Just War Theory And Non State Actors

This book uses an historical body of knowledge, Just War Theory, as the basis for analyzing modern conflicts involving Armed Non-State Actors who employ force against states. As the global community faces the challenges of globalization, terrorism, 24-hour international news coverage, super power collapse, weapons of mass destruction, and failed states, the author explores whether the historic bodies of knowledge governing decision makers during conflict remain relevant. Tracing the evolution of Just War Theory, he analyzes circumstances involving Armed Non-State Actor (ANSA) groups possessing powerful and destructive capabilities and a desire to use them, and pursues answers to the central research question: how does Just War Theory apply in modern scenarios involving ANSA groups who challenge the state and international institution’s monopoly on use of force? The study finds that Just War Theory still has the capacity to accommodate modern day statecraft and application in scenarios involving Armed Non-State Actors. This book will be of great interest to those researching and studying in the fields of political theory, security studies, international relations, war and conflict studies, and public ethics.

In original essays written by both senior scholars as well as rising younger scholars in the field of international ethics, this volume addresses the ethics of war in an era when non-state actors are playing an increasingly prominent role in armed conflict.

A systematic account of the right to resist oppression and of the forms of armed force it can justify.

Violent non-state actors (VNSA) often serve a destabilizing role in nearly every humanitarian and political crisis faced by the international community. As non-state armed groups gain greater access to resources and networks through global interconnectivity, they have come to dominate the terrain of illegal trade in drugs, guns, and humans. Warlords Rising arms those confronting the mounting challenge by delivering an innovative, interdisciplinary framework of analysis designed to improve understanding of non-state adversaries in order to affect their development and performance. Examining the utility of traditional theories of deterrence and warfighting in light of the insight gained through this interdisciplinary approach, the authors elevate the powerful role of environmental shaping in group development, recast deterrence in ecological terms, and lay out a strategy to defeat non-state adversaries if necessary. Whether the goal is preventing, coercing, or conquering, the framework of analysis presented here is designed to be universal, allowing for structured analysis across regions, types, and functions of non-state actors and providing the decision maker and policy maker witha variety of modes and methods of intervention.

How nonstate military strategies overturn traditional perspectives on warfare Since September 11th, 2001, armed nonstate actors have received increased attention and discussion from scholars, policymakers, and the military. Underlying debates about nonstate warfare and how it should be countered is one crucial assumption: that state and nonstate actors fight very differently. In Nonstate Warfare, Stephen Biddle upturns this distinction, arguing that there is actually nothing intrinsic separating state or nonstate military behavior. Through an in-depth look at nonstate military conduct, Biddle shows that many nonstate armies now fight more "conventionally" than many state armies, and that the internal politics of nonstate actors—their institutional maturity and wartime stakes rather than their material weapons or equipment—determines tactics and strategies. Biddle frames nonstate and state methods along a continuum, spanning Fabian-style irregular warfare to Napoleonic-style warfare involving massed armies, and he presents a systematic theory to explain any given nonstate actor’s position on this spectrum. Showing that most warfare for at least a century has kept to the blended middle of the spectrum, Biddle argues that material and tribal culture explanations for nonstate warfare methods do not adequately explain observed patterns of warmaking. Investigating a range of historical examples from Lebanon and Iraq to Somalia, Croatia, and the Vietcong, Biddle demonstrates that viewing state and nonstate warfighting as mutually exclusive can lead to errors in policy and scholarship. A comprehensive account of combat methods and military rationale, Nonstate Warfare offers a new understanding for wartime military behavior.

Provides a multi-perspective study of the international law on self-defence against non-State actors.

This new Handbook offers a comprehensive overview of contemporary extensions and alternatives to the just war tradition in the field of the ethics of war. The modern history of just war has typically assumed the primacy of four particular elements: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, the state actor, and the solider. This book will put these four elements under close scrutiny, and will explore how they fare given the following challenges: • What role do the traditional elements of jus ad bellum and jus in bello—and the constituent principles that follow from this distinction—play in modern warfare? Do they adequately account for a normative theory of war? • What is the role of the state in warfare? Is it or should it be the primary actor in just war theory? • Can a just war be understood simply as a response to territorial aggression between state actors, or should other actions be accommodated under legitimate recourse to armed conflict? • Is the idea of combatant qua state-employed soldier a valid ethical characterization of actors in modern warfare? • What role does the technological backdrop of modern warfare play in understanding and realizing just war theories? Over the course of three key sections, the contributors examine these challenges to the just war tradition in a way that invigorates existing discussions and generates new debate on topical and prospective issues in just war theory. This book will be of great interest to students of just war theory, war and ethics, peace and conflict studies, philosophy and security studies.

Just War scholarship has adapted to contemporary crises and situations. But its adaptation has spurned debate and conversation—a method and means of pushing its thinking forward. Now the Just War tradition risks becoming marginalized. This concern may seem out of place as Just War literature is proliferating, yet this literature remains welded to traditional conceptualizations of Just War. Caron E. Gentry and Amy E. Eckert argue that the tradition needs to be updated to deal with substate actors within the realm of legitimate authority, private military companies, and the questionable moral difference between the use of conventional and nuclear weapons. Additionally, as recent policy makers and scholars have tried to make the Just War criteria legalistic, they have weakened the tradition's ability to draw from and adjust to its contemporaneous setting. The essays in The Future of Just War seek to reorient the tradition around its core concerns of preventing the unjust use of force by states and limiting the harm inflicted on vulnerable populations such as civilian noncombatants. The pursuit of these challenges involves both a reclaiming of traditional Just War principles from those who would push it toward greater permissiveness with respect to war, as well as the application of Just War principles to emerging issues, such as the growing use of robotics in war or the privatization of force. These essays share a commitment to the idea that the tradition is more about a rigorous application of Just War principles than the satisfaction of a checklist of criteria to be met before waging “just” war in the service of national interest.