Just War Theory : an Historical and Philosophical Analysis. Paul P

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Just War Theory : an Historical and Philosophical Analysis. Paul P University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1990 Just war theory : an historical and philosophical analysis. Paul P. Christopher University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Christopher, Paul P., "Just war theory : an historical and philosophical analysis." (1990). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 2066. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/2066 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 3 1 2 b b fl b fc, 4 7 ^ b JUST WAR THEORY: AN HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS A Dissertation Presented By PAUL P. CHRISTOPHER Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 1990 DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY © Copyright by Paul Pasquale Christopher 1990 All Rights Reserved JUST WAR THEORY: AN HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ANAYLSIS A Dissertation Presented by PAUL P. CHRISTOPHER Approved as to style and content by: Linda Wetzel, Member Ervin Staub, Member )hn G. Robison, Departmenl Head Til osophy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS One of the great satisfactions of completing a project of this magnitude is that it affords me the opportunity to thank publicly those associates who have been generous enough to take time from their own work to assist me with mine. I especially want to thank my friend and mentor, Gareth Matthews, who first suggested the topic to me, and patiently advised and encouraged me every step of the way these past four years. Others who have been generous enough to read and comment on the entire manuscript include Bruce Aune, David Newell, Alan Schactman, Ervin Staub, and Linda Wetzel. I am deeply indebted to each of them. Many other of my friends and colleagues have provided sage advice on particular sections of the work at various stages of its development. I am especially grateful to Gary Coleman, Merrit Drucker, Anthony Hartle, and Bob Williams for their generous assistance. I am also grateful to those distinguished scholars from across the nation who continue to visit the United States Military Academy without financial remuneration in order to address future officers on the topic of war and morality, and especially those who, during their recent visits, graciously took time to discuss and advise me regarding my work on this topic. My special thanks to E. iv Maynard Adams, Robert Audi, Nick Fotion, R. M. Hare, Brian Jenkins, James Turner Johnson, John Kekes, Thomas Nagel, Robert Phillips, Telford Taylor, Malham Wakin, and Michael Walzer. Of course, one should not construe from the fact that others have assisted me in this project that they should share in any of the blame for its shortcomings. Most, if not all, of the valuable insights contained herein were inspired by the comments of others. Deficiencies most likely reflect my stubbornness to adopt some of the good suggestions I received. v ABSTRACT JUST WAR THEORY: AN HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS MAY 1990 PAUL CHRISTOPHER, B.S. NORWICH UNIVERSITY M.S., UNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE M.A., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Ph.D., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Directed by: Professor Gareth Matthews Pacifism and realism both presuppose an unbridgeable gap between war and morality. The pacifist, abhorring the suffering caused by violence, concludes that war is the consummate evil and rejects it under any circumstances. The realist, beginning from a similar assessment regarding the evil of war, concludes that those who bring war on a peaceful nation deserve all the maledictions its people can pour out. These views reflect the negative duty not intentionally to harm innocent persons, on one hand, and the positive obligation that innocent persons be protected, on the other. The pacifist views the prohibition against harming others as more fundamental; the realist accepts the positive duty to protect others as more basic. Historically, the just war tradition has provided an alternative to these extremes. Recent events in the conduct of wars around the world have, however, called into question the relevancy of certain aspects of vi the just war tradition for modern wars, In this work I critically examine the notion of a just war in terms of both jus ad bellum, or the justifications for going to war, and jus in bello, or the just means of waging war, as it is reflected in international law. I begin with a discussion of various formulations of the realist's and pacifist's positions and argue that the just war tradition provides a reasonable alternative to either of these extremes. I then briefly trace the historical development of the just war tradition beginning with Roman Law. The purpose of this historical analysis is to identify those moral principles and arguments that inspired the development of various aspects of the just war tradition so that these same principles and arguments can be used as a basis for reevaluating existing rules in light of modern tactics and technology. Finally, I expose and discuss serious deficiencies with the way the just war tradition is reflected in current international law and offer proposals for how these problems might be addressed. My conclusion is that the just war tradition can provide effective guidelines for ameliorating the tragedy of war now and into the 21st Century if the issues I identify are adequately addressed. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABSTRACT Chapter INTRODUCTION 1. REALISM AND GOING TO WAR 6 2. REALISM AND FIGHTING WARS 38 3. PACIFISM 49 4. JUST WAR IN ANTIQUITY 83 5. DEVELOPMENT OF THE JUST WAR TRADITION 96 6. SECULARIZATION OF THE JUST WAR TRADITION 136 7. HUGO GROTIUS: FATHER OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 168 8. PROBLEMS FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW 22 6 9. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WAR CRIMES 262 10. MILITARY NECESSITY AND REPRISALS 311 11. THE TACTICS OF TERRORISM 367 BIBLIOGRAPHY 401 viii . INTRODUCTION Hugo Grotius, writing in the 17th Century, observed that concerning war we must not believe either that nothing is allowable, or that everything is. Today we might refer to the views Grotius was rejecting as pacifism and realism. The pacifist, abhorring the suffering caused by violence, concludes that war is the consummate evil and rejects it under any circumstances. The realist, beginning from a similar assessment regarding the evil of war, concludes that those who bring war on a peaceful nation deserve all the maledictions that its people can pour out. These views reflect a tension between the negative duty not intentionally to harm innocent people, on one hand, and the positive obligation that innocent persons be protected, on the other. These two moral inclinations or precepts seem to be at the center of debate concerning when to wage war and how to wage it. The pacifist views the prohibition against harming others as the more fundamental of the two; the realist takes the positive duty to protect others as the more basic. Historically, the just war tradition has provided an alternative to these two extremes Today the tenets of this tradition are reflected in both the national laws of individual states and the 1 international laws of war as formalized in the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the United Nations Charter. Recent events in the conduct of war have, however, called into question the relevance of certain aspects of the just war tradition for modern wars. Examples from Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Central America, and the Middle East seem to provide strong evidence that the just war tradition and the international laws that reflect it are ineffective in protecting innocents and ameliorating suffering in wartime. It is important and timely to reevaluate the viability of the just war tradition, I believe, in light of both the paradigmatic changes in the technology of offensive and defensive weapons and the widespread adoption of guerrilla and terrorist tactics. If the just war tradition and the laws that reflect it need revision in light of the profound changes in the way that modern war is conducted, we should identify the shortfalls and work to make these changes before another war occurs. In this work I undertake a critical examination of just war tradition in terms of both jus ad bellum, or the justifications for going to war, and jus in bello, or the just means of waging war, as it is reflected in the international law. I begin with a discussion of various formulations of the realist's and pacifist's positions and argue that there are serious problems with each. My 2 . purpose here is to show that some type of just war tradition is the best means of resolving the tension between the positive duty to protect oneself and others snd the negative duty to do no harm. This is the focus of Chapter 1-3. In Chapters 4-6 I outline how the modern concept of just war evolved from a fusion of early Roman law and Judeo-Christ ian teachings. Beginning with Ancient Rome, I briefly trace the development of the just war tradition through the middle ages, and show how it was transformed into a corpus of international law following the Thirty- years War. My objective here is to explore the reasoning behind the key elements of modern just war doctrine and the laws of war that reflect it by studying their origins. If we can understand the moral or prudential principles that motivated the development of the tenets of the just war tradition, we will be better able to evaluate its relevance in light of modern technology and tactics In Chapters 7 and 8 I address more specifically the relationship between the just war tradition and the international laws of war.
Recommended publications
  • An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee's Iphigenia
    An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0: A Director’s Approach Caroline Donica Table of Contents Chapter One: Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 4 Introduction 4 The Life and Works of Charles Mee 4 Just War 8 Production History and Reception 11 Survey of Literature 13 Conclusion 15 Chapter Two: Play Analysis 16 Introduction 16 Synopsis 16 Given Circumstances 24 Previous Action 26 Dialogue and Imagery 27 Character Analysis 29 Idea and Theme 34 Conclusion 36 Chapter Three: The Design Process 37 Introduction 37 Production Style 37 Director’s Approach 38 Choice of Stage 38 Collaboration with Designers 40 Set Design 44 Costumes 46 Makeup and Hair 50 Properties 52 Lighting 53 Sound 55 Conclusion 56 Chapter Four: The Rehearsal Process 57 Introduction 57 Auditions and Casting 57 Rehearsals and Acting Strategies 60 Technical and Dress Rehearsals 64 Performances 65 Conclusion 67 Chapter Five: Reflection 68 Introduction 68 Design 68 Staging and Timing 72 Acting 73 Self-Analysis 77 Conclusion 80 Appendices 82 A – Photos Featuring the Set Design 83 B – Photos Featuring the Costume Design 86 C – Photos Featuring the Lighting Design 92 D – Photos Featuring the Concept Images 98 Works Consulted 102 Donica 4 Chapter One Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 Introduction Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0 is a significant work in recent theatre history. The play was widely recognized and repeatedly produced for its unique take on contemporary issues, popular culture, and current events set within a framework of ancient myths and historical literature.
    [Show full text]
  • How Ought We Live?
    How Ought We Live? The Ongoing Deconstruction of Our Values Mark Nielsen This thesis is submitted to the School of History and Philosophy at the University of New South Wales in fulfilment of the requirements of the PhD in Philosophy 2010 ii iii Dedication For Theresa and Charlotte. iv Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Paul Patton, for his generous support in assisting me in the creation of this thesis. I am particularly grateful for his patience and understanding in relation to the research method I have used. I would also like to thank my co-supervisor, Rosalyn Diprose, for her generous support. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Theresa, for her unwavering support over the years and for reminding me of what is important in life. v Table of Contents Title Page i Thesis/Dissertation Sheet ii Originality Statement, Copyright Statement and Authenticity Statement iii Dedication iv Acknowledgements v Table of Contents vi Introduction: Horizontal Philosophy and the Construction of an Ethical Rhizome 1 Macro-Sociological Plateaus 1. The Salesman as Values Educator: A Lesson From a Primary School Teacher 25 2. Feeling Unhappy and Overweight: Overconsumption and the Escalation of Desire 38 3. The Politics of Greed: Trivial Domestic Democracy 52 Philosophical Plateaus 4. The Democratic Rise of the Problem of ―How Ought We Live?‖ 67 5. Living in the Land of Moriah: The Problem of ―How Ought We Sacrifice?‖ 80 6. Welcome to the Mobile Emergency Room: A Convergence Between Ethics and Triage 101 7. Diagnostic Trans-Evaluation and the Creation of New Priorities 111 8.
    [Show full text]
  • From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J
    New England Journal of Public Policy Volume 19 | Issue 1 Article 5 9-21-2003 From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J. Atwood University of Minnesota - Twin Cities Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umb.edu/nejpp Part of the International Relations Commons, Military, War and Peace Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Atwood, Susan J. (2003) "From Just War to Just Intervention," New England Journal of Public Policy: Vol. 19: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://scholarworks.umb.edu/nejpp/vol19/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. It has been accepted for inclusion in New England Journal of Public Policy by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. For more information, please contact [email protected]. From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J. Atwood What is Just War? What is Just Intervention? This paper examines the evolution of the criteria for Just War from its origins in the early Christian church to the twenty-first century. The end of the Cold War era has expanded the discussion to include grounds for intervention. Indeed, in the 1990s, a number of multilat- eral interventions took place on humanitarian grounds. But the debate is ongoing about whether the criteria applied in the Just War theory — proper authority, just cause, and right intent — remain valid in an era of Just Intervention. The author examines as case studies some multilateral interven- tions and the lessons learned from them as we seek to develop the framework of international law to address the evolving theory and current practice of Just Intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea Berit Van Neste University of South Florida
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 4-12-2006 Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea Berit Van Neste University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons, and the Religion Commons Scholar Commons Citation Neste, Berit Van, "Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea" (2006). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/3782 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea by Berit Van Neste A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Religious Studies College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: James F. Strange, Ph.D. Paul G. Schneider, Ph.D. Michael J. Decker, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 12, 2006 Keywords: theology, philosophy, politics, patristic, medieval © Copyright 2006 , Berit Van Neste For Elizabeth and Calista Table of Contents Abstract ii Chapter 1 1 Introduction 1 Cicero’s Influence on Augustine 7 Chapter 2 13 Justice 13 Natural and Temporal Law 19 Commonwealth 34 Chapter 3 49 Just War 49 Chapter 4 60 Conclusion 60 References 64 i Cicero and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace and War
    Peace and War Christian Reflection A SERIES IN FAITH AND ETHICS BAYLOR UNIVERSITY GENERAL EDITOR Robert B. Kruschwitz ART EDITOR Heidi J. Hornik REVIEW EDITOR Norman Wirzba PRODUCTION ASSISTANT Julie Bolin DESIGNER Eric Yarbrough PUBLISHER The Center for Christian Ethics Baylor University One Bear Place #97361 Waco, TX 76798-7361 PHONE (254) 710-3774 TOLL-FREE (USA) (866) 298-2325 W E B S I T E www.ChristianEthics.ws E-MAIL [email protected] All Scripture is used by permission, all rights reserved, and unless otherwise indicated is from New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. ISSN 1535-8585 Christian Reflection is the ideal resource for discipleship training in the church. Multiple copies are obtainable for group study at $2.50 per copy. Worship aids and lesson materials that enrich personal or group study are available free on the website. Christian Reflection is published quarterly by The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University. Contributors express their considered opinions in a responsible manner. The views expressed are not official views of The Center for Christian Ethics or of Baylor University. The Center expresses its thanks to individuals, churches, and organizations, including the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, who provided financial support for this publication. © 2004 The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University All rights reserved Contents Introduction 8 Robert B. Kruschwitz War in the Old Testament 11 John A. Wood The War of the Lamb 18 Harry O. Maier Terrorist Enemies and Just War 27 William T.
    [Show full text]
  • The Returning Warrior and the Limits of Just War Theory
    THE RETURNING WARRIOR AND THE LIMITS OF JUST WAR THEORY R.J. Delahunty Professor of Law University of St. Thomas School of Law* In this essay, I seek to explore a Christian tradition that is nei- ther the just war theory nor pacifism. Unlike pacifism, this tradi- tion teaches that war is a necessary and inescapable aspect of the human condition, and that Christians cannot escape from engaging in it. Unlike just war theory, this tradition holds that engaging in war is intrinsically sinful, however justifiable that activity may be considered to be in the light of human law, morality or reason. Mi- chael Walzer captured the essence of this way of thinking in a cele- brated essay on the problem of “dirty hands.”1 Although Walzer’s essay was chiefly about political rather than military action, he rightly observed that there was a strand in Christian reflection that saw killing, whether in a just or unjust war, as defiling or even sin- ful, even if it conformed to moral and legal standards. That tradi- tion, though subordinate, still survives in Christian, especially Lu- theran, thought. The Church’s thought about war and peace went through sever- al phases before finally settling on the just war theory. Throughout much of the Middle Ages, the Church’s approach to war was pri- marily pastoral and unsystematic. Although opinions varied widely depending on the circumstances, the early medieval Church was commonly skeptical of the permissibility of killing in warfare. Ra- ther, the Church at that time tended to the view that killing – even in a just war – was sinful and required penance.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Theories of Just War: Understanding Warfare As a Social Tool Through Comparative Analysis of Western, Chinese, and Islamic Classical Theories of War
    THREE THEORIES OF JUST WAR: UNDERSTANDING WARFARE AS A SOCIAL TOOL THROUGH COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF WESTERN, CHINESE, AND ISLAMIC CLASSICAL THEORIES OF WAR A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PHILOSOPHY MAY 2012 By Faruk Rahmanović Thesis Committee: Tamara Albertini, Chairperson Roger T. Ames James D. Frankel Brien Hallett Keywords: War, Just War, Augustine, Sunzi, Sun Bin, Jihad, Qur’an DEDICATION To my parents, Ahmet and Nidžara Rahmanović. To my wife, Majda, who continues to put up with me. To Professor Keith W. Krasemann, for teaching me to ask the right questions. And to Professor Martin J. Tracey, for his tireless commitment to my success. 1 ABSTRACT The purpose of this analysis was to discover the extent to which dictates of war theory ideals can be considered universal, by comparing the Western (European), Classical Chinese, and Islamic models. It also examined the contextual elements that drove war theory development within each civilization, and the impact of such elements on the differences arising in war theory comparison. These theories were chosen for their differences in major contextual elements, in order to limit the impact of contextual similarities on the war theories. The results revealed a great degree of similarities in the conception of warfare as a social tool of the state, utilized as a sometimes necessary, albeit tragic, means of establishing peace justice and harmony. What differences did arise, were relatively minor, and came primarily from the differing conceptions of morality and justice within each civilization – thus indicating a great degree of universality to the conception of warfare.
    [Show full text]
  • “Against Such Hellish Mischief Fit to Oppose”: a Grotian Reading of Milton’S War in Heaven
    Elizabeth Oldman “Against such hellish mischief fit to oppose”: A Grotian Reading of Milton’s War in Heaven y the time the latter parts of Paradise Lost came to be written,” remarks Stevie Davies, “the revolution had failed and the new tyrant, Charles II, had been restored” (45). In Paradise Lost, this essay proposes, Milton “Bcalls upon Hugo Grotius’s version of natural law to distinguish evil from good at a time when evil seemed to prevail. He attempts to make natural law perform beyond the restoration of monarchy, to ultimately prove God’s just intention in allowing the unfortunate outcome of the English Civil War to take place. Demonstrating the poet’s Grotian belief that the parameters for legitimate military action must be circumscribed in accordance with the laws of nature, two models of warfare—criminal battle originated by Satan, and God’s justifiable defensive response—take place in the War in Heaven in Book 6 of the epic. This three-day conflict fought between God’s troops and Satan’s enables Milton to investigate “what kind of rebellion was justified and what not” (Hill 366). As explanation for why the angels agree to battle, I consider how the War in Heaven ensues in a Grotian manner as a necessary instrument, for there is no other way of obliging errant nations which are uncivil to conform to reason. In response to unjust war, that is, one must wage just war. In contrast to Satan, who reveals himself as a usurper who initiates his ‘‘foreign” or international campaign for conquest and plunder of land, commendable rulership is embodied in juxtaposition with the author’s depiction of God.
    [Show full text]
  • The Heart of the Matter
    american academy of arts & sciences The Heart of the Matter The Humanities and Social Sciences for a vibrant, competitive, and secure nation Who will lead America into a bright future? Citizens who are educated in the broadest possible sense, so that they can participate in their own governance and engage with the world. An adaptable and creative workforce. Experts in national security, equipped with the cultural understanding, knowledge of social dynamics, and language proficiency to lead our foreign service and military through complex global conflicts. Elected officials and a broader public who exercise civil political discourse, founded on an appreciation of the ways our differences and commonalities have shaped our rich history. We must prepare the next generation to be these future leaders. commission on the humanities and social sciences The Heart of the Matter american academy of arts & sciences Cambridge, Massachusetts © 2013 by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences All rights reserved. isbn: 0-87724-096-5 The views expressed in this volume are those held by the contributors and are not necessarily those of the Officers and Fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. The Heart of the Matter is available online at http://www.amacad.org. Please direct inquiries to: American Academy of Arts & Sciences 136 Irving Street Cambridge, MA 02138-1996 Phone: 617-576-5000 Email: [email protected] www.amacad.org 5 Members of the Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences 6 Acknowledgments 9 Executive Summary 15 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Waging War: Filling the Gap in Just War Theory
    Waging War: Filling the Gap in Just War Theory by James M. Dubik Lieutenant General, U.S. Army, Retired A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Baltimore, Maryland June 18, 2014 © 2014 James M. Dubik All Rights Reserved Abstract 1. Statement of the Problem. Just war theory’s account of jus in bello is deficient. Michael Walzer, the prime representative of the prevailing view in the United States, restricts jus in bello to combat, war-fighting, then constructs a theory of responsibility and presents a set of principles that guide action when fighting: the principles of combatant/noncombatant distinction, proportionality, double effect and double intent, as well as the principle of due care/due risk—all of which arise amid the tension between winning and fighting well. 2. Procedures and methods. This study establishes and describes the gap in the prevailing view’s treatment of jus in bello, then investigates alternative ways to fill that gap. Throughout, the study combines elements of moral philosophy, political philosophy, and strategic studies with historical and contemporary case illustrations of war. 3. Results. This study finds that the prevailing view is necessary but insufficient; it omits jus in bello’s strategic, war-waging dimension which involves a tri-partite tension: (a) setting war aims and making strategy, policy, and campaign decisions that increase the probability of being right, or at least less wrong than those one is fighting; (b) translating those decisions into action to achieve war aims at the least cost, in lives and resources, and least risk to one’s political community and adapting aims, strategies, policies, and campaigns to the changing realities of war as they unfold; and (c) doing all of the foregoing while observing the war convention, sustaining the war’s legitimacy in the eyes of the political community, and maintaining proper subordination of the military to civilian ii leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chinese Meaning of Just War and Its Impact on the Foreign Policy of the People’S Republic of China
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Research Papers in Economics GIGA Research Programme: Violence, Power and Security ___________________________ The Chinese Meaning of Just War and Its Impact on the Foreign Policy of the People’s Republic of China Nadine Godehardt N° 88 September 2008 www.giga-hamburg.de/workingpapers GIGA WP 88/2008 GIGA Working Papers Edited by the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies Leibniz-Institut für Globale und Regionale Studien The Working Paper Series serves to disseminate the research results of work in progress prior to publication in order to encourage the exchange of ideas and academic debate. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. Inclusion of a paper in the Working Paper Series does not constitute publication and should not limit publication in any other venue. Copyright remains with the authors. When Working Papers are eventually accepted by or published in a journal or book, the correct citation reference and, if possible, the corresponding link will then be included in the Working Papers website at <www.giga-hamburg.de/workingpapers>. GIGA research unit responsible for this issue: Research Programme: “Violence, Power and Security” Editor of the GIGA Working Paper Series: Martin Beck <[email protected]> Copyright for this issue: © Nadine Godehardt English copy editor: Melissa Nelson Editorial assistant and production: Vera Rathje All GIGA Working Papers are available online and free of charge on the website <www. giga-hamburg.de/workingpapers>.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethics of Armed Conflict John W
    THE ETHICS OF ARMED CONFLICT JOHN W. LANGO JOHN W. THE ETHICS OF Cover image: photograph by the author of a burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) standing beside a burrow amidst vegetation at the end of a beach in Ventura, California. Cover design: www.paulsmithdesign.com ISBN 978-0-7486-4574-9 ARMED CONFLICT A COSMOPOLITAN JUST WAR THEORY www.euppublishing.com JOHN W. LANGO THE ETHICS OF ARMED CONFLICT The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 1 09/12/2013 12:10:04 The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 2 09/12/2013 12:10:04 THE ETHICS OF ARMED CONFLICT A Cosmopolitan Just War Theory John W. Lango The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 3 09/12/2013 12:10:04 For my son, sister, mother, and father © John W. Lango 2014, under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives licence Edinburgh University Press Ltd 22 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9LF www.euppublishing.com Typeset in Times by Iolaire Typesetting, Newtonmore, and printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CR0 4YY A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7486 4575 6 (hardback) ISBN 978 0 7486 4576 3 (webready PDF) The right of John W. Lango to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No. 2498). The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 4 09/12/2013 12:10:04 CONTENTS Preface vii 1 Introduction 1 2 Just War Theory 18 3 Moral Theory 48 4 Theory of Action 77 5 Just Cause 107 6 Last Resort 134 7 Last Resort and Noncombatant Immunity 156 8 Proportionality and Authority 178 9 All Things Considered 200 References 225 Index 239 The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 5 09/12/2013 12:10:04 The Ethics of Armed Conflict.indd 6 09/12/2013 12:10:04 PREFACE During the Cold War, I was startled awake when the ground shook, frightened that nuclear war had begun; but it was Los Angeles, and only an earthquake.
    [Show full text]