Terrorism And The Ethics Of War

Most people strongly condemn terrorism; yet they often fail to say how terrorist acts differ from other acts of violence such as the killing of civilians in war. Stephen Nathanson argues that we cannot have morally credible views about terrorism if we focus on terrorism alone and neglect broader issues about the ethics of war. His book challenges influential views on the ethics of war, including the realist view that morality does not apply to war, and Michael Walzer's defence of attacks on civilians in 'supreme emergency' circumstances. It provides a clear definition of terrorism, an analysis of what makes terrorism morally wrong, and a rule-utilitarian defence of noncombatant immunity, as well as discussions of the Allied bombings of cities in World War II, collateral damage, and the clash between rights theories and utilitarianism. It will interest a wide range of readers in philosophy, political theory, international relations and law.

Steinhoff deals with topical and urgent questions: When is a war just, and when not?, describing and explaining the basic tenets of just war theory and giving a succinct, precise and highly critical account of the present status of the theory and of the most important and controversial current debates surrounding it.

Presenting the reader with provocative articles that critically examine the morality of the war on terrorism as it has evolved over the past eight years, this book consists of articles that effectively address specific aspects of the war on terrorism that are missing or underrepresented in ethical discourse since 9/11

Drawing on examples from the history of warfare from the crusades to the present day, "The ethics of war" explores the limits and possibilities of the moral regulation of war. While resisting the commonly held view that 'war is hell', A.J. Coates focuses on the tensions which exist between war and morality. The argument is conducted from a just war standpoint, though the moral ambiguity and mixed record of that tradition is acknowledge and the dangers which an exaggerated view of the justice or moral worth of war poses are underlined. In the first part, the broad image of the just war is compared with the competing images of realism, militarism and pacifism. In the second part, the moral issues associated both with the decision to go to war and with the manner in which war is conducted are explored. Was the allied decision to go to war in the Gulf premature? were economic sanctions a more effective and morally preferable option? was Britain justified in going to war over the Falklands? did the allied bombing of Germany in the Second World War constitute a war crime? should the IRA's claim to belligerent status be recognised? these questions and more are raised in this important book.

This edited volume addresses the key issues of ethics, war and international relations in the post-9/11 world. There is a lively debate in contemporary international relations concerning the relationship between statist obligations to one’s own political community and cosmopolitan duties to distant others. This volume contributes to this debate by investigating aspects of the ethics of national military and security and intelligence policies in the post-9/11 environment. The discursive transformation of national militaries into ‘forces for good’ became normalized as the Cold War subsided. While the number of humanitarian military interventions and operations rose considerably in the immediate post-Cold War period, the advent of the ‘war on terror’ raised questions about exactly what we mean by ethical behaviour in terms of military and security policies. This volume interrogates this key question via a focus that is both distinctive and illuminating – on national military ethics; femininities, masculinities and difference; and intelligence ethics. The key objectives are to demonstrate the important linkages between areas of international relations that are all too often treated in isolation from one another, and to investigate the growing tension between cosmopolitan and communitarian conceptions of intelligence and security and the use of armed force. This book will be of much interest to students of security studies, ethics, gender studies, intelligence studies, and international relations in general. Mark Phythian is Professor of Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Leicester. He is the author or editor/co-editor of ten books. Annika Bergman-Rosamond is Senior Researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies in Copenhagen.

A new edition of the leading book on this subject that takes a serious account of the most recent developments, with new entries on terrorism and counterterrorism.

We are supposed to wage war against Terrorism - but exactly what we are fighting against in this war, there is nearly no consensus about. And, much worse, nearly nobody cares about this conceptual disaster - the main thing being, whether or not you are taking sides with the good guys. This volume is an analytical attempt to end this disaster. What is Terrorism? Are terrorist acts to be defined exclusively on the basis of the characteristics of the respective actions? Or should we restrict such actions to acts performed by non-state organisations? And, most important, is terrorism already by its very nature to be morally condemned? But, having a clear idea of what Terrorism is, would be only the beginning. Rational moral assessment still needs two further components: The relevant facts; and the relevant values and norms. Now, in a field where systematic disinformation has been even proclaimed to be the official policy, facts are obviously very hard to get at. This volume is mainly interested in Ethics: What's wrong with Terrorism? And what is morally right or morally wrong, respectively, with all the different means of Counter-Terrorism? What are the moral boundaries for waging war agains terrorism? What are the right ways of dealing with terrorists? And what about the alleged anti-terrorism wars on Afghanistan and Iraq? With contributions from Marcelo Dascal, Tomis Kapitan, Daniel Messelken, Seumas Miller, Olaf L. Mueller, Igor Primoratz, Charles P. Webel, Per Bauhn, Rüdiger Bittner, C. A. J. (Tony) Coady, Haig Khatchadourian, Georg Meggle, Peter Simpson, Carolin Emcke, Ralf Groetker, Laurence Lustgarten, Thomas Mertens, Aleksandar Pavkovic, Filimon Peonidis, Janna Thompson, Véronique Zanetti

This collection by leading scholars represents state of the art writings on the ethics of war. Many of the most important and contested controversies in modern war receive comprehensive discussion: the practice of torture, terrorism, assassination and targeted killing, the bombing of civilians in war, humanitarian intervention, and the invasion of Iraq Analytical introduction provides a guide to recent developments in the ethics of war An excellent overview for general readers interested in the current debate and controversies over the ethics of war