1. Justice in Action: Just War Theory
Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy Co-Director, Center for Ethics in Science & Technology
University of San Diego
April 5, 2017

2. Overview Three principal areas:
The just conditions for entering into a war.
When is it just to go to war?
The just conditions for conducting a war.
What are we permitted to do in carrying out a war and what is forbidden as unjust?
The just conditions of peace.
What are the conditions of peace that insure the just conclusion of a war?
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

3. Acknowledgement
This presentation is based on the excellent article by Brian D. Orend, "War ,“ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

4. Jus ad bellum: The Just Conditions for Going to War
Just cause
Right intention
Proper authority and public declaration
Last resort
Probability of success
Proportionality
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

5. Just cause
Protection from external attack is the first and foremost—and in the eyes of some, the only--just cause of war; based on the right of self-defense.
Some have maintained the humanitarian intervention is also justified, where we go to war to save the lives of innocent people who are being attacked by an aggressor.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

6. Right intention The war must be pursued for a just cause.
Unacceptable intentions:
Revenge
Political expansion
Land acquisition
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

7. Proper authority and public declaration
Traditionally, only nations have the authority to declare war.
Wars must be publicly declared, not pursued in secret.
Question: Can terrorist groups be said to declare war? If not, is the response to terrorism really war?
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

8. Last resort
If there are other means of achieving the same objectives, such as negotiations or economic blockades, they should be pursued exhaustively first.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

9. Probability of success
The rationale here is clear and simple: war is a great evil, and it is wrong to cause such killing, suffering, and destruction in a futile effort.
Question: what about countries that feel they are resisting evil even when there is little or no chance of success? For example, small European countries being invaded by the Nazis.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

10. Proportionality
Are the possible benefits (especially in terms of a just peace) proportional to the death, suffering, and destruction that the pursuit of the war will bring about?
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

11. Jus in bello: The Just Conditions for Conducting a War
Three principal conditions:
Discrimination
Proportionality
No means that are evil in themselves.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

12. Discrimination
The key requirement here is to discriminate between those who are engaged in harm (soldiers) and those who are not (civilians). This has increasingly become an issue as countries such as the United States have turned to high altitude bombing campaigns that are more likely to put civilians at risk.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

13. Proportionality
Onoe should only use the amount of force that is proportional to the (just) ends being sought. This raises interesting issues in the use of massive air strikes against bin Laden by the United States.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

14. No Means Evil in Themselves
Orend lists a number of means that count as evil in themselves.
“mass rape campaigns;
“genocide or ethnic cleansing;
“torturing captured enemy soldiers; and
“using weapons whose effects cannot be controlled, like chemical or biological agents.”
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

15. Jus post bellum: Creating a Just Peace
Brian Orend gives 5 conditions for a just peace:
Just cause for termination.
Right intention.
Public declaration and legitimate authority.
Discrimination.
Proportionality.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

16. Just cause for termination
Orend: “a reasonable vindication of those rights whose violation grounded the resort to war in the first place.”
Unjust gains from aggression have been eliminated
Victims’ rights reinstated
Formal apology
Acceptance of reasonable punishment
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

17. Right intention
Excludes motives such as revenge Prosecution of war crimes needs to be applied to all, not just the vanquished.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

18. Public declaration and legitimate authority
This requirement is fairly straightforward and uncontroversial.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

19. Discrimination Differentiate between Political and military leaders
Military and civilian populations
Punish the elite responsible for prosecuting the war, not the uninvolved civilians.
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman

20. Proportionality The vanquished do not lose their rights
No ‘witch hunts’
Proportional to reasonable rights vindication
4/5/2017
(c) Lawrence M. Hinman