Justice of War and Justice in War
- LAST REVIEWED: 26 August 2020
- LAST MODIFIED: 24 March 2021
- DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199791279-0166
- LAST REVIEWED: 26 August 2020
- LAST MODIFIED: 24 March 2021
- DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199791279-0166
This article deals with what are termed descriptive and normative understandings of war. Descriptive accounts attempt to capture and describe the most salient and essential features of warfare as it is experienced by its participants (and victims). Normative accounts, by contrast, attempt to provide theories about when, if ever, the kind of activities in those descriptive accounts are justified (permissible, excusable, or unavoidable). Normative accounts of warfare also attempt to develop theoretical frameworks within which appropriate and inappropriate means and methods of conducting war can be distinguished. Such justificatory accounts of war and its conduct may be purely political in nature (political “realism”), but are more often framed as moral and ethical arguments about the permissibility of resorting to armed force to resolve conflict and the sorts of methods and tactics which may be permitted when doing so (“just war” theories). This article concludes with recent developments that challenge conventional theories concerning justified war and its proper conduct in the light of new military technologies for waging war, as well as the increased resort to terrorism and forms of “asymmetric” warfare by individuals and organizations not officially representative of existing nation-states.
The Conceptual Origins of Modern Conventional War
War—conventionally understood as the opposite of peace, tranquility, security and stability—represents a form of conflict among nations and peoples in which armed force, or the threat of armed force, is employed by a nation’s political leaders and elites in order to further their nation’s (and perhaps also their allies’) political or economic interests. War, in particular, is thought to represent a form of political conflict between adversaries in which less violent and dramatic modes of conflict resolution—such as diplomacy, negotiation, economic sanctions, and political compromise—have proven ineffective or futile. The final resort to armed force is intended to compel the recalcitrant adversary to comply with the militarily victorious nation’s will or ambitions Clausewitz 1976 provided the classic summative assessment of war in the early 19th-century as precisely such a “continuation of political intercourse, . . . with other means” (p.87). The goal of armed conflict in pursuit of a nation’s political objectives is, he argued, to defeat the enemy’s armies, occupy his cities, and break his will to fight or resist. Orend 2009 maintains that such general descriptive accounts of warfare as a political phenomenon focus primarily (though not exclusively) upon a public, state-centric conception of armed conflict, also known as “conventional” warfare. Raising, training, and equipping armies and navies and using these for political purposes in the manner described above by Clausewitz is an enormous undertaking, feasible only for politically powerful and economically well-resourced states. Likewise, states have long been thought to be the only legitimate agents of such power and authority. It has only been since the 17th century, however, that this conventional public account of warfare has been understood as the sole legitimate description of this activity, as distinguished from various forms of what were once termed “private war.” The latter encompassed other categories of armed conflict between rival principalities, political factions within states, large criminal or even corporate or religious factions, or among ethnic or tribal groups within regions or territories lacking a strong central government. This broader distinction between public and private war was first codified in Gentili 1877, as destructive wars of all of these different kinds raged throughout Europe, ostensibly fueled by religious sectarian concerns for Reformation and Counter-Reformation. Gentili’s distinction was incorporated within Grotius 1625, from whence it was increasingly recognized in international law.
Clausewitz, Karl. Fundamental Principles of War. Translated by Hans W. Gatzke. Washington, DC: Military Services, 1942.
Originally published in 1812. Sometimes mistakenly treated as a preliminary outline for Clausewitz’s mature work (Clausewitz 1976), this summary is a lesson outline for Clausewitz’s pupil, the Prussian crown prince, Friedrich Wilhelm, written just prior to the tutor’s departure from Berlin to join the Russian Army in its fight against Napoleon. Contains useful reflections on military strategy and tactics as practiced during the Napoleonic Wars, and the campaigns of Frederick the Great.
Clausewitz, Karl. On War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.
Originally published 1830. Widely respected as the most thorough and systematic treatment of the origins and proper waging of conventional war ever written. The author’s analysis is deeply indebted to Newtonian mechanics, describing war in terms of opposing vector forces operating on a political or geographical center of gravity, seeking to move people and events into the final configurations desired by the military victors.
Gentili, Alberico. De juri belli, libre tres. Translated by T. E. Holland. Oxford: Clarendon, 1877.
Originally published in 1589. Pioneering analysis by one of the founding figures of international law, introducing categories and distinctions of conflict that established many of the fundamental principles of warfare and the law of armed conflict as understood today.
Grotius, Hugo. De iure belli ac pacis libri tres. Paris: Buon, 1625.
Sets forth several conditions for justification of use of force, well beyond those found in earlier discussions in medieval philosophy. Outlines laws pertaining to conduct of hostilities, including differentiating between combatants and classes of noncombatants who should properly be immune from attack; mandating proper treatment of prisoners of war; and for the first time proscribing use of weapons (even against otherwise-legitimate targets) whose destructive powers are wholly indiscriminate, or can be shown to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.
Hanson, Victor Davis. Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise of Western Power. New York: Doubleday, 2001.
Respected classicist and military historian describes key military conflicts from Salamis to Vietnam, arguing that the rise to dominance of European militaries has as much to do with their common grounding in the shared values of Western culture (democracy, capitalism, individualism, and political freedom) than with accidents of environment or geography.
Kagan, Donald. On the Origins of War. New York: Anchor, 1995.
An exhaustive historical account of the origins and causes of conflict from the Peloponnesian War to the Cuban missile crisis by a venerable classicist and respected American intellectual.
Keegan, John. A History of Warfare. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993.
An authoritative survey of wars and methods of warfare, from the Neolithic era to the Battle of Waterloo, by a world-renowned military historian.
Orend, Brian. On War: A Dialogue. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2009.
Lively, thoughtful, and unpretentious treatments of the nature, origin, and causes of war, together with an account of the rise of philosophical and moral reflection on how to restrain it.
Parker, Geoffrey, ed. The Cambridge History of Warfare. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Contributing authors examine battles, strategy, tactics, and military technologies from Marathon to the First Gulf War, tracing the rise to military dominance of Western culture over two millennia.
Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Translated by Samuel B. Griffith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963.
Arguably the most influential and widely studied of the “Seven Military Classics” of ancient China, attributed by tradition to a military general and Confucian sage (Sun Wu; c. 512 BCE), although many scholars challenge this view. Underlying thesis is that war itself is to be avoided if possible, or else fought expeditiously in the shortest time and with the least use of force possible. Effective military strategy involves applying these principles to the unanticipated and ever-changing nature of conflict.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login.
- 1812, War of
- Aerial Bombardment, Ethics of
- Afghanistan, Wars in
- Africa, Gunpowder and Colonial Campaigns in
- African Wars of Independence
- Air Transport
- Allenby, Edmund
- All-Volunteer Army, Post-Vietnam Through 2016
- American Colonial Wars
- American Indian Wars
- American War of Independence
- Animals and the Military
- Antietam, Battle of
- Arab-Israeli Wars, 1948-Present
- Arctic Warfare
- Armed Forces of the Ottoman Empire, 1683–1918
- Armored War
- Arms Control and Disarmament
- Army, Roman
- Artists and War Art
- Australia from the Colonial Era to the Present
- Austrian Succession, War of the
- Austro-Hungarian Armed Forces
- Balkan Liberation, 1878–1913, Wars of
- Battle of Route Coloniale 4, 1950: France’s first devastat...
- Battle of Salamis: 480 BC
- Boer Wars
- Bonaparte, Napoleon
- Brazilian Armed Forces
- Britain and the Blitz
- British Armed Forces, from the Glorious Revolution to Pres...
- British Army in World War II
- British Army of the Rhine, The
- British-India Armies from 1740 to 1849
- Canada from World War I to the Present
- Canada through World War I
- Cavalry since 1500
- China's Modern Wars, 1911-1979
- Chinese Civil War, 1945-1949
- Churchill, John, 1st Duke of Marlborough
- Churchill, Winston
- Clausewitz, Carl von
- Coalition and Alliance War
- Cold War, 1945-1990
- Communications, French Revolution to Present
- Conquest of Mexico and Peru
- Cornwallis, Charles
- Counterinsurgency in the Modern World
- Cromwell, Oliver
- Crusades, The
- Defense Industries
- Dien Bien Phu, Battle of
- Dominion Armies in World War II
- Eisenhower, Dwight
- European Wars, Mid-Nineteenth-Century
- Finland in World War II
- Frederick the Great
- French Armies, Early Modern
- French Military, 1919-1940
- French Revolutionary Wars, The
- Gender Issues
- German Air Forces
- German Army, 1871–1945
- German Sea Power, 1848-1918
- German Unification, Wars of
- Germany's Eastern Front in 1941
- Grant, Ulysses S.
- Guerrilla Warfare, Pre-20th-Century
- Hippolyte, Comte de Guibert, Jacques Antoine
- Hundred Days Campaign of 1918
- Hundred Years War
- Hungary, Warfare in Medieval and Early Modern
- Imperial China, War in
- India 'Mutiny' and 'Revolution,' 1857-1858
- Indian Army in World War I
- Indian Warfare, Ancient
- India-Pakistan Wars
- Indochina Wars, 1946-1975
- Information Warfare
- Intelligence, Military
- International Efforts to Control War
- Iraq Wars, 1980s-Present
- Irish Civil War, 1922–1923
- Irish Revolution, 1911-1923, The
- Italian Armed Forces in the Modern Age
- Italian Campaign, World War I
- Japanese Army in the World War II Era, The Imperial
- Japanese Navy
- Jomini, Antoine-Henri
- Justice, Military, the Anglo-American Tradition
- Justice of War and Justice in War
- Khan, Genghis
- Kursk, Battle of
- Learning and Adapting: The British Army from Somme to the ...
- Lee, Robert E.
- Lepizig, Battle of
- Literature and Drama, War in
- Loos, Battle of
- Louis XIV, Wars of
- Low-Intensity Operations
- Manzikert, Battle of
- Medicine, Military
- Medieval Japan, 900-1600
- Meuse-Argonne Offensive
- Mexico and the United States, 1836–1848, Wars of
- Midway, Battle of
- Military Officers, United States
- Military Revolutions
- Modern Piracy
- Mongol Wars
- Montgomery, Bernard Law
- Music and War
- Napoleonic Wars, The
- Napoleonic Wars, War and Memory in the
- Navy, British
- Nelson, Horatio
- New Zealand
- Nimitz, Chester
- Nuclear Culture
- Nuclear Weapons
- Occupations and Military Government
- Operational Art
- Ottoman Navy
- Passchaendale, Battle of
- Patton, George
- Peninsular War
- Polish Armed Forces, 1918-present
- Political Purges in the 20th Century
- Poltava, Battle of
- Popular Culture and Modern War
- Psychiatric Casualties
- Race in the US Military
- Red Cross
- Religio-Military Orders
- Roman Empire
- Roses, Wars of the
- Russian and Soviet Armed Forces
- Russian Campaign of 1812
- Russian Civil War, 1918-1921
- Russian Military History
- Russian Military History, 1762-1825
- Russo-Japanese War
- Safavid Army
- Sailing Warships
- Science and Technology in War
- Science Fiction, Military
- Semi-Military and Paramilitary Organizations
- Seven Years' War
- Seven Years' War in North America, The
- Sino-Japanese Wars, 1895-1945
- South West Pacific, 1941–1945, Campaigns in
- Southeast Asian Military History, Colonial
- Southeast Asian Military History, Precolonial
- Space and War
- Spain since the Reconquista
- Spanish Civil War
- Special Operations Forces
- Special Operations Forces
- Stalingrad, Battle of
- Steppe Nomadic Warfare
- Submarine Warfare
- Swedish Armed Forces
- Tet Offensive
- The Allied Bombardment of Occupied Europe During World War...
- The United States and the Middle East, 1945-2001
- Thirty Years War, 1618–1648
- Trench Warfare
- United States Marine Corps, The
- Urban Warfare
- US Air Force
- US Air Power
- US Army
- Verdun, Battle of
- Victorian Warfare, 1837–1902
- Vietnam War
- Vietnam War in Hollywood Feature Films
- War, Chemical and Biological
- War Correspondents
- War, Culture of
- War of the Spanish Succession, 1701–1714
- Warfare, Precolonial, in Africa
- Warships, Steam
- Women in the Military
- World War I in Film
- World War I Origins
- World War I: The Western Front
- World War II and the Far East
- World War II in Film
- World War II in the Mediterranean and Middle East
- World War II, Indian Army in
- World War II Origins
- World War II, Russo-German War
- Yugoslavian Civil War, 1991-1999
- Zhukov, Georgii
- Zulu Wars