The origins of the just war theory date back to medieval times, with the early Catholic scholars, Augustine and Aquinas, and have continued into modem times, with revisions of the theory by Elshtain and Walzer. So why is a new just war theory needed? The primary problem with the old theories is not the concept of the theory itself, but the questions that prior theories of just war leave unanswered. The just war theory of today continues to be unspecific, and does not deal with contemporary issues, such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; terrorism; and discrimination between combatants and noncombatants in an age of airborne warfare. In the years since September 11 th, and following the 2003 invasion of Iraq sans the support of the United Nations, the concept of the just war has gained prominence in political theory and commentary. In a twofold manner, this thesis deals with the problems left unanswered by current just war theory. First, a new just war theory is proposed, which addresses many of the abovementioned issues that remain unsolved by former theories. Second, this theory is tested through application to the 1991 Persian Gulf War; the decade after the war in which economic sanctions were placed against Iraq; and the three-year period directly after the September 11th attacks, in which the world again entered into conflict with Iraq. The classic just war theory template is used, with the war and the decade-long period following it classified under the traditional jus ad bellum (just cause ),jus in bello (just conduct), and conclusion categories. The post September 11th period is dealt with using the jus ad bellum template, as a precursor to the 2003 Iraq War. This thesis tests the applicability of the new just war theory in the face of modem wartime considerations, such as advanced weapons technology, wartime military conduct, military occupation, and civilian welfare. The new just war theory has been designed to take these issues into consideration, and as such, it accommodates the just limitations of war (what a state can and cannot do in the course of a conflict), while still defining what is and is not a just cause to go to war. There is also new consideration given to the conclusion of the war, and specifically, the rights and responsibilities of both the occupied and the occupying parties, as well as the issue of rebuilding and recovery in the country or countries involved in the conflict. These are considerations that are new to war, and were not considered previous to the past century of conflict. As such, older just war theories do not adequately discuss these responsibilities, and the new theory strives to fill this gap.

In this essay I attempt to examine critically Michael Walzer's just war theory. I begin by pointing out what I take to be philosophically sound about his conception; in particular, his philosophical commitment to a doctrine of human rights as being morally decisive for questions of war. He argues, and I think correctly, that questions of justified wars and justified means within wars are ultimately questions about whether or not human rights are being respected. Unfortunately, Walzer does not always formulate his war principles in light of his fundamental commitment to human rights, and where he fails to do so, supreme emergencies and nuclear deterrence, I argue that his account becomes incoherent. At bottom, Walzer supposes, in these instances, that while individual rights may not be overriden for purely utilitarian reasons, rights may, nevertheless, be overridden for the sake of the political community. What this amounts to, for Walzer, is the following claim: that it is more just to secure the rights of a collection of individuals than it is to secure the rights of one individual. If so, it is morally permissible to suspend some individual rights for the sake of many individual rights. And even though I will hold that this argument is very persuasive, I will suggest that it is mistaken from a moral point of view which takes human rights to be morally conclusive.

Ma thèse de doctorat examine les réactions du Saint-Siège et, à travers une approche comparative, des catholiques français et italiens aux événements survenus au Viêtnam entre la seconde moitié de 1963 et le premier semestre de 1966. Dans cette période une série d'événements attirerait de nouveau l'attention internationale sur le Viêtnam, alors que Paul VI reprenait les travaux du concile Vatican II et les menait à terme. En même temps, le système international et les sociétés de l'Europe occidentale connaissaient des transformations majeures dans leurs structures profondes. Entre 1963 et 1966 le Viêtnam semble avoir été perçu par l'Église comme le théâtre de trois formes différentes de conflit : une guerre de religion (1963, « crise bouddhiste »), une éventuelle troisième guerre mondiale atomique (1964-1965, crise du golfe du Tonkin et intervention armée des États-Unis contre le FLN et le Viêtnam du Nord), une guerre demi-conventionnelle asymétrique qui provoqua une urgence humanitaire (1965-1966, intense escalade). Chacune de ces formes souleva des questions spécifiques et délicates aux yeux de l'Église conciliaire, dont la plupart intéressaient les rapports entre religion et politique. Les questions les plus pressantes concernaient la légitimité de la « guerre juste » à l'âge atomique, la nécessité d'une action concrète de l'Église en faveur de la paix, la primauté de la conscience. Engagée dans une dialectique interne complexe et souvent contradictoire, l'Église semble avoir été divisée entre l'esprit de « l'aggiornamento » de Vatican II, introduit par le magistère de Jean XXIII, et son lien traditionnel avec l'Occident, marqué par le rigide anticommunisme du pontificat de Pie XII des années Cinquante. / My PhD dissertation analyzes the reactions of the Holy See as well as of French and Italian Catholics, through a comparative approach, to the events in Vietnam between the second half of 1963 and the first half of 1966. Within this time frame, a series of events would bring the international attention back on Vietnam, while Paul VI would resume the work of the Second Vatican council and lead it to a conclusion, and while both the international system and Western European societies would go through major transformations in their deep structures. Based on my study, I argue that between 1963 and 1966 Vietnam would have been perceived as the scene of three different forms of conflict in the eyes of the Church. A religious war (1963, ‘Buddhist crisis’), a potential atomic third world war (1964-1965, Gulf of Tonkin crisis and U.S. full military intervention in Vietnam), and an asymmetric, semi-conventional war that would cause a humanitarian emergency (1965-1966, intense escalation of the war). Each of these forms of conflict would raise specific and delicate issues for the conciliar Church, most of which regarding the relationship between religion and politics. The most pressing of these issues would come to be the legitimacy of the “Just War” doctrine in the atomic age, the need for concrete action in favor of peace on behalf of the whole Church, and primacy of conscience amongst the Catholics. Engaged in a complex and often contradictory internal dialectic, the Church appears to have been divided between the spirit of Vatican II’s ‘aggiornamento’, introduced by John XXIII’s magisterium, and the its traditional connection with the West, marked by Pius XII’s rigid anticommunism of the Fifties.

Nesta dissertação, partiu-se da herança da tradição cristã do direito de guerra justa a fim de compreender as modulações experimentadas pelo conceito quando de sua aplicação, na legislação castelhana, aos processos de conquista e colonização das Índias Ocidentais de 1492 a 1573. Tendo em conta a polêmica instaurada com a dúvida acerca da legitimidade da conquista, foram consideradas as posições de alguns dos mais influentes teólogos, juristas, conquistadores e administradores coloniais. Deu-se especial atenção ao pensamento de Francisco de Vitoria e Domingo de Soto, os maiores expoentes da Escola de Salamanca, em razão do debate historiográfico pendente na direção da coadunação entre a doctrina communis apresentada por eles quanto à guerra e as normas de Castela. Observou-se que, durante quase todo o período analisado, o teor da legislação pressupôs a inferioridade dos nativos, bem como uma interpretação teocrático-pontifical das bulas papais de 1493. O rol de causas disparadoras da guerra se mostrou variável, conforme o texto e a circunstância, abarcando imperativos de defesa, castigo, conversão, vingança, domínio e civilização. / In this thesis, the heritage of the Christian tradition of just war was considered in order to understand the modulation experienced by the concept upon its application, in Castilian legislation, to the processes of conquest and colonization of the West Indies from 1492 to 1573. Taking into account the controversy brought with the doubt concerning the legitimacy of the conquest, the positions of some of the most influential theologians, jurists, conquerors and colonial administrators were analyzed. Special attention was provided to the thought of Francisco de Vitoria and Domingo de Soto, the greatest exponents of the School of Salamanca, given the pending historiographical debate toward coadunition between their doctrina communis about war and the rules of Castile. It was observed that, during most of the period studied, the content of the legislation assumed the inferiority of the natives, as well as a theocratic-pontifical interpretation of the papal bulls of 1493. The list of triggering causes of war was variable, according to the text and the circumstance, covering defense, punishment, conversion, revenge, domination and civilization imperatives.

Nossa tese pretende analisar a história do conceito de Honor imperii no reinado de Friedrich I Barbarossa. Para tanto, estudamos as formas de legitimidade real entre os séculos X e XII buscando entender os pesos relativos dos elementos militares e sacros; as especificidades de Friedrich Barbarossa e as transformações estruturais por ele patrocinadas no regnum Teutonicorum. Depois realizamos o estudo quantitativo e o estudo crítico do Honor imperii na documentação produzida pela chancelaria imperial (diplomas e constituições) e na Gesta Friderici de Otto de Freising e Rahewin, principal fonte para o reinado de Friedrich. Também estudamos os significados do termo honra no contexto cultural germânico do século XII. O Honor imperii está ligado à projeção de poder do monarca devido a uma estrutura jurídica (os direitos Romano e Feudal) que o liga ao exercício militar através da doutrina da Guerra Justa e à punição pela quebra das Landfrieden. / Our thesis intends to analyze the history of the Honor imperii concept in Frederick I Barbarossas reign. For this we had to study the ways political legitimacy was obtained between the Tenth and Twelfth centuries seeking to understand the relative weights of military and sacred elements, Frederick Barbarossas singularities and the structural transformations sponsored by him in the regnum Teutonicorum After that we stablished a critical analysis of the Honor imperii in the documentation produced by the imperial Chancellery (charters and constitutions) and in Otto of Freising & Rahewins Gesta Friderici, the most important narrative source for Fredericks reign. We also studied the meanings of honor in the german cultural context of the Twelfth century. The Honor imperii was bound to the monarchs power projection by a proper legal structure (Roman and Feudal Laws) connecting it to the military exercise through the Just War Doctrine and the punishment of breaking the Landfrieden.

Nesta dissertação, partiu-se da herança da tradição cristã do direito de guerra justa a fim de compreender as modulações experimentadas pelo conceito quando de sua aplicação, na legislação castelhana, aos processos de conquista e colonização das Índias Ocidentais de 1492 a 1573. Tendo em conta a polêmica instaurada com a dúvida acerca da legitimidade da conquista, foram consideradas as posições de alguns dos mais influentes teólogos, juristas, conquistadores e administradores coloniais. Deu-se especial atenção ao pensamento de Francisco de Vitoria e Domingo de Soto, os maiores expoentes da Escola de Salamanca, em razão do debate historiográfico pendente na direção da coadunação entre a doctrina communis apresentada por eles quanto à guerra e as normas de Castela. Observou-se que, durante quase todo o período analisado, o teor da legislação pressupôs a inferioridade dos nativos, bem como uma interpretação teocrático-pontifical das bulas papais de 1493. O rol de causas disparadoras da guerra se mostrou variável, conforme o texto e a circunstância, abarcando imperativos de defesa, castigo, conversão, vingança, domínio e civilização. / In this thesis, the heritage of the Christian tradition of just war was considered in order to understand the modulation experienced by the concept upon its application, in Castilian legislation, to the processes of conquest and colonization of the West Indies from 1492 to 1573. Taking into account the controversy brought with the doubt concerning the legitimacy of the conquest, the positions of some of the most influential theologians, jurists, conquerors and colonial administrators were analyzed. Special attention was provided to the thought of Francisco de Vitoria and Domingo de Soto, the greatest exponents of the School of Salamanca, given the pending historiographical debate toward coadunition between their doctrina communis about war and the rules of Castile. It was observed that, during most of the period studied, the content of the legislation assumed the inferiority of the natives, as well as a theocratic-pontifical interpretation of the papal bulls of 1493. The list of triggering causes of war was variable, according to the text and the circumstance, covering defense, punishment, conversion, revenge, domination and civilization imperatives.

Nossa tese pretende analisar a história do conceito de Honor imperii no reinado de Friedrich I Barbarossa. Para tanto, estudamos as formas de legitimidade real entre os séculos X e XII buscando entender os pesos relativos dos elementos militares e sacros; as especificidades de Friedrich Barbarossa e as transformações estruturais por ele patrocinadas no regnum Teutonicorum. Depois realizamos o estudo quantitativo e o estudo crítico do Honor imperii na documentação produzida pela chancelaria imperial (diplomas e constituições) e na Gesta Friderici de Otto de Freising e Rahewin, principal fonte para o reinado de Friedrich. Também estudamos os significados do termo honra no contexto cultural germânico do século XII. O Honor imperii está ligado à projeção de poder do monarca devido a uma estrutura jurídica (os direitos Romano e Feudal) que o liga ao exercício militar através da doutrina da Guerra Justa e à punição pela quebra das Landfrieden. / Our thesis intends to analyze the history of the Honor imperii concept in Frederick I Barbarossas reign. For this we had to study the ways political legitimacy was obtained between the Tenth and Twelfth centuries seeking to understand the relative weights of military and sacred elements, Frederick Barbarossas singularities and the structural transformations sponsored by him in the regnum Teutonicorum After that we stablished a critical analysis of the Honor imperii in the documentation produced by the imperial Chancellery (charters and constitutions) and in Otto of Freising & Rahewins Gesta Friderici, the most important narrative source for Fredericks reign. We also studied the meanings of honor in the german cultural context of the Twelfth century. The Honor imperii was bound to the monarchs power projection by a proper legal structure (Roman and Feudal Laws) connecting it to the military exercise through the Just War Doctrine and the punishment of breaking the Landfrieden.

Le droit international humanitaire fait partie de ses rares branches du droit international qui bénéficient d’une très large adhésion de la part de la Communauté Internationale et de la société civile. Les juridictions internationales, Cour Internationale de Justice et Tribunal Pénal International, ainsi que la doctrine se sont accordés pour voir dans les règles du droit des conflits armés des normes dotées d’une valeur supérieure aux normes ordinaires. Elles ont ainsi été qualifiées d’obligations erga omnes, de principes intransgressibles du droit international et enfin de jus cogens ou normes impératives. Il ne saurait y avoir de plus grande reconnaissance juridique au sein de l’ordre public international à ce jour. En sus, le droit international humanitaire apparaît comme un des éléments fondamentaux d’une morale internationale dans un monde globalisé. Aux côtés des États et du CICR, la société civile s’est emparée de la question de son respect et même de son développement et nombre d’organisations internationales travaillent en ce sens. On ne pourrait ainsi envisager une situation plus propice à son respect que cette unanime consécration juridique et sociale. Pourtant le droit international humanitaire est violé à chaque seconde qui passe. L’objet de cette thèse est de tenter de réfléchir aux facteurs qui expliquent la récurrence de ces violations, qu’ils soient juridiques, anthropologiques ou sociologiques / International humanitarian law is one of the rare domains of international law which receive almost the entire support of the International Community and the Civil Society. Moreover, almost all of the rules that form international humanitarian law are part of international customary law which is compulsory for all, except for persistent objector. International jurisdictions, International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court, as well as doctrine agree that the rules of the law of armed conflict should be considered of superior value compared to ordinary norms. They have been qualified as obligations erga omnes, intransgressible principles of international law and even as jus cogens or imperative law. One cannot think of a better legal acknowledgment. Furthermore, international humanitarian law, at least its essential principles, appears to be one of the fundamental elements of an international moral in a globalized world. With the States and the ICRC, civil society has seized the question of its respect and even its development and many NGO work for it. We couldn’t contemplate a more favorable situation to ensure its respect that this unanimous legal and social recognition. However, the international humanitarian law is infringed every passing second. The aim of this thesis is to try to study the factors which explain the recurrence of infringements, be them legal, anthropological or sociological

Did the terrorist attacks of September 11th change the way the United States ought to contain, confront, or neutralize threats abroad? Or, can the US use the same set of tools and responses in crafting a response to terrorist threats, present and future? These are the questions that underlie the debates, discussions, critiques, and conclusions throughout this work on the US war on terror. After Al Qaeda attacked the US on September 11th 2001, the US launched its war on terror. This global war builds upon the premises of the just war tradition while using the policies of the American neoconservative movement. In essence, the neoconservative movement takes a piecemeal approach to just war theory in order to meet its various goals. This is embodied by politicians from both the left and right that represent this movement, particularly those that run the current American administration. The reason is that the neo-conservative agenda has become a pervasive part of American foreign policy and any discussion of the US execution of the war on terror must necessarily include a discussion of neoconservative practices within its literature review. The question posed with regard to the war on terror as it is currently executed is whether it is just against measures of just war theory and other normative measures. The measurement of the successes and failures of the war on terror is grounded in the overarching framework of just war theory because it represents the prevailing norms and the international community understandings with regard to the conduct of war and armed conflict. The thesis of this work believes that the US, despite its policy of preemption, has been successful in working within just war theory on the short term (tactical) level. However, in the long term (strategic) sense, where the goal is to ferret out the root causes of terrorism, the US has failed in the four years since September 11th.

The focus of this thesis is the normative base of moral liability to defensive harm. Many argue that liability is what makes it morally permissible to seriously injure or kill in self-defense or in the defense of others. Authors such as Jonathan Quong and Jeff McMahan argue that liability not only has important implications for the individual morality of self-defense, but that it plays a major role in the principles of just war conduct. How you determine when someone is liable will have a significant impact on when someone can be harmed. In this paper, I focus on the question of what a person must do to be morally liable to defensive harm. More specifically, I take a close look at Jeff McMahan’s moral responsibility account of liability and argue that it is unsatisfying as an explanation of when and why a person is liable. I then argue that an evidence-based account of liability better captures our moral intuitions surrounding liability. I end by considering an argument put forward by Quong on why we should not support an evidence-based account of liability. / Thesis (Master, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2012-09-30 12:44:32.85