War

Quesiton 1: Was the Iraq war a just war on grounds of anticipatory self-defense

This article demonstrates that the use of military force by the Bush Administration against the regime of Saddam Hussein does not meet the ethical criteria for "preemptive war" set forth in the classical Just War tradition. It considers ethical questions raised by the US-led attack against Iraq as part of the war against global terrorism and argues that the doctrine of preemptive war as applied in the case of Iraq fails crucial ethical tests (John, 352). Could Operation Iraqi Freedom and the global war on terrorista be as pivotal in the history of ethical decisionmaking as the emergence of the nationstate in the Peace of Westphalia in 1648? Do new ethics for the war on terror sever the fourth-century Augustinian roots of Just War theory and the ties to Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica 700 years later? Could the first major war of the 21st century inaugurate a revolution in ethical decisionmaking about warfare, justifying a new set of criteria for preemption of preventive war? Answers to these questions hinge on whether or not the doctrine of preemption matures into new ethical criteria (John, 352). Such criteria would build not on foundations for constraining unavoidable human violence, but stretch toward a vision of an ideal of liberty that justifies the selective killing of some to achieve a greater good of liberty for many others (BBC, 02). This emerging ethic installs the United States as the guardian of a universal, even transcendent, cause of freedom and the ultimate arbiter in that cause. (1)

This article applies the classic categories of Just War tradition to the doctrine of preemption as advanced by the current Administration in the justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom. It does not address the range of other explanations for and postures toward war outside the Just War tradition (Christiane, 448). Specifically, it does not develop details of three other major ways to think about war:

* Realism, the belief that war is essentially a matter of power, self-interest, and necessity, largely making moral analysis irrelevant.

* Holy War, the belief that war is an instrument of divine power and that individuals, groups, or nations apply decisions about violence to coerce or destroy those opposing divine will.

* Pacifism, the belief that all war is intrinsically evil and can never be justified. (2)

The article begins with a summary of the national security debate as expressed in the buildup to war against Iraq, including the views of policy experts and decisionmakers, ethicists and academics (Christiane, 448). Second, it considers Just War ethical frameworks and definitions for two facets of warfare: justice in going to war (jus ad bellum) and justice in the conduct of war (jus in bello), focusing on the six criteria of jus ad bellum (Juan, 254). In its attack on Iraq, the Bush Administration redefined criteria for preemptive and preventive war that do not satisfy the criteria established in the classical Just War tradition and may signal development of an emerging ...