The Ethics of War and Peace
“Utopian in the Right Sense”: The Responsibility to Protect and the Logical Necessity of Reform
In this article, Aidan Hehir writes that claims made about the success of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) echo the pejorative conceptions of “utopianism” as advanced by E. H. Carr and Ken Booth. In order to revive RtoP, Hehir suggests a potential reform of the existing international legal order that meets Carr’s preference for normative thinking that is “utopian in the right sense.”
The Ethics of Insurgency
In this review essay, James Turner Johnson considers two recent books on the ethics of insurgency warfare. He draws on the deep history of moral and legal thought on the subject to forcefully defend many of the standards laid out in the classical just war tradition and enshrined in international law.
“Victory” In Mosul: Fighting Well and the Horrors of “Winning”
Mosul illustrates how victory at all costs is no victory at all, and why contemporary just war thinkers need to re-conceptualize the idea of victory.
Pro Mundo Mori? The Problem of Cosmopolitan Motivation in War
In this feature article, Lior Erez explores the problem of motivating soldiers to fight in cosmopolitan wars. First, he argues that the problem is best framed as a political one rather than an ethical or meta-ethical one. Then, he goes on to suggest how states might close the gap between cosmopolitan demands and soldiers’ motivations, evaluating a range of options.
Introduction: Legitimate Authority, War, and the Ethics of Rebellion
The three articles in this special section all investigate the idea that considerations of “legitimate authority” have a key role in constituting the modern idea of war and in determining the normative status of those who participate in it.
Legitimate Authority and the Ethics of War: A Map of the Terrain
In this article, Jonathan Parry challenges both the traditional conception of the legitimate authority criterion as well as those reductivists who reject it wholesale. Specifically, he offers a qualified defense of the authority requirement on reductivists’ own terms.
Does Who Matter? Legal Authority and the Use of Military Violence
In this article, Pål Wrange demonstrates that in international law there is no consistent, over-arching conception of proper authority. Instead, he concludes, there exists authority to do different things for different purposes, allocated to a variety of actors who base their authority on a multitude of characteristics.
The Perspective of the Rebel: A Gap in the Global Normative Architecture
In this article, Christopher Finlay writes that the failure to take account of what he calls the “Rebel Perspective” constitutes a source of instability within the global normative architecture governing the use of force. Because this architecture is nevertheless valuable, he proposes some suggestions for strengthening it by incorporating the Rebel Perspective.
