Ethics of War and Ethics in War

Conatus 4 (1):9 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper examines the justification of warfare. The main thesis is that war is very difficult to justify, and justification by invoking “justice” is not the way to succeed it. Justification and justness are very different venues: while the first attempts to explain the nature of war and offer possible schemes of resolution, the second aims to endorse a specific type of warfare as correct and hence allowed – which is the crucial part of “just war theory.” However, “just war theory,” somewhat Manichean in its nature, has very deep flaws. Its final result is criminalization of war, which reduces warfare to police action, and finally implies a very strange proviso that one side has a right to win. All that endangers the distinction between ius ad bellum and ius in bello, and destroys the collective character of warfare. Justification of war is actually quite different – it starts from the definition of war as a kind of conflict which cannot be solved peacefully, but for which there is mutual understanding that it cannot remain unresolved. The aim of war is not justice, but peace, i.e. either a new articulation of peace, or a restoration of the status quo ante. Additionally, unlike police actions, the result of war cannot be known or assumed in advance, giving war its main feature: the lack of control over the future. Control over the future, predictability, is a feature of peace. This might imply that war is a consequence of failed peace, or inability to maintain peace. The explanation of this inability forms the justification of war. Justice is always an important part of it, but justification cannot be reduced to it. The logic contained here refers to ius ad bellum, while ius in bello is relative to various parameters of sensitivity prevalent in a particular time, with the purpose to make warfare more humane and less expensive.

Similar books and articles

Just Information Warfare.Mariarosaria Taddeo - 2016 - Topoi 35 (1):213-224.
Kant's ethics of war and peace.Brian Orend - 2004 - Journal of Military Ethics 3 (2):161-177.
Review essay: Moral and legal restraint in warfare.Martin L. Cook - 1996 - Ethics and International Affairs 10:175–190.
Trust, Predictability and Lasting Peace.Jovan Babić - 2015 - Facta Universitatis, Series: Philosophy, Sociology, Psychology and History 14 (No 1):1 – 14.
Neuroetika i filozofija.Jovan Babic - 2014 - Filozofija I Društvo 25 (2):181-203.
Justice in Cyberwar.Klaus-Gerd Giesen - 2014 - Ethic@ - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 13 (1):27–49.
Order and Affray: Defensive Privileges in Warfare.Toby Handfield & Patrick Emerton - 2009 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 37 (4):382 - 414.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-03-12

Downloads
156 (#112,893)

6 months
60 (#63,740)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jovan Babic
University of Belgrade

References found in this work

Political action: The problem of dirty hands.Michael Walzer - 1973 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 2 (2):160-180.
The ethics of killing in war.Jeff McMahan - 2004 - Ethics 114 (4):693-733.
The ethics of killing in war.Jeff McMahan - 2006 - Philosophia 34 (1):693-733.
The morality of war and the law of war.Jeff McMahan - 2008 - In David Rodin & Henry Shue (eds.), Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford University Press. pp. 19--43.
World war II: Why was this war different?Michael Walzer - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):3-21.

View all 8 references / Add more references