Judging the judges: Evaluating challenges to proper authority in just war theory

Journal of Military Ethics 10 (3):133-147 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Abstract The article criticizes the trend of reformulating the traditional just-war criterion of Proper Authority, which was designed to de-legitimize force by non-state actors, into a requirement that decisions to resort to force be multilateral. The article illustrates several shortcomings of the judgment processes of the UN Security Council and General Assembly, the World Court, and states? populations, and argues among other things that reformulating Proper Authority would render other criteria meaningless, especially Just Cause. Finally, the article rebuts the strongest objection to a system in which states judge their own causes for war: the problem of invincible ignorance

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The ethics of war.Patience Coster - 2012 - New York: Rosen Central.
The limits of the war convention.Lionel K. McPherson - 2005 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 31 (2):147-163.
What Is War—And Can a Lone Individual Wage One?Uwe Steinhoff - 2009 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):133-150.
On the ethics of war and terrorism.Uwe Steinhoff - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Plato: The Necessity of War, the Quest for Peace.Henrik Syse - 2002 - Journal of Military Ethics 1 (1):36-44.
Can There Be a Just War?Karsten J. Struhl - 2006 - Radical Philosophy Today 2006:3-25.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-09-25

Downloads
31 (#445,444)

6 months
4 (#320,252)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?