The Scars of Victory

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Campbell ◽  
Brent J. Steele
Keyword(s):  
International Conflict ◽  
Just War ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Reasonable Expectation ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The Past ◽  
Exclusive Focus

A key provision in just war theory counsels that it is unjust to engage in conflict without a reasonable expectation of success. This is often imbued with an exclusive focus on achievability, such that success is connected to an a priori ethical end. This chapter challenges the focus on achievement by untangling the process from the ends. We argue that the most powerful political processes do not have the ‘finality’ so actively sought in ‘winning’ an international conflict. Instead, the process of cultivating finality through victory in war is too often dependent upon an assumed moral outcome driven through the politically, historically, and affectively determinative presentations of the past, presented in the visual and metaphorical scars of victory and defeat. Thus, scars of violence, visceral instances in which conflicts, regardless of outcome, are continually open, perpetuate interpretations and exist independent of attempts to achieve finality through their politicized use.

War and Religion: A Very Short Introduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolyon Mitchell ◽  
Joshua Rey
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Ancient History ◽  
Short Introduction ◽  
History Of Religion ◽  
Religious People ◽  
Ethical Frameworks ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of

War and Religion: A Very Short Introduction traces the history of religion and war. Is religion a force for war or a force for peace? From the crusades to Sri Lanka's civil war, religion has been involved in some of the most terrible wars in history. Yet from the Mahabharata to just war theory, religion has also provided ethical frameworks to moderate war, while some of the bravest pacifists have been deeply religious people. Ranging from ancient history to modern day conflicts, this VSI offers a nuanced view on these issues that have had such weight in the past, and which continue to shape the present and future.

scholarly journals La nouvelle géopolitique des minéraux : Une étude sur l’évolution de l’impact international des minéraux stratégiques

2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-471
Author(s):  
David G. Haglund
Keyword(s):  
International Conflict ◽  
World Order ◽  
Contributory Factor ◽  
Deterministic Equation ◽  
Supply Disruptions ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The Past ◽  
Past Half Century ◽  
The Military ◽  
Past Half

This article explores changes in the international political significance of "strategic minerals" over the past half-century. The method of analysis is comparative historical, or "diachronic", and the major issues examined are: 1) minerals as a cause of international conflict; 2) minerals as a factor contributing to the military potential of states; and 3) the question of mineral scarcity. In addition to the above issues, the author analyzes two central concepts, "geopolitics" and "strategic minerals" . He concludes that while it does make sense to speak of a "new geopolitics of Minerals" in the post-1973 era, there are nevertheless important ways in which recent strategic-minerals issues resemble those of the earlier period under examination, the interwar years (and, in particular, the 1930s). What does not seem to have changed in respect of strategic minerals since the 1930 s is that access to them continues ultimately to be a function of political processes, and therefore the access question remains what it was, a matter of geopolitical concern. Where there have been differences in the relevance of strategic minerals, these have mainly consisted in: 1) the declining importance of minerals as a major contributory factor in the breakdown of world order; 2) the lessening of what had formerly been a deterministic equation between mineral possession and military potential; and 3) the increased salience in the post-1973 era of the perception that access will be affected by the growing scarcity of minerals, whether due to the actual depletion of reserves or politically induced supply disruptions.

scholarly journals The Irony of Just War

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cian O'Driscoll
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
The Past ◽  
Ethics Of War ◽  
Modern Warfare

AbstractBy claiming that “just war is just war,” critics suggest that just war theory both distracts from and sanitizes the horror of modern warfare by dressing it up in the language of moral principles. However, the phrase can also be taken as a reminder of why we need just war theory in the first place. It is precisely because just war is just war, with all that this implies, that we must think so carefully and so judiciously about it. Of course, one could argue that the rump of just war scholarship over the past decade has been characterized by disinterest regarding the material realities of warfare. But is this still the case? This essay examines a series of benchmark books on the ethics of war published over the past year. All three exemplify an effort to grapple with the hard facts of modern violent conflict, and they all skillfully bring diverse traditions of just war thinking into conversation with one another.

How Violence Breeds Violence: Some Utilitarian Considerations

Politics ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Calhoun
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Long Range ◽  
International Conflict ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Philosophical Writing ◽  
The Future ◽  
Made In

Recent philosophical writing about war has focused upon just war theory, especially how best to construe the ius ad bellum and ius in bello tenets, and whether the distinction between combatants and non-combatants can be made in the modern world. Historically and politically, calls to war have often appealed to utilitarian considerations. In this article, I discuss important long-range consequences rarely mentioned in utilitarian defences of particular decisions to engage states in war. When consequences are weighed fully not only in the short term but with an eye to the future, bearing the destiny of all people in mind, it emerges that belligerent approaches to international conflict resolution will not maximise utility.

scholarly journals The Unfounded Bias Against Autonomous Weapons Systems

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Aron Dombrovszki
Keyword(s):  
Autonomous Vehicles ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
The Past ◽  
Autonomous Weapons ◽  
Good Reputation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Weapons Systems

Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS) have not gained a good reputation in the past. This attitude is odd if we look at the discussion of other – usually highly anticipated – AI-technologies, like autonomous vehicles (AVs); whereby even though these machines evoke very similar ethical issues, philosophers’ attitudes towards them are constructive. In this article, I try to prove that there is an unjust bias against AWS because almost every argument against them is effective against AVs too. I start with the definition of “AWS.” Then, I arrange my arguments by the Just War Theory (JWT), covering jus ad bellum, jus in bello and jus post bellum problems. Meanwhile, I draw attention to similar problems against other AI-technologies outside the JWT framework. Finally, I address an exception, as addressed by Duncan Purves, Ryan Jenkins and Bradley Strawser, who realized the unjustified double standard, and deliberately tried to construct a special argument which rules out only AWS.

Humans, Autonomous Systems, and Killing in War

2018 ◽  
pp. 135-152
Author(s):  
Jai Galliott
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Autonomous Systems ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Human Influence ◽  
The Past ◽  
Autonomous Weapons ◽  
Weapons Systems

Technology has always allowed agents of war to separate themselves from the harm that they or their armed forces inflict with spears, bows and arrows, trebuchets, cannons, firearms, and other modern weaponry, all serving as examples of technologies that have increased the distance between belligerents and supposedly made warfare less sickening than the close-quarters combat of the past. This chapter calls into question the claims of some proponents of a ban moratorium on lethal autonomous weapons systems regarding a responsibility gap and contends that most implications associated with the introduction of autonomous technologies can be resolved by recognizing that autonomy does not mean the elimination of a human influence on the battlefield and advocates for a black-box-type recorder to ensure compliance with just war theory and the laws of war.

Humans, Autonomous Systems, and Killing in War

2021 ◽  
pp. 240-257
Author(s):  
Jai Galliott
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Autonomous Systems ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Human Influence ◽  
The Past ◽  
Autonomous Weapons ◽  
Weapons Systems

Technology has always allowed agents of war to separate themselves from the harm that they or their armed forces inflict with spears, bows and arrows, trebuchets, cannons, firearms, and other modern weaponry, all serving as examples of technologies that have increased the distance between belligerents and supposedly made warfare less sickening than the close-quarters combat of the past. This chapter calls into question the claims of some proponents of a ban moratorium on lethal autonomous weapons systems regarding a responsibility gap and contends that most implications associated with the introduction of autonomous technologies can be resolved by recognizing that autonomy does not mean the elimination of a human influence on the battlefield and advocates for a black-box-type recorder to ensure compliance with just war theory and the laws of war.

Kantian Project of Perpetual Peace in the Context of Modern Ethical and Political Concepts of War

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Arseniy D. Kumankov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Democratic Peace Theory ◽  
Perpetual Peace

The article considers the modern meaning of Kant’s doctrine of war. The author examines the context and content of the key provisions of Kant’s concept of perpetual peace. The author also reviews the ideological affinity between Kant and previous authors who proposed to build alliances of states as a means of preventing wars. It is noted that the French revolution and the wars caused by it, the peace treaty between France and Prussia served as the historical background for the conceptualization of Kant’s project. In the second half of the 20th century, there is a growing attention to Kant’s ethical and political philosophy. Theorists of a wide variety of political and ethical schools, (cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and liberalism) pay attention to Kant’s legacy and relate their own concepts to it. Kant’s idea of war is reconsidered by Michael Doyle, Jürgen Habermas, Ulrich Beck, Mary Kaldor, Brian Orend. Thus, Doyle tracks democratic peace theory back to Kant’s idea of the spread of republicanism. According to democratic peace theory, liberal democracies do not solve conflict among themselves by non-military methods. Habermas, Beck, Kaldor appreciate Kant as a key proponent of cosmopolitanism. For them, Kant’s project is important due to notion of supranational forms of cooperation. They share an understanding that peace will be promoted by an allied authority, which will be “governing without government” and will take responsibility for the functioning of the principles of pacification of international relations. Orend’s proves that Kant should be considered as a proponent of the just war theory. In addition, Orend develops a new area in just war theory – the concept of ius post bellum – and justifies regime change as the goal of just war.

The Possibility To Intervene In Syria Relying On Just War Theory Assumptions

2019 ◽  
pp. 338
Author(s):  
عامر سلامة القرالة ◽  
أيمن صالح البراسنة
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document