Just and Unjust War1
Justice discourse has long played an important moral and strategic role in the waging of war. Whether the cause is a just one is determined by the jus ad bellum, the ‘law of war’. Whether the mode of fighting a war is just is determined by the jus in bello, the ‘law in war’. The international system has tried to limit the grounds for initiating hostilities and also the means by which hostilities are initiated and conducted. Both of these efforts to impose limits on the use of force derive at least in part from a concept of fairness. Both deploy normative constraints: first to define limits, and secondly to institutionalise a pull to compliance. This chapter examines the effect of these normative constraints on the belligerence of states. First, historic notions of a just war vs. unjust war are considered, followed by a discussion of the UN Charter's shift from collective self-defence to collective security, and norms and practice under the Geneva Conventions.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.