Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility To ProtectWho Should Intervene?$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

James Pattison

Print publication date: 2010

Print ISBN-13: 9780199561049

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199561049.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 20 August 2019

An Intervener's Conduct: Humanitarian Intervention and Jus in Bello

An Intervener's Conduct: Humanitarian Intervention and Jus in Bello

Chapter:
(p.99) 4 An Intervener's Conduct: Humanitarian Intervention and Jus in Bello
Source:
Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility To Protect
Author(s):

James Pattison

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199561049.003.0004

This chapter defends the moral importance of an intervener's fidelity to the principles to jus in bello (principles of just conduct in war). It begins by outlining the particular principles of ‘external jus in bello’ that an intervener should follow (focusing largely on discrimination and proportionality). It draws on Jeff McMahan's work and the nature of humanitarian intervention to claim that these principles should be highly restrictive. The chapter then asserts two principles of ‘internal jus in bello’. The second section considers more broadly the moral underpinnings of the principles of jus in bello. It claims that consequentialist justifications of these principles cannot fully grasp their moral significance and particularly the difference between doing and allowing. The final section considers the ‘Absolutist Challenge’—that the principles of jus in bello defended are too important and consequently render humanitarian intervention impermissible. After rejecting the doctrine of double effect as a solution to this challenge, the chapter invokes the scalar account of legitimacy to respond to this objection.

Keywords:   absolutism, consequentialism, doctrine of double effect, doing and allowing, humanitarian intervention, Jeff McMahan, just war theory, international humanitarian law, jus in bello, non‐combatant immunity, proportionality

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.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .