Lecture Eight: International Relations
We have to watch the film for the midterm (13 days and another – look at email).
Just War Theory
This is a compromise of Machiavelli (justifies all means). Treats war as something
that just happens and tries to limit the damage as much as possible.
Jus As Bellum questions we ask before we go to war. War is just only when it is
declared by a legitimate authority (only state). Non state actors are not allowed to
declare war by international law. We need to make sure that the benefit brought by
war needs to outweigh the loses and the war must be winnable, therefore just. If it
satisfies all five, then it would be considered a just war.
Jus In Bello (Justice in War): It limits the type of weapons that an army can use to
attack and how injured soldiers should be treated; all these conventions provide a
lot of examples for this. Discrimination is a good thing; this kind of discrimination is
the discrimination against civilians because they are not legitimate targets; only
fighting parties are the legitimate targets. International law is trying to bring
incentive; without uniform it is hard to discriminate. Discrimination brings a lot of
ethical issues; nuclear weapons (cannot discriminate because it produces mass
destruction therefore it is unjust). Proportionality is not a competition in
causalities. What they do look at is the double affect; almost every act we engage in
war always produces two consequences (the act we intended and the unintended
[maybe killing citizens]). This is where the proportionality comes; the good needs
to outweigh the negative consequences. Agent Orange was suppose to create
environmental conditions so Americans can see better through the trees (wanted to
spread chemical oil through the forest so the leaves will fall). This seems like a
legitimate act; but there is a problem with the double effect (people became sick and
huge environmental damage).
Documentary for this example: believes that proportionality should be the guideline
Justin Post Bellum (questions after war): we find out who violated the rules of war
and we put them on trial (justice after war – but they touch on my broader issue like
whose going to pay for the damages). If you lose the war; you have to pay for the
cost of the war. A lot of the accusations are that the winner