On Patting Snakes and Sitting under Trees: Just Peace Theory and Prophetic Witness

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-148
Author(s):  
Anthony Rees
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Theoretical Concepts ◽  
Harmonious World ◽  
Prophetic Witness ◽  
Just Peace

Abstract As a reaction against the failures of Just War theory in creating a more harmonious world, recent times have seen the emergence of Just Peace as a corrective to the tendency to use Just War as justification for, rather than a warning against, aggravated conflict. This article considers the contribution of Daniel Philpott to this literature, and argues that theoretical concepts alone will be insufficient for the institution of a Just Peace. In looking for complementary images, the article considers two images from the prophetic corpus to image a Just Peace. Strikingly, both prophetic passages draw on ecological imagery to imagine a world at peace.

Must Just Peace and Just War Be Mutually Exclusive?

Horizons ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-108
Keyword(s):  
Catholic Church ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
The Catholic Church

In April 2016 Pax Christi International and the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace cosponsored the Nonviolence and Just Peace Conference at the Vatican. The conference issued an Appeal calling on the Catholic Church to make nonviolence and just peace central to its purpose, while also urging it to cease teaching or using just war theory. This roundtable consists of four perspectives from Catholic moral theologians who offer just-war responses to this Appeal.

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.

scholarly journals Non-culpable ignorance and Just war theory

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 59-68
Author(s):  
Jovan Babic
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Just Cause ◽  
Culpable Ignorance ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
Contemporary Context

The so called ?non-culpable ignorance? is an instrument to justify participating in a war on a defeated side, on condition that fighters sincerely believe that they are defending a just cause and had some valid reasons to believe in having a chance to win. Within the just war theory this instrument is needed to make both sides prima facie right, otherwise the theory would imply that those who lose are guilty in advance, especially if they are the weaker side. However, in contemporary context of criminalizing war the very concept of war is changing and becoming extremely vague. As wars are more and more ?asymmetric?, just war theory might face serious challenges regarding incorporation of ?non-culpable ignorance? within its scope, as well as difficulties in showing that justice goes with the victory, opening thus the issues of articulation of a just peace.

scholarly journals Decolonisation as Peacemaking

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-29
Author(s):  
Sam Grey
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Indigenous Philosophy ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Just War Tradition ◽  
State Relations ◽  
Just Peace

For decades now, Canada has been seen as a global exemplar of peacemaking and peacekeeping, yet the troubled relationship between its state and the Indigenous peoples within its borders doeslittle to support this image. There is, in fact, a strong case to be made that the ongoing crisis of Indigenous–settler state relations in Canada is best understood as a protracted war; or more succinctly, as a failure to achieve peace following the initial violence of conquest and colonisation. Accordingly, it makes sense to apply just war theory - a doctrine of military ethics - to the issue. Grounded in familiar moral and legal principles, the just war tradition is fully legible to the state, yetits principles also resonate with the Indigenous philosophy of 'decolonisation'. Because it articulatespowerful theories of justice while mapping a theoretical common ground between Indigenouspeoples and the settler state, just war theory emerges as a promising, and thus far neglected, framework for evolving a just peace in the wake of colonial conquest in Canada.

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.

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