Suchergebnisse

Principled pluralism? A constructive account of "thin universalism" / James Beard -- Justice and judgment without hindsight : the failed justification of the Iraq War / Christine Stender -- Aristotle, the Army, and Abu Ghraib : torture and the limits of military virtue ethics / J. Joseph Miller -- When the guns fall silent : towards an adequate theory of Jus post bellum / Mark Evans and Christine Stender -- The "failed" state : morality, ideology and global responsibilities / Mark Evans -- When reason sleeps : liberal citizenship in an age of terror / Nazeer Patel -- Long Kesh prison resistance : its influence on the Irish peace process / Claire Delisle

Moral theory and the idea of a just war / Mark Evans -- Preemptive and preventive wars / Neta C. Crawford -- Punitive intervention : enforcing justice or creating conflict? / Anthony F. Lang Jr. -- In humanity's name : democracy and the right to wage war / Mark Evans -- Proportionality : old problems, new ambiguities / Kateri Carmola -- Is there a supreme emergency exemption? / Brian Orend -- Security beyond the state : cosmopolitanism, just war and the human right to peace / Patrick Hayden -- Forgiveness and reconciliation in jus post bellum / Andrew Rigby -- In defence of just war theory / Mark Evans

Theories of jus post bellum have tended to be what I call 'restricted,' in that they have focused on the norms to govern the ending & immediate aftermath of a just war. But the goal of building a just peace, which is the ultimate aim of a just war, often places rather longer-term responsibilities on the shoulders of the victorious just, especially where occupation of the defeated unjust state is required (the scenario on which I concentrate). Given the variety of possible post-conflict situations, then, we should expect there to be various conceptions of jus post bellum, sensitive to the context-specific demands of the 'just peace' objective. This article therefore sets out the case for an 'extended' theory of jus post bellum which is likely to be required in, for example, occupation scenarios. But, having argued that 'restricted' conceptions do not fully lay out what might be reasonably expected of just occupiers, the article then contends that the 'extended' considerations may be in significant tension with another post- bellum requirement, namely, the obligation to restore sovereignty to the occupied state as soon as is reasonably feasible. Various ways of negotiating the tension are discussed & found to be wanting. Given that just war theory in general is supposed to be action-guiding, the concern is that an extended jus post bellum may be unhelpfully action-disorienting. The ostensibly strong case for it is therefore cast into some doubt & some implications for how the obligations of peacebuilding for just occupiers should theorized are considered. Adapted from the source document.