Just War Theory And Civilian Casualties

This book addresses the inadequacies of just war theory and international law regarding civilian rights, developing new principles of individual restorative justice.

This book addresses the inadequacies of just war theory and international law regarding civilian rights, developing new principles of individual restorative justice.

The protection of noncombatants from deadly violence is the centrepiece of any account of ethical and legal constraints on war. It was a major achievement of moral progress from early modern times to World War I. Yet it has been under constant attrition since - perhaps never more so than in our time, with its 'new wars', the spectre of weapons of mass destruction, and the global terrorism alert. Civilian Immunity in War, written in collaboration by eleven authors, provides the first comprehensive analysis of all main aspects of this highly topical subject. It considers the arguments for rejection of civilian immunity and the main theories of the grounds and proper scope of this immunity, both deontological (just war theory) and consequentialist. Separate chapters examine the historical development of the idea of civilian immunity, its standing in current international law, and the problem of "collateral damage": of harming civilians without intent, as a side-effect of attacks on military targets. The volume also addresses a string of specific issues. Civilian immunity has undergone much attrition with the development of air warfare and the tendency of military conflict to degenerate into "total" war. On the other hand, modern military technology with its precision guidance missiles and "smart" bombs opens up the possibility of restricting deadly violence to its proper targets and staying clear of civilian life, limb, and property. Another pressing issue is the fate of women in war in light of mass rapes characteristic of some 'new wars'.

The status of the civilian today is that of a calculated casualty, to die immediately or after agonizing suffering. The civilian is also a hostage in the political power struggle, since his continued safety depends upon the decision or even impulse of his leaders. This is true if he is a citizen of a major power, or if he lives elsewhere in unstable social and political environments. Hartigan's book is a unique effort to deal with a mass, but hidden problem: the status of the civilian non-combatant in conditions of armed conflict.Civilian Victims in War fills the gaps in our knowledge of the origins of civilian immunity, so that a full evaluation of the principle's continued worth may be made. The book reviews the concepts of noncombatants, civilian immunity, how it arose from need and intuition and developed into legal practice. The volume focuses on the development of this concept in the Western tradition, not because civilian immunity was absent in Asia or Africa, but because its present formulation owes its origin and elaboration to European custom, practice, and thought.Civilian Victims in War is the first book to deal with the central theme of the innocent non-combatant. Hartigan seeks to pursue this subject in greater depth, and asks the intelligent layman to reconsider his or her options in the face of modern warfare. He touches on many subjects in this work which will spark interest with the general public and policy personnel, those who should recognize themselves as civilians and see this book as their tragic history.

Originally published: The forgotten victim. Chicago: Precedent Pub., 1982.

This book offers a renewed defense of traditional just war theory and considers its application to certain contemporary cases, particularly in the Middle East. The first part of the book addresses and responds to the central theoretical criticisms levelled at traditional just war theory. It offers a detailed defense of civilian immunity, the moral equality of soldiers and the related dichotomy between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, and argues that these principles taken together amount to a morally coherent ethics of war. In this sense this project is traditional (or "orthodox"). In another sense, however, it is highly relevant to the modern world. While the first part of the book defends the just war tradition against its revisionist critics, the second part applies it to an array of timely issues: civil war, economic warfare, excessive harm to civilians, pre-emptive military strikes, and state-sponsored assassination, which require applying just war theory in practice. This book sets out to reaffirm the basic tenets of the traditional ethics of war and to lend them further moral support, subsequently applying them to a variety of practical issues. This book will be of great interest to students of just war theory, ethics, security studies, war and conflict studies, and IR in general.

This book provides a stimulating discussion of, and introduction to, just war theory.

Essay from the year 2018 in the subject Sociology - War and Peace, Military, grade: 8,0, University of Groningen, course: Theories of International Relations, language: English, abstract: Michael Walzer’s "Just and Unjust War" from 1977 is considered a major work in traditional Just War Theory. Many of his assumptions are still the basis for modern warfare considerations. However, the author suggest that Walzer’s concept of jus in bello (the conduct of war) needs further revision, especially to provide an appropriate notion of combatants. In this respect, the theoretical conception of soldiers will be examined on three different levels of analysis. These include the combatants' contradictory responsibilities in jus ad bellum (the justification for war), jus in bello and the debate on the value of a soldier's life. Firstly, the contradictory role of combatants' responsibilities in jus ad bellum and jus in bello by referring to Graham Parsons' criticism on the dualism of Just War Theory will be outlined. Then, the author elaborates on Walzer's claim that all soldiers are morally equal. The following critical analysis of the value of combatants' lives as individual human beings will further demonstrate the need for a revised perception of combatants in modern warfare and point out why Walzer's assumptions are insufficient. While the role of civilians and their need for protection has developed over time and even restrictions for cruel methods of killing were introduced, the status of soldiers has basically remained the same. In this work the author arugues that striving toward more just warfare also requires reconsidering the highly inhumane status of soldiers in traditional approaches.