Syrian civil war started in 2011 was the outcome of the opposition against the President Bashar al-Assad regime. The uprising emerged as a response to the Arab spring movement that lead to regime change in Tunisia and subsequently turned into mass unrest rooted into the discontent with long-term dictatorship and poor economic situation in the country (Manfreda, n.d.). The number of Syrian citizens killed in the civil war reached 140000 since March 2011 (SBS 2014). The European Commission (2014, 2) reports approximately 9.3 million civilians “in need for humanitarian assistance”. The scale of armed rebellion between government and opposition that lead to an increasing number of casualties among civilians did not remain unnoticed by the …show more content…
In the Syrian case only the first part of the theory will be discussed, as it is the only relevant to the current situation. Five main criteria of a just war will be considered:
1. There must be a just cause when resorting to war. This can imply either self-defence actions or be fought in order to provide humanitarian aid to the victims of aggression.
2. War must be waged in accordance with the purpose of establishing justice, expressing the “right intention”.
3. The decision to wage a war must be made by a legitimate authority.
4. “Just war” can be waged only as a last resort, when all other options are insufficient.
5. The reasonable chance of success must be present. Therefore, a “just war” is a winnable war.
6. The good that can be achieved must outweigh deaths and destruction incurred. (International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences Online 2008)
The “just cause criterion is central in the “just war” doctrine. When assessing the sufficient “just cause” reasons the principle of self-defence is undoubtedly tolerable. It can be extended to the reason of assisting aid to victims of oppression or external threat (Moseley n.d.). Following this principle, the mass murder of the Syrian civilians by the government forces that reached nearly 40000 (Aloyo 2014) create a justified cause for the USA and the international community in general. However, in the case of Syria using forces against the aggression as a whole will be an impossible task, as both parties
Just war encourages peace for all people and indicates that even though it isn’t the best solution, it is still required. Everyone has the duty to stop a potentially fatal or unjust attack against someone else, even if it meant using violence against the attacker. Plus, all states have some important rights that must not be violated by either people or states, so when they’re violated or potentially getting violated, that state is entitled to defend itself through whatever means necessary. Also, the state that did the violating lost their privilege to not have their own rights violated through means of violence. Therefore, just war is ethically permissible.
The Just War Theory is a set of criteria that are used to judge whether a war is morally justifiable. It was St Augustine in the third century that formulated the Just War theory, and was formalised 10 centuries later by Thomas Aquinas. There are seven criteria by which a war can be judged to be just. Among the rules are Just Cause – there must be a very good reason for going to war, such as protecting your country from invasion. There should be a formal declaration of war by the legal government. It has to be the last resort and all other alternatives must be exhausted. There must be a reasonable chance of success and great care must be
Another principle of just war is reasonable chance of success, these principle advices nations not to resort to war when they see the results will be futile. For example if a small nation is attacked by a greater nation, it should not opt to go to war since it has no chance of success. Such a nation needs to do nothing and hope to make use of diplomatic resolution in the future.
Historically, there has been consistent disagreement between political philosophers regarding the possibility of a justification of war. Theorists from Grotius to Gandhi have from time immemorial argued about whether violence can ever be sanctioned as a viable recourse for preventing evil. History itself, at various times, seems to offer lessons regarding the complexity of the issue—demonstrating both the human capacity, if unchecked, to cause immense destruction and evil and the inherent destruction that accompanies the common means of using war and violence to rid the world of such evils. However, it is clear that neither
The Syrian Civil War has had a profound effect of all Syrians as well as neighbouring countries and the international community. With more than 11 million homeless Syrians comes consequences beyond what most of the world population has ever experienced or anticipated. Of the displaced, almost 5 million are refugees outside Syria and around 6 million have been displaced inside Syria, with half of all displaced Syrians being children. The main causes of displacement amongst the population is the violence committed by all sides of the war, and which often targets civilians or centres of high civilian activity (such as markets, hospitals, schools, workplaces or high density residential areas). One main group heavily affected by the conflict
According to the Just War theory, just war is separated into two domains. First is the motivation behind entering war, and second is the means used during warfare (Hu, 2). The first judgment signifies justice of war, or jus ad bellum that evaluates the terms of a just versus unjust war. The second signifies justice in war, or jus in bello, which essentially measures whether or not the ends justify the means. The relationship between jus ad bellum and jus in bello are independent of each other, meaning that even if the war passes the judgment of one area, it does not imply justification for the other
than Russia so that there is not an unnecessary onslaught. The fourth subcategory for declaring a just war is to have a right intention. An example of going to war over a right intention would be to correct a suffered wrong, an example of this would be an event happening like Pearl Harbor. A right intention cannot be used for purely a material gain. The next criteria for declaring a just war is to use proportionality. Proportionality is using a similar sized force or attack strategy as your opponent. An example of this would be if the United States and Mexico decided to go to war against each other and there has just been small arms fire at the border. As long as one force is not going “overkill” or dropping nukes on a country that does not
If a war is to be just then the third condition that must be satisfied is that it must be done with the right intentions. If a nation’s real reason for war is only to further its own interests, or to get back at an enemy, then that war is not considered just. With the just war theory, the only true was to have right intentions is for peace to be the desired outcome. The purpose of humanitarian intervention is to save and protect inferior foreign people, showing that the intentions are right.
1. What is a Just War? When is it justifiable for nations to used organized violence against other nations or terrorist groups?
The first portion of the Just War Theory is jus ad bellum, or just initiation of war. This means that in order to justify initiating war, it
The assumption that there are a morally significant achievements that can be made in war seems paramount to just war theory. Taking a life without certainty of of the necessity of doing so undermines the value of that life. Because international relations provides such an ambiguous and subjective subject matter to apply just killing theory to, pacifism seems to be the approach most likely to encourage peace.
The principles of humanitarian law are thought to apply in conflict, and to regulate the conduct of military forces. The rules of warfare aim to safeguard human life and some other fundamental human rights, and to ensure that war is limited in its scope and level of violence. Total war, where neither discrimination nor proportionality serves as mitigating
In this essay’s scope, the Syrian war has been analyzed using the just war theory. The just war theory highlights situations where waging a war can be justifiable and also provides guidelines on how a war should be fought. In as much as the theory recognizes the need to protect innocent human life even when it involves the use of force, the theory puts in place several principles that need to be met to qualify a war as being just. As for the Syrian situation, the bone of contention is whether the proposed US military intervention is justifiable or not. Those who are for a US military intervention observe that the enormity of the massacre in Syria justifies an external intervention. They point out that an intervention would protect further loss of innocent human life. Those against such a move point out some guidelines that have not been met to merit such an intervention as a just
Additionally, there must be a reasonable chance of success and should only be entered into as a last resort.2 Basically, no one can just go out and start a war against another country without appropriate rationale.
This essay intends to define and give an overview of the ‘Principles of War', the philosophers that coined these principles and with examples from the various countries that used and have their own perspectives on the ‘Principles of War'.