War: A Human History of Destruction and Death - Essay Sample

Introduction

From the ancient wars that annihilated different ancient civilizations to the wars of the 20th century, and to the ever-present threat of nuclear war, human history has been characterized by war. It is estimated that humans have only experienced 268 entire years of peace in the last three millennia (Hedges). It is also estimated that between 150 million and 1 billion people have died in war throughout human history, with 108 million of them being killed in the 20th century (Hedges). Today, wars and conflicts are happening in different parts of the world, including the Middle East and Africa. Besides, different countries allocate huge amounts of money to the military every year in preparation for a possible war. As such, being a common occurrence, war has been a source of philosophical debates throughout history. For instance, St. Augustine sought to understand how people who exemplified pacifism would also support the use of armed force, such as during the war against heathen barbarians by Christians. In his conclusion, he argued that rulers owe their people protection, and hence war is morally permissible if it is for self-defense (Barua 121). However, he insisted that anger, hatred, greed, or blood lust, factors that have fuelled several wars in history, should not be the motivation for getting into wars. His doctrine still influences political practice and military policy across the world today. In the same light, this paper seeks to discuss instances when war is justifiable.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The Just War Theory

Developed and refined over the years by different philosophers, including St. Augustine, the just war theory holds that there are instances when war is justifiable. While the theory does not disregard the fact that war is terrible, it holds that it is morally permissible at times. Factors that may justify war, as will be discussed below, include undesirable outcomes, preventable atrocities, important responsibilities, among others. The theory is in direct contradiction with pacifism, which holds that war can never be justified. It also differs from realism which states that war and morality are not related. Realism also sees war as a selfish pursuit of national interests such as natural resources, security, and power. This opposition, notwithstanding, the just theory has influenced several international laws on armed conflict (Johnson 453).

The rules of the just theory can be categorized into three. The first category, jus ad bellum, focusses on the morality of going to war. Under this rule, there exists a consensus that wars for self-defense from aggression are morally justified. Aggression often leads to the violation of the fundamental human rights of both individuals and communities. Therefore, preventing such violations through war can be justified (Gassama et al.). However, even just war theorists are divided on the justifiability of nondefensive wars, also known as wars of choice. For instance, while Cicero and Aristotle held that wars of anticipation, preemption, and empire-building could be justified, others saw such wars as a punishment for sins not committed by citizens (Spindler 237). According to the rules of jus ad bellum, however, war is only justifiable if it seeks to achieve a just cause. Also, all the peaceful means of conflict resolution should be exhausted before resorting to war.

The second category, jus in bello, it emphasizes on the need for moral conduct while at war. For instance, this rule holds that civilians should not be attacked directly or intentionally. Prohibited weapons should not be used, and the treatment of prisoners is also captured in this category (Ndi). Recently, a third category, just post bellum, has been included and deals with the morality of settle and reconstruction after the war into the theory (Aziz and Yaaqub). Military disarmament, war crime trials, punishments and compensation, declaration of peace treaties, and rehabilitation are some of the elements of this category.

Elements of a Just War

Looking at the discussion above, it is clear that in some instances, war can be justified. However, for a war to be termed as just, it must meet specific criteria. As mentioned, all peaceful alternatives must be exhausted first. If the use of force is employed before all the non-violent means are explored, the war cannot be considered to be just. Besides, just wars can only be waged to redress a wrong that has been suffered. The cause of the war must also carry sufficient moral weight (Jinman 21). Rectifying an existing wrong is the leading just cause of war. War can also be justly waged to prevent a wrong from happening. For instance, when a country goes to war to defend itself against armed attack, it is seen as a just war. Self-defense in this context entails several instances such as defense from an invasion, assassination of a national figure by an enemy, attack on a nation's religion, or economy, among other causes.

Other than self-defense, a just war can be waged to assist a friendly nation that has been invaded by an enemy. Violations of fundamental human rights are also a just cause of war. When these rights are so severely violated, war may be the only logical response (Dworkin 16). While some quarters hold that punishment for an act of aggression might be a just cause for war, it may lead to the punishment of innocent individuals. As such, it is not a just cause of war (Dannerbaum 1242).

Before going into war, there must be a reasonable chance of success. Else, the deaths and injuries sustained in a hopeless cause would not be morally justifiable. The violence that the warring parties employ must also be proportional to the injury. The weapons used in the war must also discriminate between combatants and non-combatants (Ndi). Where civilians are intentionally targeted, it cannot be considered to be a just war. The ultimate goal of just war should be to re-establish peace. Usually, for a war to be seen as just, the peace achieved should be more preferable than that which had existed before the war, or that which would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

Conclusion

As shown in the paper, war has been a common feature in the history of man. As such, the justifiability of war has been discussed and debated for years. The just war theory is one of the best ways of explaining the justifiability of war. According to the theory, though war is terrible, it can be justified in some instances. For instance, war can be justified in cases of self-defense or severe violation of fundamental human rights. However, the theory highlights rules that must be followed before, during, and after the war. It holds that all the peaceful alternatives must be explored before waging war. Morality should also be exercised during the war, and the violence used should be reasonable. Most importantly, a war can only be termed as just if it seeks to achieve a peace that is more preferable than that which had existed before the war. When these rules are followed, the war can be justified.

Works Cited

Aziz, Farhatul Mustamirrah Mahamad and Mohd Rizal Yaaqub Yaaqub. "Jus Post Bellum: The missing link of Just War Theory: A theoritical examination of what us justice after the war." Geografia-Malaysian Journal of Society and Space 12.8 (2017). <http://ejournals.ukm.my/gmjss/article/view/17696>.

Barua, Ananya. "Re-visiting the Ethics of War in the Philosophy of St. Augustine, Mahatma Gandhi and the Dalai Lama." Prajña Vihara 17.2 (2017): 121. <http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/PrajnaVihara/article/view/2563>.

Dannerbaum, Tom. "Why have we criminalized aggressive war." Yale LJ 126 (2016): 1242. <https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/ylr126&section=31>.

Dworkin, Anthony. "Individual, not collective: Justifying the resort to force against members of non-state armed groups." International Law Studies 93.1 (2017): 16. <http://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1713&context=ils>.

Gassama, Saikou Kawsu, Mansoureh Ebrahimi and Kamaruzaman Yusoff. "Justum Ad Bellum & Israel's 2006 Attack on Lebanon: An Examination of Just War Principles." Asian Social Science 14.8 (2018). <https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fdd7/2a036ee02458d4f33170706da5cba1ef9b15.pdf>.

Hedges, Chris. "'What every person should know about war'." 6 July 2003. The New York Times. 22 May 2020. <https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/books/chapters/what-every-person-should-know-about-war.html>.

Jinman, Kim. "The Justification of WAR Viewed from Ethical Perspectives." International journal of military affairs 1 (2016): 21-32. <https://scholar.dkyobobook.co.kr/searchDetail.laf?barcode=4010024972247>.

Johnson, James Turner. "A practically informed morality of war: Just war, international law, and a changing world order." Ethics & International Affairs 31.4 (2017): 453-465. <https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ethics-and-international-affairs/article/practically-informed-morality-of-war-just-war-international-law-and-a-changing-world-order/5C93023CD4D20C9D0B06E4DC9E85D9A5>.

Ndi, George. "International Regulation of Armed Conflicts:'Jus in Bello'in an Age of Increasingly Asymmetric and Hybrid Warfare." GSTF Journal of Law and Social Sciences 7.1 (2018). <https://pure.hud.ac.uk/en/publications/international-regulation-of-armed-conflicts-jus-in-bello-in-an-ag>.

Spindler, Zsolt. "Just War Theories from Jus Ad Bellum to Jus Post Bellum-Legal Historical and Legal Philosophycal Perspectives." Kazan UL Rev 4 (2019): 237. <https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/kznulr4&section=30>.