Moral Responsibilities and the Conflicting Demands ofJus Post Bellum

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Evans
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Conflict Situation ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Conflicting Demands ◽  
Moral Responsibilities ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
As If

Recently, strong arguments have been offered for the inclusion ofjus post bellumin just war theory. If this addition is indeed justified, it is plain that, due to the variety in types of post-conflict situation, the content ofjus post bellumwill necessarily vary. One instance when it looks as if it should become “extended” in its scope, ranging well beyond (for example) issues of “just peace terms,” is when occupation of a defeated enemy is necessary. In this situation, this article argues that an engagement byjus post bellumwith the morality of post-conflict reconstruction is unavoidable. However, the resulting extension ofjus post bellum's stipulations threatens to generate conflict with another tenet that it would surely wish to endorse with respect to “just occupation,” namely, that sovereignty or self-determination should be restored to the occupied people as soon as is reasonably possible. Hence, the action-guiding objective of the theory could become significantly problematized. The article concludes by considering whether this problem supports the claim that the addition ofjus post bellumto just war theory is actually more problematic than its supporters have realized.

Victory and the Ending of Conflicts

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Patterson
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Just War ◽  
Conflict Situation ◽  
State Agency ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
War Aims ◽  
Just Peace

Scholars and political leaders have recently grown increasingly uncomfortable with terms like victory and ‘unconditional surrender’. One reason for this becomes clear when reconsidering the concept of ‘victory’ in terms of ethics and policy in times of war. The just war tradition emphasizes limits and restraint in the conduct of war but also highlights state agency, the rule of law, and appropriate war aims in its historic tenets of right authority, just cause, and right intention. Indeed, the establishment of order and justice are legitimate war aims. Should we not also consider them exemplars, or markers, of just victory? This chapter discusses debates over how conflicts end that have made ‘victory’ problematic and evaluates how just war principles—including jus post bellum principles—help define a moral post-conflict situation that is not just peace, but may perhaps be called ‘victory’ as well.

Just War, Just Peace and the Jus post Bellum

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger Österdahl
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Just War ◽  
Conflict Situation ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
Law Making

Justice after war is becoming an increasingly pressing concern. The cases of Afghanistan, Iraq and most recently Libya illustrate the importance of as well as the difficulties involved in the efforts to manage the outcome of armed conflict in a constructive way. The jus post bellum is meant to serve as the normative framework for the efforts to stabilise the post-conflict situation. The jus post bellum also has the future peaceful and arguably democratic and human rights respecting development of the post-conflict society in view. This article aims at drawing the conceptual and substantive contours of the jus post bellum and to discuss its relationship with other parts of international law, primarily the other bodies of law making up the law of armed conflict. Depending on one’s perspective the jus post bellum can be claimed not yet to exist, to exist already or irrespective of which to be superfluous as a separate category of law. The article recognises the apparent need for a comprehensive post-conflict law to serve as a bridge between war and stable peace. What way the international community should take in order to arrive at a just and useful normative framework for building peace is far from certain, however.

Restraining the fox: Minimalism in the ethics of war and peace

2021 ◽  
pp. 175508822110347
Author(s):  
Lonneke Peperkamp
Keyword(s):  
Recent Article ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
Alternative Concept ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Guiding Principle ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Ethics Of War ◽  
As If

Peace plays a central role in the ethics of war and peace, but this proves to be an enormous challenge. In a recent article, Elisabeth Forster and Isaac Taylor grapple with this important topic. They argue that certain concepts in just war theory—aggression, legitimacy, and peace—are essentially contested and susceptible to manipulation. Because the rules are interpreted and applied by the very states that wage war, it is as if the fox is asked to guard the chicken coop—a recipe for disaster. To avoid manipulation of the theory and make the goal of peace attainable, they defend “minimalism” in the ethics of war and peace. This paper responds to and builds on their article. After nuancing the analysis, I will argue (a) that their minimalism does not solve the problem since the proposed alternative concept is equally prone to misuse, and (b) that their minimalism is mistargeted. What I propose is to specify and ground the rules of war without raising the standard too high, to disentangle jus ad bellum and jus post bellum and see peace as guiding principle for jus post bellum, and to interpret that in a minimalist way.

scholarly journals Just Peace After Conflict

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Peace And Conflict Studies ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Peace And Justice ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Just Peace

The interplay between peace and justice plays an important role in almost any contemporary conflict. Peace and conflict studies have generally devoted more attention to conflict than to peace. Peace is often described in adjectives, such as negative/positive peace, liberal peace or democratic peace. But what elements make a peace just? Just war theory, peacebuilding, or transitional justice provide different perspectives on the dialectic relation between peace and justice and the methods of establishing peace after conflict. Experiences such as the Colombian peace process show that peace is increasingly judicialized. This volume analyses some of the situational, normative, and relational elements of peace in processes of transition. It explores six core themes: conceptual approaches towards just peace, macro-principles, the nexus to security and stability, protection of persons and public goods, rule of law and economic reform and accountability. It engages with understudied issues, such as the pros and cons of robust UN mandates, the link between environment protection and indigenous peoples, the treatment of illegal settlements, the feasibility of vetting practices or the protection labour rights in post-conflict economies. It argues that just peace requires only not negotiation, agreement and compromise (e.g., moderation), but contextual understandings of law, multiple dimensions of justice and strategies of prevention. It complements the two earlier volumes on the legal contours of jus post bellum, namely Just Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations (2014) and Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles and Practices (2017).

scholarly journals Jus Post Bellum and Just Peace

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Carsten Stahn
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Peace Studies ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Peace And Justice ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
Just Peace

Theories of just peace have remained understudied in international law and peace studies. This chapter introduces major themes of the book and traces the role of peace and justice in just peace discourse. It identifies different approaches towards just peace in three fields: just war theory, peacebuilding practice, and transitional justice approaches. It argues that just peace is more than ‘just a peace’, namely a stable peace with justice, but at the same time highly dependent on relational and discursive dimensions. It requires negotiation, recognition, and implementation and involves concession or compromise from parties. It is not only related to form and process, but connected to different dimensions of justice (retributive, procedural, restorative, and distributive justice) which need to be adjusted to the context of transitions from conflict to peace. Peace must be perceived to be fair and just.

Jus Post Bellum and Foreign Direct Investment: Mapping the Debate

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 590-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric De Brabandere
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Conflict Situation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
The One

Recent situations of States recovering from conflict show that foreign direct investment (FDI) act as a double-edged sword and are characterized by an inherent paradox. Indeed, on the one hand, post-conflict economic reconstruction and development requires and relies on FDI. On the other, rights granted to foreign investors before and during the post-conflict phase may result in a backlash for States recovering from conflict because rights granted to foreign investors have – besides the general tensions caused by such instruments – specific consequences in post-conflict situations due to the economic, security-related, social and demographic specificities of those situations. This article maps and charts the issues raised by FDI protection in post-conflict situations, and thus provides the context for the debate of the interaction between FDI regulation and post-conflict situation.

Jus Post Bellum: The Perspective of a Just-War Theorist

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 571-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
BRIAN OREND
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Regime Change ◽  
Just War ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Body ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Jus Post Bellum

The introduction explains how this essay articulates the issue of ‘justice after war’ from the point of view of just-war theory, and how such a view can and ought to impact upon international law, for instance by inspiring the eventual development of a new treaty, or Geneva Convention, exclusively concerned with issues of postwar justice. In the body of the essay, attention is first given to explaining why just-war theory has traditionally ignored, or even rejected, jus post bellum. Second, argument is made as to why this ignorance and rejection must be overcome, and replaced with information and inclusion. Third, principles drawing on traditional just-war theory are constructed and defended, for jus post bellum in general and for forcible postwar regime change in particular. Finally, several remaining challenges are addressed, seeking to dissolve doubts and strengthen resolve towards working for progress on this vital and topical issue of jus post bellum.

scholarly journals Jus Post Bellum as Definition and Practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 269-283
Author(s):  
Maj Grasten
Keyword(s):  
Field Research ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
General Argument ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
Oriented Approach

This chapter traces the materialization of the rule of law in post-conflict Kosovo to argue that jus post bellum involves contestation and enactment. It suggests that just peace requires negotiations over what is ‘just’ in any specific context and advocates a more general argument for a sociologically informed approach to international law. This includes due attention to the effects of indeterminacy. Drawing on field research on UNMIK and EULEX in Kosovo, the chapter takes a practice- and process-oriented approach in tracing how international policy concerns entered international legal and policy documents, institutions, and practices. It concludes that just peace, and legal form more generally, are political and never objective.

scholarly journals Jus Post Bellum in Just War Theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-136
Author(s):  
Leonid V. Yakushev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Jus Post Bellum
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document