Introduction
War is an intentional armed conflict which occurs only between political communities. The essence of war is about governance and who gets power and resources, thus who has the final say to what goes on in a given territory. As Carl Clausewitz’s puts it war is “an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfil our will”. It is about governance itself.
At the turn of the twenty first century the War on Terror proclaimed by President Bush has produced a series of moral debates in the Western world. The War on Terror raised the following fundamental questions: Can there ever be a just war? Is it permissible to cause harm and death on the ground that it is the side effect of bringing about the best result? Do humanitarian interventions help the people in need? What intentions can there be behind a war?
Political leaders justify wars by appealing to moral frameworks, of which the most influential ones are the “just war” theory and utilitarianism. Michael Walzer’s masterwork Just and Unjust Wars offers some plausible answers to these questions. The “just war” tradition – a set of mutually agreed rules of combat – evolves common values shared between two enemies. Though, in the case where enemies differ greatly in moral beliefs, war conventions are rarely applied. The motivation for two parts to agree to certain conventions can be often mutually benefiting. Historically, “just war” theorists agree that rules of war should be applied to all equally. The aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the USA on 9/11 has brought great attention to the “just war” debate. Despite the international war conventions in place, war crimes continue regardless of the righteousness of the cause.
War is an intentional armed conflict which occurs only between political communities. The essence of war is about governance and who gets power and resources, thus who has the final say to what goes on in a given territory. As Carl Clausewitz’s puts it war is “an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfil our will”. It is about governance itself.
At the turn of the twenty first century the War on Terror proclaimed by President Bush has produced a series of moral debates in the Western world. The War on Terror raised the following fundamental questions: Can there ever be a just war? Is it permissible to cause harm and death on the ground that it is the side effect of bringing about the best result? Do humanitarian interventions help the people in need? What intentions can there be behind a war?
Political leaders justify wars by appealing to moral frameworks, of which the most influential ones are the “just war” theory and utilitarianism. Michael Walzer’s masterwork Just and Unjust Wars offers some plausible answers to these questions. The “just war” tradition – a set of mutually agreed rules of combat – evolves common values shared between two enemies. Though, in the case where enemies differ greatly in moral beliefs, war conventions are rarely applied. The motivation for two parts to agree to certain conventions can be often mutually benefiting. Historically, “just war” theorists agree that rules of war should be applied to all equally. The aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the USA on 9/11 has brought great attention to the “just war” debate. Despite the international war conventions in place, war crimes continue regardless of the righteousness of the cause.
)
)
)
)
