Questions regarding responsibilities in war are deeply related to moral discussions. Just war theory is a theory developed in order to categorize in which ways a war can be performed to be as just as possible. The theory was primarily divided into two dimensions: jus ad bellum and jus in bello which focuses on the reasons for going to war and the execution of the war. In recent years a third component to the theory has been discussed which incorporates the responsibilities after a war has been terminated, also known as jus post bellum. In this essay, just war theory is applicable to NATO:s invasion, Operation Unified Protector (OUP), of Libya during the civil war in 2011. In order to do so, a qualitative study has been chosen as methodology based on primary and secondary sources. By analyzing NATO:s actions from a just war perspective, the results present that the invasion was just based on jus ad bellum and jus in bello. The jus post bellum dimension did, in this case study, weaken OUP from a just war perspective as very few post war measures were implemented and sustainable peace did not arise after the operation ended.

Quels rapports entretiennent le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello ? S’agit-il de deux corps de règles indépendants? Ou sont-ils au contraire influencés l’un par l’autre, comme certaines théories le professent de manière récurrente ? Dans la présente thèse, nous avons tenté de répondre à cette question et de clarifier certains aspects fondamentaux des relations entre ces deux corps de règles. Dans la première partie, nous avons procédé à l’étude du principe de l’égalité des belligérants. Ce principe constitue la pierre angulaire de l’application des règles du DIH et proscrit toute invocation du jus contra bellum pour influencer l’application du jus in bello. Cela n’est pas évidemment sans poser de problèmes dans un ordre juridique dont une des règles fondamentales interdit le recours à la force. Ainsi, le principe de l’égalité des belligérants a fait l’objet de théories visant à remettre en cause son caractère absolu. Notre étude a montré qu’il n’en était rien. Le principe de l’égalité des belligérants est de nature coutumière et ne souffre pas d’exception. Ainsi, il incarne, dans sa forme la plus absolue, l’indépendance qui existe entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello. La seconde partie de notre étude a eu pour objet de vérifier si cette indépendance pouvait également caractériser d’autres aspects des relations entre ces deux corps de règles, ou si on contraire, l’étanchéité entre ces deux branches du droit international n’était pas absolue. Ont été analysés, d’une part, les champs d’application ratione materiae et personae de ces corps de règles et, d’autre part, deux notions de fond qui sont considérées comme formant des « ponts » entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello : la nécessité et la proportionnalité. Ici encore, notre analyse confirme que l’indépendance constitue la caractéristique principale des relations entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello.

Modern warfare in general, and targeted killing (TK) in particular, challenge conventional legal paradigms. While some contend that targeted killing is a clear violation of law, others argue that it is the law that should adapt to its modern context. In this thesis, I argue in favor of the latter. I will first explain the two dominant paradigms through which one can interpret TK: law enforcement versus armed conflict, going on to argue that an armed conflict paradigm can be legitimately invoked. In sections IV and V, I examine the rights and status of targeted individuals in modern conflict. I will then explore Jeremy Waldron’s objection to TK—that its potential for abuse outweighs its utility. I conclude by arguing that TK, like all warfare, is justified only by the unacceptability of its alternative, and that the justification of all warfare abides under the same pragmatic presumption.

JORDÃO, Marco Aurélio de Medeiros. A guerra justa no liberalismo político de John Rawls. 2008. 97f. – Dissertação (Mestrado) – Universidade Federal do Ceará, Programa de Pós-graduação em Linguística, Fortaleza (CE), 2008. / Submitted by Gustavo Daher (gdaherufc@hotmail.com) on 2017-10-02T16:05:24Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Márcia Araújo (marcia_m_bezerra@yahoo.com.br) on 2017-10-04T15:42:28Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-10-04T15:42:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 / This work intends to study the concept of just war from an analysis of the political international philosophy of the American philosopher John Rawls. We will take like base the work Law of People (2001), and will retake some basic concepts of too many works, in special A Theory of the Justice (1971) and Political Liberalism (1993). Our objective in this dissertation is to examine two questions: I) How the principle of justice of the international right of Rawls, justify a military intervention? II) Are there cases in which to do a war it is morally legitimize? Our star point is from the general concept of war and will present the thought of four authors paradigmatic what boarded this subject, and they are: Voltaire and his humane vision of bases Illuminists; Kant and his project of perpetual peace; Clausewitz and the war as exceptional case of the politics; Carl Schmitt and the concept of political and binomial friend – enemy. The concepts what we will board in Rawls are: a)the concept of political liberalism and the idea of pluralism and tolerance what they are harnessed to him; b) The conception of traditional liberalism and the difference of his political liberalism; c) The idea of original position, essential notion to understand why the war is just when is only made of “society of the people”. Finally, we will investigate the questions from the recovering that Rawls does from the concept of Jus ad Bellum, what in an immediate translation is it Justice of the war, and therefore, answers which motives of going away to war. And Jus in Bello, whose translation would be a justice in waging war, in other words, which moral behaviour what the soldier must adopt in struggle. / Esse trabalho tem como objetivo estudar o conceito de guerra justa, a partir de uma análise da filosofia política internacional do filósofo americano John Rawls. Tomaremos como base à obra Direito dos Povos (2001), e retomaremos alguns conceitos básicos das demais obras, em especial Uma Teoria da Justiça (1971) e Liberalismo Político (1993). O nosso objetivo nessa dissertação é examinar duas questões, a saber: I) Segundo os princípios de justiça do direito internacional de Rawls, se pode justificar uma intervenção militar? II) Existem casos em que fazer uma guerra é moralmente legitimo? Partiremos do conceito geral de guerra e apresentaremos o pensamento de quatro autores paradigmáticos que abordaram esse tema, são eles: Voltaire e sua visão humanitária de bases Iluministas; Kant e seu projeto de paz perpétua; Clausewitz e a guerra como caso excepcional da política; e Carl Schmitt e o conceito do político e o binômio amigo – inimigo. Os conceitos que abordaremos em Rawls são: a) o de liberalismo político e a idéia de pluralismo e tolerância a eles atrelados; b) A concepção de liberalismo abrangente e o porque esse se diferencia do seu liberalismo político; c) A idéia de posição original, noção essencial para entender como se dará à sociedade dos povos e por que a guerra só é justa quando travada por essa sociedade específica. Finalmente, investigaremos essas perguntas a partir da retomada que Rawls faz de dois conceitos, a saber, Jus ad Bellum, isto é, justiça do guerrear, e do Jus in Bello, que em uma tradução imediata significa justiça no guerrear, ou seja, qual o comportamento moral que o soldado deve adotar em luta.

At a time when the majority of conflicts are non-international, providing arms to the legitimate government or to the opposition forces may influence and even determine the outcome of a civil war. It is, therefore, not surprising that such a provision is subject to a web of rules. This dissertation focuses on those applicable to the EU Member States, which arise from international, European, and domestic law. Sanctions regimes are an integral part of this legal framework. Of primary importance are, naturally, sanctions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter VII, but also the more controversial EU restrictive measures are accounted for. The dissertation aims to clarify to whom EU Member States can legally provide arms and weapons during a civil war. This investigation is justified also in light of the positions adopted by individual EU Member States vis-a-vis the conflicts in Libya, Syria, and Yemen, three conflicts particularly relevant in political and economic terms for the EU and its Member States. By analysing these three case studies and putting the whole legal framework to the test the dissertation sheds light on how EU Member States justify their intervention. The adoption of these specific case studies allows for the assessment of their positions both when they provide arms to parties that intervene on request of the legitimate government and when they provide support to opposition forces. Despite being EU Member States subject to common European rules on arms exports and being all party to the Arms Trade Treaty, their practice is far from uniform. The result of these differences is far-reaching and has an impact not only on the civil war where the arms are provided but also on the EU.

La Gaule protohistorique est traditionnellement vue comme dénuée d'unité, déchirée par de continuelles guerres entre ses peuples. L'entité gauloise décrite par César serait une création de ce dernier en vue d'objectifs politiques bien romains. Néanmoins, les institutions des peuples gaulois sont vues comme un tout cohérent conforme au modèle éduen. L'étude renouvelée des sources. Du "Bellum Gallicum" en particulier, infirme ces vues héritées des siècles passés. La Gaule est en fait une réalité antérieure au descriptif romain, un espace politique cohérent doté de pratiques politiques communes : des assemblées à différents niveaux, dont une commune à la Gaule, la reconnaissance d'un peuple hégémonique, le recours à des coalitions générales dirigées par un chef de guerre. Ces pratiques bien établies à l’époque de César, fournirent en partie le socle du système administratif romain en Gaule. Ainsi l'entité gauloise fut pérennisée par le culte du Confluent qui ignore la tripartition provinciale et obéit en partie à des critères hérités de l'indépendance. Quant aux institutions des peuples, elles sont ici conçues comme autant d'entités indépendantes, révélant, par-delà des convergences, leur diversité. La conquête romaine n'entraîne pas d’immédiat bouleversement institutionnel et les guerres civiles retardent l'application d'une "forma provinciae". Rome s'appuie alors sur des hommes qu'elle maintient au pouvoir et ce n'est qu’en 16-13 av. J.-C. qu'Auguste réalise le découpage provincial et initie la mutation civique en Gaule ce qui pousse à plus d'homogénéité institutionnelle. Mais la diversité perdure, et le droit latin ne met pas fin non plus aux situations héritées du passé. / Protohostoric Gaul is traditionally seen as devoid of unity, torn apart by continuous wars between its peoples. The Gallic entity described by Caesar would be a creation of his own in view of Roman politics goals. Nonetheless, the institutions of Gallic peoples are seen as a coherent whole obeying to the Aeduan model. The renewed study of the sources, particularly the "Bellum Gallicum", invalidates these views inherited from passed centuries. ln fact, Gaul is a reality that precedes the Roman description. It is a coherent political space with common political practices: assemblies at different levels, among which one for Gaul, the recognition of a hegemonic people, the use of general coalitions headed by a war leader. These practices, well established already during Caesar's time, provided for a part of the basis of the Roman administrative system in Gaul. Thus the Gallic entity is perpetuated though the cult at the Confluent which ignored the provincial tripartition and partially obeyed criteria inherited from the independence. As for the peoples' institutions, they are here considered as many of independent entities therefore revealing their diversity in spite of their convergences. The Roman conquest did not entail an immediate institutional upheaval and civil wars delayed the establishment of a "forma provinciae". Rome then relies on men it maintained to power. It is only in 16-13 BC that Augustus completed the provincial cutting and triggered civic mutation in Gaul which leads to more institutional homogeneity. But diversity endured and the Latin right doesn't put an end to situations inherited from the past either.

FundaÃÃo Cearense de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Cientifico e TecnolÃgico / Esse trabalho tem como objetivo estudar o conceito de guerra justa, a partir de uma anÃlise da filosofia polÃtica internacional do filÃsofo americano John Rawls. Tomaremos como base à obra Direito dos Povos (2001), e retomaremos alguns conceitos bÃsicos das demais obras, em especial Uma Teoria da JustiÃa (1971) e Liberalismo PolÃtico (1993). O nosso objetivo nessa dissertaÃÃo à examinar duas questÃes, a saber: I) Segundo os princÃpios de justiÃa do direito internacional de Rawls, se pode justificar uma intervenÃÃo militar? II) Existem casos em que fazer uma guerra à moralmente legitimo? Partiremos do conceito geral de guerra e apresentaremos o pensamento de quatro autores paradigmÃticos que abordaram esse tema, sÃo eles: Voltaire e sua visÃo humanitÃria de bases Iluministas; Kant e seu projeto de paz perpÃtua; Clausewitz e a guerra como caso excepcional da polÃtica; e Carl Schmitt e o conceito do polÃtico e o binÃmio amigo â inimigo. Os conceitos que abordaremos em Rawls sÃo: a) o de liberalismo polÃtico e a idÃia de pluralismo e tolerÃncia a eles atrelados; b) A concepÃÃo de liberalismo abrangente e o porque esse se diferencia do seu liberalismo polÃtico; c) A idÃia de posiÃÃo original, noÃÃo essencial para entender como se darà à sociedade dos povos e por que a guerra sà à justa quando travada por essa sociedade especÃfica. Finalmente, investigaremos essas perguntas a partir da retomada que Rawls faz de dois conceitos, a saber, Jus ad Bellum, isto Ã, justiÃa do guerrear, e do Jus in Bello, que em uma traduÃÃo imediata significa justiÃa no guerrear, ou seja, qual o comportamento moral que o soldado deve adotar em luta. / This work intends to study the concept of just war from an analysis of the political international philosophy of the American philosopher John Rawls. We will take like base the work Law of People (2001), and will retake some basic concepts of too many works, in special A Theory of the Justice (1971) and Political Liberalism (1993). Our objective in this dissertation is to examine two questions: I) How the principle of justice of the international right of Rawls, justify a military intervention? II) Are there cases in which to do a war it is morally legitimize? Our star point is from the general concept of war and will present the thought of four authors paradigmatic what boarded this subject, and they are: Voltaire and his humane vision of bases Illuminists; Kant and his project of perpetual peace; Clausewitz and the war as exceptional case of the politics; Carl Schmitt and the concept of political and binomial friend â enemy. The concepts what we will board in Rawls are: a)the concept of political liberalism and the idea of pluralism and tolerance what they are harnessed to him; b) The conception of traditional liberalism and the difference of his political liberalism; c) The idea of original position, essential notion to understand why the war is just when is only made of âsociety of the peopleâ. Finally, we will investigate the questions from the recovering that Rawls does from the concept of Jus ad Bellum, what in an immediate translation is it Justice of the war, and therefore, answers which motives of going away to war. And Jus in Bello, whose translation would be a justice in waging war, in other words, which moral behaviour what the soldier must adopt in struggle.

This thesis is an attempt at a partial interpretation of Lucan's epic The Civil War (Bellum Civile). It pays special attention to the character of Caesar, who turns out to be at the centre of the poet's narrative and to whom the essential themes presented by the poet are related. The introduction of the work points to the importance of interpreting inconsistencies in the Roman epic (O'Hara), which has become the methodological basis for the submitted literary analyses of Lucan's work. Indeed, modern Lucan research (Henderson, Masters, Roller, O'Hara) shows that the fragmentation and inconsistencies of the individual voices, scenes and events in the epic are the artistic intent of the author and mirror the theme of his work - the deeply divided world in the civil war - in the form of his narrative. The main part of the work is devoted to analysing the passages of the epic in which the character of Caesar has a central position and which prove to be essential in the interpretation of the overall narrative of the work. These analyses show that one of the prominent themes of the epic is the theme of power. As can be seen from Caesar's characterization and his actions in the first five books of the epic, the character of Caesar is shrouded in an image of monstrosity and unstoppability, which, however,...

No description available.

I cambiamenti verificatisi nel sistema internazionale nel corso degli ultimi anni hanno avuto una profonda incidenza sul dibattito teorico circa l'uso della forza e i conflitti armati. In particolare, il cambiamento che si è avuto nel warfare ha portato a concentrare l'attenzione su due aspetti particolari della guerra, ovvero la sua giustificazione morale e la relazione tra uso della forza e diritto internazionale. Inoltre, rispetto al passato, la fase successiva ai conflitti assume una rilevanza sempre maggiore. Scopo di questo lavoro è, quindi, da un lato analizzare la teoria della guerra giusta in relazione al diritto internazionale e alle sfide poste dall'attuale sistema internazionale, evidenziandone gli elementi teorici più problematici e, dall'altro, delineare gli elementi normativi necessari per una teoria della pace giusta. Se, infatti, la tradizione teorica relativa a ius ad bellum e ius in bello è ben consolidata, i problemi teorici ed empirici che si pongono circa lo ius post bellum sono nuovi e ancora senza risposta. Il lavoro cerca quindi di formulare gli elementi normativi che dovrebbero regolare lo ius post bellum affinché vengano soddisfatti i requisiti di giustizia post-conflittuale Infine, alla luce degli elementi teorici emersi sono stati analizzati tre conflitti che ben si prestano a valutare empiricamente la teoria della guerra giusta, ovvero il primo conflitto in Iraq del 1991, l'intervento in Kosovo del 1999 e il secondo conflitto in Iraq del 2003. / The changes occurred in the international system during the last decade had a deep influence on the theoretical debate about use of force and armed conflicts. In particular, changes in warfare focused attention on two different aspects of war its moral justifiability and the relation between the use of force and international law. Furthermore, the post-conflict phase is becoming more and more important. The aim of this work is twofold: on one hand, to analyse the relationship between Just War Theory and international law and the challenges raising from the new international system, underlining the most problematic aspects from a theoretical point of view. On the other hand, the aim is to sketch some normative elements of Just Peace Theory. If jus ad bellum and jus in bello theories are well-established, there are many theoretical and empirical problems related to jus post bellum Consequently, this work tries to advance some normative elements required to regulate jus post bellum in order to satisfy requirements of post-conflict justice. Finally, in the light of the elements arisen in the theoretical part of the work, three conflicts particularly relevant for Just War Theory are taken into account: the 1991 war in Iraq, the 1999 intervention in Kosovo e and the 2003 conflict in Iraq.