JUST WAR IN THEORY AND PRACTICE: THE LEGITIMATION OF SWEDISH INTERVENTION IN THE THIRTY YEARS WAR

2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 499-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
PÄRTEL PIIRIMÄE
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Normative Language ◽  
Argumentative Strategy ◽  
Police Action

This article attempts to establish a connection between the practical legitimation of war and the theories of international law, examining Sweden's efforts to justify her intervention in the Thirty Years War in 1630. Swedish argumentative strategy is analysed in the light of two major traditions of thinking about war: theological and humanist ‘just war’ traditions. The article argues that Swedish leaders did not appeal to the more belligerent humanist arguments which would have enabled them to describe their campaign as a just war either on the grounds of pre-emptive defence or humanitarian intervention. Instead, they tried to interpret it as being within the limits set by the more restrictive theological tradition. This strategy eventually forced them to relinquish attempts to present their intervention as a genuine war and to develop an argument of ‘police-action’, even though it resulted in a loss of credibility. The case study suggests that in the early seventeenth century the prevailing normative language of just war was that of the theologians.

scholarly journals Winning Humanitarian Interventions? Problematizing Victory and jus post bellum in International Action to Stop Mass Atrocities

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt Mills
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Stop Mass ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
International Action ◽  
Humanitarian Interventions ◽  
Police Action ◽  
Traditional Sense

Much contemporary conflict bears little resemblance to traditional understandings of war. This is particularly the case for action intended to protect civilians in the midst of war and mass atrocities, as conceived of in the norm of the responsibility to protect. Humanitarian intervention is frequently invoked as an instance of just war. Yet, particularly within contemporary legal and political frameworks, this is a mischaracterization. It is not war in the traditional sense, although there may be war-like elements. It is more akin to police action, where certain international actors are upholding international law and norms. Some elements of peacekeeping also fall under this heading. This has significant implications for how—and whether—we can conceive of victory in such situations. Further, there are significant questions about what follow-through is required after a humanitarian intervention—and who has a responsibility to rebuild torn societies.

Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando R. Tesón ◽  
Bas van der Vossen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Collective Self

We introduce general concepts of just war theory and describe different kinds of war: national self-defense, collective self-defense, and humanitarian intervention. After laying down the conditions for the justification of humanitarian intervention, we highlight some of our differences. We conclude with an outline of the international law of use of force and some jurisprudential themes that bear on the current humanitarian intervention debate.

scholarly journals Moral Justification of Humanitarian Intervention in Modern Just War Theory

2021 ◽  
Vol 63 (11) ◽  
pp. 58-73
Author(s):  
Arseniy D. Kumankov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Just War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The State ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Moral Justification ◽  
Mass Violence ◽  
Mass Murders

The article deals with the problem of moral justification of humanitarian intervention by modern just war theorists. At the beginning of the article, we discuss the evolution of the dominant paradigms of the moral justification of war and explain why the theory and practice of humanitarian intervention appears only at the present stage of the development of ethics and the law of war. It is noted that theorization of humanitarian intervention began in the last decades of the 20th century. This is due to a significant transformation, a retreat in the legal and ethical studies of war from the position of radical condemnation of aggressive actions and the recognition of the political subjectivity of non-state groups. Thus, there is a rethinking of the long tradition, the Westphalian system of international relations, according to which the state was recognized as the main participant of big politics, and its sovereign right to conduct domestic policy was considered indisputable. Further, we take the works of Michael Walzer as the main source of modern conceptualization of the ethics of humanitarian interventionism, since Walzer repeatedly addressed this topic and formulated a position on this issue that is representative of the entire modern Just War Theory. The arguments of Walzer and his supporters in favor of the moral justification of humanitarian intervention are considered. Among them are the following. First, the argument about the state as an organization which goal is to protect the rights of its own citizens. If this goal is not not achieved, the state shall loose its power over these people and in this territory. Second, Walzer calls for identifying governments and armed forces involved in mass murders as criminal and, therefore, deserving of punishment. Finally, there is, perhaps the most important, demonstrative argument: an appeal to the self-evident impossibility to stand aside in cases of mass violence in any state. This is followed by a critique of these arguments, as well as a demonstration of how the modern Just War Theory can respond to these criticisms.

Justified: Just War and the Ethics of Violence and World Order

2021 ◽  
pp. 435-448
Author(s):  
Chris Brown
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
World Order ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Just War Tradition ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Impact

This volume’s final Part VII on the impact of legal claims in war discourses is introduced by Chris Brown. In this chapter, he fundamentally questions the relevance of international law as a frame of reference for the justification and limitation of war. Brown turns our attention back to just war which we have discussed earlier in this volume (ch. 2 by Anthony Lang, Jr): Brown argues that, properly understood, the just war tradition can be defended against most of its critics, the exceptions being those Clausewitzian realists and Gandhian pacifists who refuse to make the kind of discriminations upon which the tradition is based. More problematic are some of the newer friends of the tradition, analytical political theorists who reject its praxis-oriented dimension, and focus on the rights and responsibilities of individuals, discounting the importance of collectivities. These writers are, in some respects, closer to the medieval tradition than are defenders of contemporary international humanitarian law, but their reliance on the ability of philosophers to decide matters of justice leads to a dogmatism uncharacteristic of the just war tradition, and their emphasis on the individual undermines the link between theory and practice. This chapter defends a traditional, albeit post-Christian, reading of the notion of justified war against both its overt opponents and its supposed friends.

In the Cause of Humanity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Klose
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Humanitarian Aid ◽  
The United States ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Military Interventions ◽  
War Of Independence ◽  
Humanitarian Crises ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Military

In the Cause of Humanity is a major new history of the emergence of the theory and practice of humanitarian intervention during the nineteenth century when the question of whether, when and how the international community should react to violations of humanitarian norms and humanitarian crises first emerged as a key topic of controversy and debate. Fabian Klose investigates the emergence of legal debates on the protection of humanitarian norms by violent means, revealing how military intervention under the banner of humanitarianism became closely intertwined with imperial and colonial projects. Through case studies including the international fight against the slave trade, the military interventions under the banner of humanitarian aid for Christian minorities in the Ottoman Empire, and the intervention of the United States in the Cuban War of Independence, he shows how the idea of humanitarian intervention established itself as a recognized instrument in international politics and international law.

SOLIDARITAS ISLAM DAN PENCEGAHAN PENGARUH ISIS DI INDONESIA DALAM PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL

Jurnal Hukum ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 1511
Author(s):  
Jawahir Thontowi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Just War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Control Zone ◽  
Military Uniform ◽  
Self Protection

Abstrak Persaudaraan dalam Islam (ukhuwah Islamiyah) adalah ajaran yang ideal berdasarkan prinsip syariah. Hal ini terkait dengan konsep solidaritas Islam yang efektif digunakan untuk perlawanan dan perlindungan diri terhadap agresi non muslim. Ketika Negara Islam Irak dan Suriah (ISIS) menyatakan kendali mereka terhadap Irak dan Suriah, mereka didukung oleh konsep solidaritas Islam dari beberapa negara Muslim. Meskipun ISIS memenuhi persyaratan untuk berperang, seperti sebagai memiliki zona dibawah kendali, komandan, pengikut, dan seragam militer; tetapi ia tidak dapat diklasifikasikan sebagai berperang dalam hukum internasional karena fakta bahwa tindakan ISIS melanggar hukum humanis, ISIS saat ini ditolak oleh negara-negara muslim. Mengusulkan bantuan kemanusiaan yang dilakukan oleh muslim akan menjadi pilihan yang lebih baik untuk dipromosikan daripada melakukan intervensi kemanusiaan. Pemerintah Indonesia berupaya untuk memerangi pengikut ISIS, dan hal ini tidak akan berhasil tanpa ada usaha yang dilakukan. Kata kunci: Solidaritas Islam, ISIS, Hukum Internasional, Pemberontakan Abstrak Brotherhood in Islam (ukhuwah Islamiyah) is an ideal teaching based on Islamic principle.  It’s related to the concept of Islamic solidarity that is effectively used for resistence and self protection against non Moslem aggression. When the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed their control to the Iraq and Syria, they are supported by the concept of Islamic solidarity from some Moslem countries.  Althought the ISIS comply belligerent requirements like as having under control zone, commander, follower, and military uniform; it cannot be classified as belligerent in international law due to the fact that the ISIS actions violate agains humanitarian law the ISIS currently rejected by Moslem countries to be valid and just war. Proposing humanitarian assistance conducted by Moslem would better choice to be promoted rather than humanitarian intervention. Indonesian government attemptes to combat against the ISIS followers cannot be tralled effectively, whithout any effort played.  Key Words: Islamic Solidarity, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Internasional Law, Belligerency

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document