Class Notes (807,850)
Canada (492,877)
POL208Y1 (477)
La Haine (38)

just war theory

4 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto St. George
Political Science
La Haine

JUST WAR THEORY Mihael Walzer--compromise between pacism and machiavellian approach some say war is a necessary evil some say all war should be a crime Waltzer says lets nd a balance When is war just? how can it be carried out in an ethical manner? some criticize just war theory bc it gives us illusion that we can ght a just war-have less guilt about war-legitimizes war walzer relies on bible, thomas aquinas, hug grotius--all struggle with balance of natural side of war and control of it wars a judeged by 2 things: why did we go to war? is it justiable? how did we ght the war? were the means justiable? So: JWT divides war into 3 parts jus ad bellum, jus in bello, jus pot bellum ad bellum-why are we going to war in bollo-justic IN WAR-what are we doing post bello-what happens AFTER war? how do we deal with war prisoners criminalsdestruction--->less developed than other 2 Jus Ad Bellum-relies on these principles a just war should have a just cause (UN charter: self-defense)-BUT what counts as self defense, what about prevention?-in defense of a future attack, what about it our ally is being attacked? is that cause for self defense? Last Resort: how do we know that weve reached last resort? when do we give up on negotiiations? Declared publicly by a legitimate authority (no longer as important as in past)--what is a legitimate authority? only just states can ght a just war--since the non legitimate ones dont have a monopoly over the use of force Proportionality-benet that we think well get from the war should outweigh the harm from the war the war is iwnnable-ghting a war that we cannot win is unjust --->these conditions protect status quo actors Jus In Bellum-status is war Hague treaties-early attempts to codify existing norms as laws of war treaty of Geneva (1949)-after horrors of WW2, need to redene our codes of war 2 main principles Discrimination-refers to discriminating between civilians and ghters-protect civilians and targets those participating in the ghting-example-nuclar weapons cannot discriminate so are nucear weapons unjust? what about the threat of using them? what about aerial bombing? can we disciminate? what about the ethics of terrorism and counterterrorism? Proportionality-specic goal in targeting specic area (building
More Less

Related notes for POL208Y1

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.