Log In | Subscribe
Features

The just war tradition

  18th December 2004  —  Issue 105
State sovereignty is fragmenting but world government is still far off. Neither the UN charter, designed to protect member states from aggression, nor the new US doctrine of preventative war can address the challenges of a globalising world. The "just war" tradition provides a sounder moral base

In recent years there has been a revival of war as a policy of choice. Since the collapse of communism, the US and its allies have attacked Iraq (twice), Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. With “hot war” released from its cold war constraints, it is important to consider the conditions under which resort to war is justifiable, and what methods of fighting wars are right. This is the domain of “just war” theory. There is also the related issue of how just war doctrine may be fruitfully applied by the UN, the main custodian of international law.

The return of war as a policy of choice overturns the post-second world war assumption, enshrined in the UN charter, which allowed only wars of self-defence and proscribed intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. This position – a reaction to the two world wars of the 20th century – waPeace Planes reinforced by the unique destructiveness of nuclear weapons. The threat of MAD (mutually assured destruction) prevented war between the two cold war superpowers, and made possible the semi-pacifism of Europe and Japan, sheltering under the nuclear umbrella. The utility as well as the morality of war was questioned. The conventional view was that superior firepower could not prevail against ideologically inspired guerrillas. After Vietnam, the US became reluctant to accept casualties.

None of this meant that warfare disappeared from the planet. Hot wars punctuated the cold war era. Some of these were extremely bloody. But their locus was in the unstable, postcolonial peripheries of the world system. In the imperial age, the great powers fought each other and kept peace in their colonies. After the second world war, the great powers lived in peace with each other, while some of their former possessions were engulfed by violence, largely as a result of decolonisation.The UN’s role was confined to the sporadic provision of unarmed peacekeepers, there on the sufferance of the warring factions.

This article is available to subscribers only

Subscribing to Prospect is the most reliable and convenient way to receive the magazine every month, and offers the best value.

Subscription Types:

Print

As a print edition subscriber you can get over 20 per cent discounted from our cover price. Have the magazine delivered straight to your door each month, starting at just £16 for six months. All print subscriptions now come with a free online subscription which includes complete access to our searchable archive. Buy a subscription now »

Online

An online subscription offers you complete and unlimited access to the entire website, including our searchable archive of every back issue of Prospect, and a PDF edition of each new issue: all this for just £20 per year. Purchase an online subscription »

Renewal

Renew an existing subscription »

Institutional access

If you are a library, business organisation or any other large institution that needs a multi-user licence, you can obtain institutional access.
  • Comment Subscribe to post comments