Just War Doctrine in an Age of Hyperpower Politics

By Foster, Gregory D. | The Humanist, March-April 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Just War Doctrine in an Age of Hyperpower Politics

Foster, Gregory D., The Humanist

Whatever else may come of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, a clear need focus anew on the ethics of postmodern war has emerged. And considering the regularity with which commentators on the ethics of war invoke just war doctrine as the basis for their views, the questions posed--and, more importantly, the questions not posed--by this classical doctrine warrant greater scrutiny and skepticism now than ever before.

Traditionally, just war doctrine has offered a number of now-familiar considerations for determining the justifiability of resorting to war and the attendant propriety of one's actions in prosecuting war: Is there sufficient cause to justify going to war? Does the use of force represent a last resort after all other reasonable means have been exhausted? Is the use of force backed by the correct intentions? Does the decision to resort to force emanate from proper authority? Is there a reasonable prospect of success in employing force? Is the resort to force and the employment of particular means proportional to the situation at hand, the stakes involved, the ends sought, and the danger posed? Do the means employed discriminate sufficiently between combatants and innocent noncombatants to minimize harm to the latter?

All of these questions have been asked in varying measure regarding Iraq but none has been answered satisfactorily. Rather, this latest round of questioning has only reaffirmed that established just war precepts, rather than being clear guides to action (or inaction), can be vague, malleable, and subject to self-serving manipulation by governments seeking both legitimacy and exculpation for their martial sins.

Established just war doctrine falls especially short, though, in failing to ask a number of crucial questions that now beg to be posed--not simply to accommodate the postmodern media age but no less to face up to the appetites, muscularity, and impatience of a United States that seems intent on fulfilling its imagined mandate as world hyperpower.

Question 1: Are the authorities charged with responsibility for committing forces to war strategically competent? Are they, in other words, possessed of a coherent strategic vision that frames their actions? Is their grasp of the world cosmopolitan and global, rather than provincial and ethnocentric? Do they demonstrate an adequate understanding of the nature and uses of power (as distinct from raw force)? Do they appreciate the extended, frequently hidden, political, economic, social, and psychological consequences of their actions (punitive or otherwise)? Do they target actions at underlying causes that offer hope of permanent resolution, or merely at the visible symptoms of the moment? Are they measured and rational, rather than extravagant, in allocating vital national resources to security?

Not simply must decisions to go to war emanate from the highest authority in the land, such authority must be competent. And not simply must such authority be competent, it must be strategically so. Absent such strategic acumen, absent the intellectual proficiency to judge the larger effects and implications of military action, those at the pinnacle of power lack proper moral standing and authority to commit forces to war legitimately.

Question 2: Does the use of force minimize provocation and escalation? If force is used, will it dampen the level of violence and diminish the propensity of those against whom it is used, as well as others, to engage in further aggression? Or is it likely to have the opposite effect (as it has in Iraq)? Might it, in other words, foment a contagion of terrorism, lead to the proliferation--and eventual use--of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, or feed the radicalization and coalescence of militant, anti-democratic fundamentalist groups and regimes?

One of the most commonplace rationalizations for the use of force--certainly one the Bush administration invoked in attacking Iraq--is that such action is necessary to deter future would-be aggressors.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Just War Doctrine in an Age of Hyperpower Politics


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?