Just War and Graduated Discrimination

American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):649-665 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Th is paper investigates the question of legitimate targets in war and the traditional jus in bello principle of discrimination, which is generally interpreted to mean that a bright line must be drawn between combatants and noncombatants, and that only the former may be attacked directly.Michael Walzer and John Rawls have proposed a “supreme emergency exemption” to this principle, which permits the targeting of innocent people in emergencies such as that of Britain in late 1940. Rejecting this, the paper offers as an alternative a principleof “graduated discrimination.” This principle distinguishes three classes: innocents, combatants, and noncombatant belligerents (noncombatants are belligerent if they contribute directly to the enemy’s war effort). It holds that the bright line must still be drawn, but between innocents and belligerents, and that, among the latter, noncombatants may be attacked in severe conditions—even, in supreme emergencies, if their belligerent role is simply providing the regime with a popular mandate.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,347

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
41 (#391,063)

6 months
7 (#440,443)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christopher H. Toner
University of St. Thomas, Minnesota

Citations of this work

The Logical Structure of Just War Theory.Christopher Toner - 2010 - The Journal of Ethics 14 (2):81-102.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references