Is War Morally Just?

War is basically a contest between belligerent nations or parties primarily through their armed forces in which the ultimate purpose is for one to vanquish the other and impose its own conditions for peace. The truth is that war is dangerous because it involves the use of weapons which are not specified and to what extent such weapons may be used. The experiences of war in the past have thought us lessons that can never be forgotten
because millions of lives have been affected. In the world history, there have never been eight years past without war in some part of the world. Although, some philosophers have argued for the importance of war such as removing the faces that disturbs peace, the need for a government protecting the millions of lives of its citizens, population control and limit of competition for scarce resources. In fact, Frederick 

Nietzsche and Ruskin say that ‘men are nourished in war and wasted at peace’.

Claus Vitz said that war is the continuation of politics by violence, the armed forces being the tool of politicians and they continue their policies through the use of armed warfare. Given these, we then begin to ask ourselves- can war be morally just? The former US president George Bush said- ‘War is a war of armies, a combat of combatants in which the civilian population should be shielded’. Thanks to the Geneva Convention of 1864, the Hague convention of 1899 and 1907 and the four Geneva Red Cross conventions of 1949 that clearly spell out the Laws or war. The law of war consists of limits set by international law within which the force required to overpower the enemy may be used in war situations and the principles governing the individuals in the course of war and armed conflicts are limited. The truth is that war is a dirty game but can be made clean by the law of war.

The Hague conventions govern hostilities in general and particularly the conduct of combat, concept of occupation, the concept of neutrality. It also covers territories i.e. people moving around to secure another place. Also, cities that are not occupied are left untouched and there are laws that protect them.

The Geneva conventions govern protective means for victims of war and prisoners in general and also those caring for the victims of armed forces. These people have laws that govern them; they have light weapons that they use to protect themselves (i.e. Medical Personnel). All states that are signatories to these treaties are bounded by the laws governing the treaties. The State involved in hostility against one or more state is a party to the conflict. Such a state in armed conflict is a belligerent while a state that is not a party to armed conflicts is a neutral state. However, state not parties to international treaty can accept and apply the provisions of the treaty. Every state that is sovereign can accept the treaty.

Under the just war theory, war can only be declared if it satisfies the following conditions:

JUS AD BELLUM – The right to go to war

This has to do with the right to go to war and the issues that must be properly examined before the decision to go to war is made. For a war to be just, it must satisfy the following principles:

(a)      Just cause

          This principle states that war must not solely be for punishing people who have done wrong and that the taking of innocent lives is prohibited. However, there is disagreement over what constitutes just cause. Examples offered are self defense, the defense of others from aggressive attacks, the protection of innocent people from aggressive regimes. Also, only a legitimate State can begin a war with Just cause.

(b) Comparative Justice

          Before a war is declared in a just scenario, there must have been rights and wrongs from both sides (belligerents). However, before the war can be said to be just, the injustice or wrong suffered by a belligerent party must be overwhelming when compared to that suffered by the other party.

(c)       Competent Authority

          Before a war can be just, it must be carried out by a legitimate and sovereign State. A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinction of Justice. The decision to go to war must be made with the proper authority (usually laid down in the state’s constitution) & by a public declaration. Before a nation can be said to be sovereign, it must have control over its territory which comprises of the Land space, the territorial waters of the state and the national airspace of the state.

(d)      Right intention

          Force may only be used as a corrective means for a wrong suffered. Any other intention such as Material gain, egoistic gain, undermines the justice of the war.

(e) Probability of Success

          A declaration of war can only be just if the State can foresee a probability of success in resolving the conflict through war. Violence without likely gain cannot be justified.

(f) Last Resort

          The declaration of war can be just if it is the last resort, following the exhaustion of all plausible alternative means to resolving the conflict especially where a belligerent party is deliberately frustrating all attempts at peaceful settlements.

(g) Proportionality

          This means that the good that can be secured through war must out weight the evil that will most likely occur. The end must justify the means. And in this calculation, the State must take into account not just the costs and benefits to itself, but those that will affect everyone involved in the war (e.g. including enemy causalities).

(h) Modern time

          In modern times, just war is waged in terms of self defense or in defense of another (with sufficient evidence).

JUST IN BELLO – Justice in war

It means justice in war, and has traditionally been concerned with the treatment of the enemy and has the following principles:

(a) Distinction

This has to do with distinguishing combatants and non- combatants. The war should be between combatants and not targeted towards non- combatants or civilians. The prohibited acts include bombing civilians and attacking neutral targets. Also, combatants are not permitted to attack enemy combatants who have surrendered or wounded already or captured or even the dead. This is also a regulation of the ICRC. The law of war protects certain persons and objectives. They are: The military medical services, Military religious personnel or wounded military officers. Also, civilian medical services, civilian religious personnel, wounded, sick and shipwreck, cultural objects, places of worship, public works or installations containing dangerous forces, dams, dykes, nuclear power plants, hospital ship, hospital zones, medical materials, Red Cross officials and objects and demilitarized zones.

(b) Proportionality (e.g. guns & arrow)

          Armed forces must use proportional force i.e. proportional to achieving the end. Combatants must make sure that the harm caused to civilians or civilian property is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a military objective.

(c) Military Necessity

          Military combatants can only attack enemy combatants. Armed forces are not justified in breaking these rules in response to the enemy breaking these rules in response to the enemy breaking these rules. The reason is that the combatants represent a legitimate/sovereign state whose actions and conduct in war are guided by the laws of war.

(d) Fair treatment of prisoners of war:

          Prisoner of war must be treated well, because once captured, they have ceased to be the threat to life and security no matter the previous destruction or harm they might have caused. It is therefore wrong to torture them or otherwise mistreat them.

(e) No Means

          No weapon or means of war that are evil in themselves are permitted. Example include ethnic cleansing, food or water contamination/poisoning, mass rape, forcing enemy combatants to fight against their own side or using weapons whose effects cannot be controlled (e.g. nuclear / biological weapons).   

JUS POST BELLUM- Justice after War

This has to do with applying ethical and moral principles in post conflict era and may include:

(a) Just as the declaration of war was publicly made, so also the declaration of peace must be publicly made.

(b) Justice in Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and Reintegration (DDRR). Disarmament is the collection, documentation, control and disposal of small arms, ammunitions, explosives, light and heavy weapons and also of the civilian population. It also includes the development of responsible arms management programs. Demobilization is the formal and controlled discharge of active combatants from armed forces or other armed groups. The first stage of demobilization may extend from the processing of individual combatant in temporary centers to the massing of troops in camps designated for this purpose. Rehabilitation is a form of transitional assistance to help to cover the basic needs of ex-combatants and their families and can include transitional safety allowances, food, shelter and clothe, shelter, medical services, short term education, training, employment and tools. Reintegration is the process by which ex-combatants acquire civilian status and gain sustainable employment and income. It is a long term, continuous social and economic process of development. Reintegration is essentially a social and economic process with an open time frame, primarily taking place in communities at the local level.

(c) Religious models focused on reconciliation and forgiveness.

(d) Liberal models focused on Human rights and freedom

(e) Reparations, Peace building, and national development.