Suchergebnisse
Filter
76 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
World Affairs Online
Paul Kelly: Conflict, War and Revolution: The Problem of Politics in International Political Thought. (London: LSE Press, 2022. Pp. xii, 458.)
In: The review of politics, Band 85, Heft 3, S. 434-436
ISSN: 1748-6858
Heartfelt truths: Towards an existentialist ethics of war
In: Review of international studies: RIS, Band 49, Heft 5, S. 872-884
ISSN: 1469-9044
AbstractJust war theory appears ever more alienated from the practice it ostensibly regulates, warfare. An increasingly abstract and esoteric discourse, it can seem very remote from the mud-and-blood actualities of warfare. This is reflective of a broader disconnect between the study of, on the one hand, the ethics of war, and, on the other, the lived experience of war. Seeking to address this problem, this article asks: How can we recentre just war thinking as a 'lived' theory? It proposes that we can reconnect just war theory to the lived experience of warfare by restoring its historical dialogue with existentialism. It develops this position by reading just war theory through the prism of Albert Camus's writings on political violence. It concludes that Camus's political thoughts provides a set of signposts for the development of a mode of just war theorising that places that the lived experience of warfare at the heart of our ethical thinking about war.
Who is afraid of Tim O'Brien? The existential truth of just war theory
In: Critical studies on security, Band 10, Heft 3, S. 172-183
ISSN: 2162-4909
The Laws of War in International Thought, Pablo Kalmanovitz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020), 208 pp., cloth $95, eBook $94.99
In: Ethics & international affairs, Band 35, Heft 2, S. 316-318
ISSN: 1747-7093
Good Timing: The New Temporal Turn in International Relations Theory
In: International studies review, Band 23, Heft 4, S. 1915-1916
ISSN: 1468-2486
The laws of war in international thought
In: International affairs, Band 97, Heft 3, S. 887-888
ISSN: 1468-2346
International Political Theory 2020: The Worst of Times, the Best of Times
In: Ethics & international affairs, Band 34, Heft 4, S. 547-556
ISSN: 1747-7093
AbstractThe year 2020 has been a very trying one for many people, and universities have not been exempted from the challenges it has posed. There are real concerns that the effects of COVID-19 could lead to a lost generation of academic researchers. At the same time, this has been an unusually fecund period for the field of ethics and international affairs. New ideas regarding the relationship between politics and ethics have come to light, with implications for how we think about what ethics actually comprises. This essay seeks to take stock of this moment by considering the contributions to the field made by four recently published books. It concludes that we are observing a trend toward a more expansive way of thinking about ethics, one that has significant implications for how we approach the task of international relations scholarship.
No substitute for victory?: why just war theorists can't win
In: European journal of international relations, Band 26, Heft 1, S. 187-208
ISSN: 1460-3713
Victory has historically been regarded as the 'telos' or 'very object' of war. As one well-placed commentator has noted, war is all about winning. It is baffling to note, then, that contemporary just war theory, the predominant framework for addressing the moral and legal questions that war raises, makes no allowance for victory. Today's just war theorists shun the language of victory, preferring instead to speak about the 'endings' of warfare. This article investigates why just war theorists have been so reluctant to engage with the idiom of victory. It identifies seven principal objections to accommodating victory in just war theory and subjects them to cross-examination. It concludes that while there are good reasons for regarding the discourse of victory as deeply problematic, these same reasons could (and arguably should) be taken as an argument for embracing rather than ignoring victory within the just war framework. Such a move would not only spare just war theory of the charge of irrelevance by ensuring that it remains connected to the material realities of modern warfare, it would also illuminate the tragic character of just war itself, revealing both its necessity and limitations.
World Affairs Online
America and the Just War Tradition: A History of U.S. Conflicts. Edited by Mark David Hall and J. Daryl Charles
In: A journal of church and state: JCS, Band 62, Heft 1, S. 174-176
ISSN: 2040-4867
How I learned tostartworrying and love the just war tradition
In: Critical studies on security, Band 7, Heft 3, S. 182-190
ISSN: 2162-4909
No substitute for victory? Why just war theorists can't win
In: European journal of international relations, Band 26, Heft 1, S. 187-208
ISSN: 1460-3713
Victory has historically been regarded as the ' telos' or 'very object' of war. As one well-placed commentator has noted, war is all about winning. It is baffling to note, then, that contemporary just war theory, the predominant framework for addressing the moral and legal questions that war raises, makes no allowance for victory. Today's just war theorists shun the language of victory, preferring instead to speak about the 'endings' of warfare. This article investigates why just war theorists have been so reluctant to engage with the idiom of victory. It identifies seven principal objections to accommodating victory in just war theory and subjects them to cross-examination. It concludes that while there are good reasons for regarding the discourse of victory as deeply problematic, these same reasons could (and arguably should) be taken as an argument for embracing rather than ignoring victory within the just war framework. Such a move would not only spare just war theory of the charge of irrelevance by ensuring that it remains connected to the material realities of modern warfare, it would also illuminate the tragic character of just war itself, revealing both its necessity and limitations.
Nobody wins the victory taboo in just war theory
In: The journal of strategic studies, Band 42, Heft 7, S. 901-919
ISSN: 1743-937X
The Irony of Just War
In: Ethics & international affairs, Band 32, Heft 2, S. 227-236
ISSN: 1747-7093
AbstractBy claiming that "just war is just war," critics suggest that just war theory both distracts from and sanitizes the horror of modern warfare by dressing it up in the language of moral principles. However, the phrase can also be taken as a reminder of why we need just war theory in the first place. It is precisely because just war is just war, with all that this implies, that we must think so carefully and so judiciously about it. Of course, one could argue that the rump of just war scholarship over the past decade has been characterized by disinterest regarding the material realities of warfare. But is this still the case? This essay examines a series of benchmark books on the ethics of war published over the past year. All three exemplify an effort to grapple with the hard facts of modern violent conflict, and they all skillfully bring diverse traditions of just war thinking into conversation with one another.