Just War Essay

Current events all over the globe raise questions with respect to the propriety and ethics of waging by one country to another. For example, there are some events that force people to think, rationalize, and make a distinction between war in its traditional concept and a war against terrorism, which makes it crucial for a state to obtain information from captured terrorists in a short period of time (Moseley). There are international standards and agreements that set the rules with respect to the waging of war, specifically applied in determining whether the war waged is just or not (Williams, Jr.and Caldwell). For one, there is the Geneva Convention, which deals with the noble objective of protecting Prisoners of War (POW) from various abuses (Moseley). The most popular theory dealing with the ethics, morality, or propriety of waging war is the â€Å"just war† theory (Moseley; Williams, Jr. and Caldwell). This theory refers to justice in war, or moral support for war (Moseley). Just war theory has two aspects: the theoretical and the historical tradition (Moseley; Williams, Jr. and Caldwell). In the former, the justification and reasons behind war are discussed; while in the latter, the focus of attention revolves around the body of rules and agreements entered into by international bodies that are supposed to be applied in times of war (Moseley). The former is also known as jus ad bellum, while the latter is also known as jus in bello (Moseley). Both concepts are not mutually exclusive, and both deal with the morality of conduct and the decision to go into war (Moseley). These concepts have a long history of tradition that built the rules of conduct to be observed during war (Moseley). The concept of jus in bello had been formulated due to decades, or even centuries of experience (Moseley). Thus, it must be deemed applicable, even to modern types of war experienced by the world today, like the war against terrorism. Indeed, the war against terrorism is of a different kind from the other kinds of wars that humankind had seen (Schwartz). However, the differences, such as the alleged pressing need for information, are not enough to abandon standards that are designed to protect the dignity of the human person (Schwartz). One of the criteria of jus in bello is strict proportion of the conduct with the objective desired (Moseley). Applying this criterion to any proposal to wage war against a country or group of people, there would ultimately be the question of whether the use of force, that would necessarily end in the loss of thousands, if not millions of lives, would justify the achievement of various goals, such as freedom, economic independence, or national security (Schwartz). Works Cited Moseley, Alexander. â€Å"Just War Theory. † 2006. 10 Oct. 2007. . Schwartz, Joseph M. â€Å"Misreading Islamist Terrorism: The â€Å"War Against Terrorism† and Just-War Theory. † Metaphilosophy 35(2004): 273-302. Williams, Jr. , Robert E. and Dan Caldwell. â€Å"Jus Post Bellum: Just War Theory and the Principles of Just Peace. † International Studies Perspectives 7(2006): 309-320