When can a war be considered a 'just war'?

From staff reports

The concept of "just war" is sometimes identified with 4th century Christian theologians, but the principle originated in Greek thought and is reflected in the writings of Plato and Aristotle in the 4th and 5th centuries, B.C., according to Daniel Heimbach, professor of Christian ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Christian theologians such as Augustine (4th-5th century), Thomas Aquinas (13th century) and Martin Luther and John Calvin (16th century) elaborated on the theory.

During the prelude to the 1991 Persian Gulf War, a detailed memo from Heimbach (then working as an advisor to President George H.W. Bush) led to Bush's articulation of just war principles in assembling a coalition of forces to wage war against Iraq.

As the potential for another war with Iraq unfolds, President George W. Bush has again called on just war terminology in seeking support for the conflict.

Because the concept of a just war is an evolving tradition, there is no single authoritative list of just war principles. Some principles accepted in earlier periods (such as rules against ambush and fighting on Sunday) have fallen from favor, while others (such as proportionality) arose more recently.

The outline of just war principles that has become a cornerstone of U.S. policy, first prepared by Heimbach, enumerates the following essentials for going to war:

Just cause - Just causes for war may include the vindication of justice, the restoration of a just international order that has been violated, the protection of innocent human life, or the restoration of basic human rights, but not the imposition of the victor's ideals.

Competent authority - A just war can only be initiated by those who are invested with proper authority and responsibility.

Comparative justice - The moral merit on "our" side must clearly outweigh the moral merit of the other.

Right intention - The purpose of a just war must be limited to obtaining or restoring a just peace. Desires to punish or humiliate the enemy are not adequate intentions.

Last resort - All non-violent alternatives must be exhausted before resorting to war, with lethal force being seen as a tragic necessity when other approaches have failed.

Probability of success - No matter how just the cause, war is only justified if there is a good prospect of success.

Proportionality of expected results - The anticipated good must be greater than the expected costs of the war.

Right spirit - Even when judged to be necessary, war should be regarded as a tragic and regrettable means for obtaining or restoring a just peace.

Heimbach also lists several principles for the conduct of a just war:

Proportionality in the use of force - No action should be taken that generates more harm than good. Deadly force should be used only to the extent needed to obtain a just objective, and no more.

Discrimination - A distinction must be maintained between combatants and non-combatants.

Avoidance of evil means - No matter how just the cause, the use of "evil means" is prohibited. These include actions such as executing prisoners, taking hostages, pillaging, raping women, terrorizing civilians, desecrating holy places and slaughtering non-combatants.

Good faith - As much as possible, the enemy must be treated in good faith to keep open the possibility of reconciliation.

Low-Graphics & Printer Friendly Version of this story
Write a Tar Heel Voices letter

biblical@biblicalrecorder.org

biblical@biblicalrecorder.org

Copyright (c) Biblical Recorder Inc.