The doctrine of just war is one of the oldest debated ideas of morality in history. The tradition is, at its core, a set of guidelines governing the ethics of war, and can be thought of as a moral compass that entities ought to adhere to while considering the act of war and during the course of war. The concept of just war lies between two diametrically opposite notions regarding validity of war - realism, which postulates that there is no place for morality in war and international affairs, and pacifism, whose adherents believe that the application of morality is universal and does not warrant any form of physical violence.
The origins of the concept can be easily thought to have coincided with the inception of warfare.
Mentions of a framework
…show more content…
Philosophers like Walzer generally categorize the just war tradition in two frameworks – the justice of war (jus ad bellum), and conduct during the war (jus in bello). Recent debates have also brought forth the issue of conduct post war (jus post bellum). Frequently cited core principles within jus ad bellum are a just cause for war, it being used as a last resort, the declaration of war by a legitimate authority, having a reasonable chance of success, and proportionality of the means with the end. Similar principles for jus in bello are rejection of prohibited weapons, minimal con-combatant casualties, and fair treatment to …show more content…
This can be particularly attributed to the fact that the thirty years since Walzer’s book was published have seen wars take unconventional forms. We now have conflicts between regular armies of states and ‘rogue forces’, or terrorist organizations not under the control of any state. These wars do not fall under the purview of conventional wars, for which the traditional theory has been developed. Many scholars have also pointed out problems with certain aspects of the theory which are largely independent of the modifications in the practice of war. These revisionist points of view have drastically undermined Walzer’s defence of the classic principles and have led to vigorous debates regarding their implications