Just War Theory & US Counterterror War (Crawford) ∙ Just War theory deals with the justification for how and why wars are fought ∙ Many argue that realistically there’s no room for morality in international politics ∙ Assumes thatIf you want to learn more check out can forensic psychologists have tattoos
Don't forget about the age old question of the two types of biogenous sediments are calcareous ooze and
We also discuss several other topics like cognitive habitual affective decision making
We also discuss several other topics like som chapter 7
Don't forget about the age old question of What allows a program to choose between alternative actions?
We also discuss several other topics like rutgers ece
war is an enduring feature of world politics ∙ The other side of the conflict argument lies with the pacifists who see no need for any type of conflict no matter the means in which it is executed ∙ Just War theory is at odds with the US counterterror war b/c this a new type of war the relies on preemption o War transformed ▪ Intervene for humanitarian purposes, attempt to order the world, state rulers, heavily armed criminals, and terrorists ∙ Issues with Just War and counterterror o Definition of self defense, defining terrorism, discrimination becomes more difficult, proportional war, what about the other side?, acceptance of conflict Module 11 Overview ∙ Focus on role of military force in the US ∙ Questions to consider: o What is politics? What are the 2 central components of the definition? o How does violence shape political order? Give an example of how the use of coercion by a legitimate authority helps to establish political order. o What is the central dilemma of the use of force to establish political order in domestic politics? How does this same dilemma frame the problem of war and political order in the international order? o How did the US address the central dilemma of the use of force in the international realm after WWII? What role did international orgs play in constraining US military power? o According to Ikenberry, why was the 2003 invasion of Iraq so problematic for the constraint of US military power? o How does realism, idealism, and pacifism each view the role of morality in war? o What are the requirements of Just War theory within its 3 realms (jus ad bellum – just resort to war; jus in bello – just conduct of war; jus post bellum – just aftermath of war)? o For Crawford, what sort of transformations in war have made Just War theory more problematic in the context of terrorism? What perennial and novel concerns does terrorism raise about Just War theory?11.1 Political Violence and Political Order ∙ Politics o Innately social process ???? coordinating lots of people, understanding how people interact with each other o Definition: authoritative allocation of scarce resources ▪ Presence of authority: capacity to direct behavior of others ∙ Can rest on coercion, but authority is also legitimate ???? target of the directive recognizes the right of the leader to enforce such decisions ∙ If we don’t pay taxes, we’ll be thrown in jail ▪ Scarcity that everyone’s demands for something cannot be satisfied ∙ Activates some conflict regarding which groups get their needs met ∙ Politics is about resolving these conflicts ∙ Obama raised tactics on the rich ∙ Political order o Stable patterns or regularity in social behavior induced by authority relationships o Coercion (implementing costs) is often used to maintain order o Authority is essentially accepted coercion o Police officer’s role in society ▪ Enforce the law and make sure violators are punished ▪ Their directives are backed by the ability to physically haul people to jail ▪ Legitimate use of coercive force ▪ Without police, people would have to protect themselves and the social dynamic would change completely o Physical force is sometimes necessary to enforce laws that ensure people behave in a peaceful manner 11.2 Fundamental Dilemma of Politics ∙ The dilemma is the fact that those in authority can use force for their advantage ∙ Political stability rests on coercion, but it risks predation and theft o Must give power to enforce but not to overdo it o Dilemma often solved through democracy ∙ Past situations have required the US to intervene with force (Iraq, Nazi) ???? how do you decrease the military presence after the threat is resolved o Must acknowledge limitations and rules to abide by o Extend the dilemma because the gov’t could just rewrite these rules o US solved this by withdrawing from Europe after WWI, but that left a vacuum for Hitler to gain power o After WWII, the US made the use of continued military power legitimate ???? primarily set up to contain the USSR o When the USSR threat disappeared, the US would no longer have a way to legitimize its military ∙ Ikenberry argued that the US bound its own power through domestic democracy and international organizations o Pres. needs support from Congress and the public ???? constraints on military forceo With NATO, US will often consult its allies o Iraq war in 2003 brought those claims to questions ???? many US allies opposed the war but US went for it regardless o Ikenberry criticized the Bush admin. ???? failed to observe core limits on US military power ???? could unravel the international political order o Issues with ISIS portrays the same problem o When US flexes its military muscle, it makes other countries more insecure 11.3 What is War? ∙ WAR: military contest among competing large organizations o Distinguishes war from small-scale criminal activity o The opposing powers have conflicting views o Imposes significant costs on all parties, regardless of the outcome o Use of physical punishment to secure political concessions or disarm the enemy o Total military victory allows the victor to impose a treaty on the loser o Act of war is a POLITICAL act ▪ War is the continuation of politics by other means ???? a way to a larger political end 11.4 Just War Theory ∙ Ethics of war: can it ever be justified on moral grounds? o Is killing ever ethically permissible? ∙ It’s a reality that states often engage in war ???? under what conditions is war morally defensible? ∙ Is war uncontrollable? ???? states have tried to mitigate it with certain rules ∙ Realism: morality should not be considered in international relations o States exist in an anarchic world system ???? must provide their own security o War should not be dictated by moral constraints ∙ Idealism: morality must be taken into account but may require the use of force to reach just ends ???? promoting freedom, democracy, etc. o Many of the most idealist presidents still used force, but for what they saw as the greater good ∙ Pacifism: killing is never justified ∙ Just War theory ???? Idealism approach o Dates back to the 5th century; in the 20th century, the church and other thinkers reiterated the importance of Just War theory o Since 9/11, Just War theory has been questioned o Argues that war can be justified if requirements are meant o Just initiation, just conduct, and just aftermath o 6 requirements for initiation: ▪ 1. Has a just cause ???? usually self-defense if attacked first (Japan attack on Pearl Harbor)▪ 2. Only when armed conflict is taken as a last resort, after attempts at democracy ▪ 3. Can only be undertaken by a legit authority, a state ▪ 4. Right intention ???? motivated by defense rather than aggression, acquisition of territory, etc. ▪ 5. Reasonable chance of success ???? avoid suicide missions due to huge loss of life ▪ 6. Proportionality: benefits of engaging in war must be proportional to the expected harm of fighting that word o 2 principles of just conduct ▪ 1. Discrimination: states should NOT target civilians ???? not part of the conflict ∙ Violence on noncombatants is not a legitimate just war, only killing soldiers ▪ 2. Proportionality: how much force is morally acceptable? ???? amount of force should be proportional to the ends of the war ∙ Prisoners should not harmed, society should not be destroyed? 11.4 Crawford Reading ∙ Just war theory was never a perfect fit for war despite its long history ∙ Many innovations of war (nukes) have provided serious complications o Terrorism is the latest instance of this ∙ After 9/11 attacks, Bush admin. Offered 2 arguments o War has been transformed, so it can’t be fought the same anymore o Counterterror war against criminals ???? fighting them is a just war ∙ Crawford agrees that war has been changed by non-state actors and attacking noncombatants o Terrorists and states fighting them are compelled to use different tactics o These wars don’t have definitive beginnings or ends o Terrorist attacks happen unexpectedly ???? harder to use just war theory ∙ US still wanted to defend its counterterrorism as just wars o Bush admin used just war theory to justify the attacks on terrorists and their supporters o Preemptive wars in Iraq and Afghan were justified as self-defense o Just conduct ???? emphasis on discrimination; this war was NOT a war against Islam ∙ 12 complications of terrorism and counterterrorism to just war theory (3 categories) o 1. Perennial concerns ▪ Things that have been around forever ▪ What is self defense? ▪ What is a last resort? o 2. Novel concerns: particular to terrorism conflict o 3. Outside concerns: broader than this particular context ∙ Conclusion o Crawford claims that it is very hard to have a just counterterror war o However, we shouldn’t just throw out the idea o Just because it’s hard does NOT mean just war theory is irrelevanto US must take a different approach to emphasize counterterrorism defense, police topics, etc.