Just war Lecture Notes 12_2_25 GVPT 241

Civilian Casualties: Non-combatants are often casualties in warfare, raising ethical questions about the justification of war.
Historical Context: The discussion aligns with historical pacifist views, but the modern context differs significantly.
Precision of Weapons:
- Modern weaponry is more precise; however, ballistic weapons still pose a risk of civilian harm.
- Advances in weapons technology increase concerns over civilian infrastructure damage.

New Theater of War: Cyber space is recognized as a new battleground.
Targeting Military Infrastructure: The potential exists for targeting military systems, leading to debates on the acceptability of cyber warfare.
Concerns about Civilian Infrastructure: Despite targeting military systems, cyber warfare often impacts civilian infrastructure, complicating ethical considerations.
Contingent Pacifism: Potential arguments arise concerning the morality of cyber warfare by contingent pacifists, though such positions are not widely articulated as of current observations.

Definition of Realism: A theory positing that countries act primarily in their self-interest.
Core Principle: Understanding a country's actions can be achieved by assessing its collective self-interest.
John Mearshimer's Contributions: A key figure in realism; argues countries engage in actions, including wars, when in their self-interest.
Controversial Perspectives: Mearshimer controversially justifies Vladimir Putin's actions in Ukraine, arguing NATO's expansion caused Russia's aggressive response.

Formation and Purpose: NATO was established during the Cold War as a deterrent against Soviet aggression, with Article 5 requiring collective defense.
Post-Soviet Expansion: After the Soviet Union's collapse, NATO expanded, integrating former Soviet states, which Mearshimer claims provoked Russian hostility.
Mearshimer vs. Normative Theory: Mearshimer is criticized for using realism to justify aggression rather than simply explain it, conflating empirical analysis with normative judgment.

Differentiating War from Crime: War involves organized groups (countries), whereas crimes are individual acts.
Collectivist Approach: Argues different moral standards apply to group conduct during war as opposed to individual interactions:
- Justification of Violence: Acts of violence between militaries are seen as morally different from civilian actions.
Just Cause and Conduct: Justifying war requires examining causes (jus ad bellum) and conduct (jus in bello).

Collectivism vs. Individualism:
- Collectivist Ethics: Recognizes different standards for actions before and during war.
- Individualism's View: Argues consistent moral standards should apply, regardless of context.

Criteria for a Just War: Several criteria must be met for a war to be considered just.
1. Legitimate Authority: Wars must be declared by the official head of state (e.g., not by a lone general).
2. Just Cause: Self-defense against aggression is a classic example of a justifiable cause.
3. Last Resort: All diplomatic solutions must be exhausted prior to resorting to war.
4. Reasonable Chance of Success: There must be a realistic chance of achieving goals without excessive loss of life.
5. Proportionality: Military responses must be proportional to the aggression faced.
6. Right Intention: Stated motives for war must be genuine and align with the conduct of the war.
7. Public Declaration: Wars should not be initiated secretly; a public declaration is necessary.
8. Humanitarian Intervention: Recent updates to Just War Theory include the notion that interventions may be justified to prevent humanitarian abuses (e.g., established by the UN in 2005).

Rules Governing Conduct:
- Actions during war must adhere to the principles of proportionality and military necessity.
- Discriminatory Targeting: Only uniformed soldiers should be targeted, avoiding civilian casualties as much as possible.
Moral Equality of Soldiers:
- Within collectivist views, soldiers from opposing sides are seen as morally equal, though criticisms arise regarding the context of aggressive actions.
Challenges of Targeting Civilians: The complexities of targeting rules arise in distinguishing between civilians and combatants, leading to ethical debates and the justification of civilian deaths.

Evaluation of the War: Assessments must determine if the war's goals were met and if civilian harm was mitigated post-conflict.
Reparations and Treatment of Defeated Enemy:
- The victors have obligations concerning the treatment of the defeated; reparations must be reasonable, fair, and consider the burden on civilians.
- Historical examples (e.g., consequences of reparations post-WWI) highlight the long-term ramifications of punitive peace settlements.
Maximal vs. Minimal Focus: Evaluating obligations post-war involves both what victors demand and what they owe to the vanquished, prioritizing principles like equality, responsibility, and fairness.
Real-World Relevance: Current conflicts (including U.S. interventions regarding drug trafficking) continue to evoke discussions around Just War Theory, highlighting its practical implications in global politics.