theology................................................ 284 Is Just War Outdated?..................................................... 290 Conclusion....................................................................... 293 REFERENCES........................................................................................ 294 VITA ......................................................................................... 311 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: ONTOLOGY AND JUST WAR War is one of the most clarifying events in human existence. It is clarifying because it shows what truly matters to those engaged in it. An oft-quoted line is “there are no atheists in a foxhole,” but it is more than that. In war, what one believes to be true comes to the forefront – whether something is worth dying for or killing for, whether life’s preservation is all that matters, whether there are such things as “inalienable human rights” (even in war), and the like. War, especially total war, is clarifying because its participants lack the luxury of happy illusions and puffed-up notions that they do not, at their core, believe. War is one of the few human activities that is known to most (if not all) societies, and it raises some of the deepest questions of what it means to be human, and what it means to be good. Are these deepest questions (and their answers) illusions in and of themselves? For the participants, these cannot be illusions. The extremity of the situation calls for reality and truth, not placating illusions. But if you are facing extermination at the hands of the enemy, is there any reason to hold back from the use of total and brutal force? Is there any reason not to raze the cities and kill the populations of your opponent? While the leader as an individual may _____ This dissertation follows the style of the American Political Science Review. 2 be willing to withhold total force rather than save his/her own life, should the leader reserve using total force even at the risk of his/her experiential world? Should one hold back when one’s family, fellow citizens, cities, institutions, and entire way of living may cease to exist? Yes. There are reasons, even in the latter situation, to restrain one’s self. The just war tradition, accepting that war is sometimes necessary, also explains how fighting a war must be restrained. Under its prescriptions, to do immoral acts, even for the preservation of the state or its interests, is unacceptable. But why is this so? What could be the reasons for restraining force, even for survival? The answers lie in the ontological and theological assumptions of the just war doctrine’s creators. When asking for reasons to restrain force, we need to investigate what the just war