The Principle of Justice in War and Peace and Principle

The Enduring Principle of Justice in War and Peace

The quest for justice, particularly in the extreme circumstances of war and the delicate balance of peace, stands as one of humanity's most profound and persistent philosophical endeavors. This article explores how the principle of justice has been conceptualized and applied across the spectrum of human conflict and its aftermath, drawing from the rich tapestry of thought found in the Great Books of the Western World. From ancient Greek city-states to modern international relations, the fundamental duty to act justly, even amidst the horrors of war and peace, remains a cornerstone of ethical governance and individual conscience. We will delve into the established frameworks for just war and the equally critical considerations for forging a lasting, equitable peace.

The Philosophical Foundations of Justice

Before we dissect justice in war and peace, it's essential to acknowledge the foundational discussions of justice itself. Philosophers like Plato, in his Republic, explored justice as an inherent quality of the ideal state and the virtuous individual, where each part performs its proper duty. Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics and Politics, distinguished between distributive and corrective justice, laying the groundwork for how resources and penalties should be fairly allocated within a society. These ancient insights underscore that justice is not merely a legalistic concept but a moral imperative, a principle that guides human flourishing.

The Principles of Just War: A Moral Compass in Conflict

The concept of a "just war" (bellum justum) is one of the most enduring and controversial applications of the principle of justice. Developed by thinkers such as St. Augustine of Hippo and later refined by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, this framework seeks to impose ethical constraints on the decision to go to war (jus ad bellum) and the conduct within war (jus in bello). It acknowledges the tragic necessity of conflict in certain circumstances but insists that even war must be waged within a moral framework.

Jus ad Bellum: Justice in the Decision to Go to War

The criteria for justly initiating a war are stringent and demand careful consideration, reflecting the immense gravity of the decision. These criteria impose a duty on leaders to exhaust all peaceful alternatives.

Criterion	Description	Philosophical Basis
Just Cause	War must be waged only to avert a grave public evil, such as large-scale aggression or massive human rights violations. Self-defense against attack is the clearest example.	Augustine's "correction of wrongs," Aquinas's defense of the common good.
Legitimate Authority	Only a properly constituted public authority (e.g., a sovereign state) can declare war. Private individuals or groups cannot.	Emphasizes the state's duty to protect its citizens and maintain order, as discussed by Hobbes in Leviathan and Locke in his Two Treatises of Government.
Right Intention	The primary purpose of war must be to achieve a just peace, not for conquest, revenge, or economic gain.	Focus on moral rectitude, ensuring the principle of justice is upheld throughout.
Last Resort	All peaceful alternatives (negotiation, sanctions, diplomacy) must have been genuinely exhausted or deemed impractical.	Underscores the extreme nature of war and the duty to avoid it if possible.
Proportionality	The expected good to be achieved by going to war must outweigh the anticipated harm (lives lost, destruction, societal disruption).	A utilitarian consideration rooted in the principle of minimizing suffering, even within a just cause.
Reasonable Hope of Success	There must be a reasonable chance of achieving the war's just aims; futile wars are unjust.	Avoids pointless loss of life and resources, reflecting a practical application of the duty to protect citizens.

Jus in Bello: Justice in the Conduct of War

Once war has begun, the principle of justice continues to apply, guiding the actions of combatants. This aspect emphasizes the duty to fight humanely, even against an enemy.

Discrimination (Non-combatant Immunity): Military force must distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. Intentional targeting of civilians is strictly forbidden. This principle is crucial for limiting the scope of violence.
Proportionality: The force used must be proportional to the military objective. Excessive force that causes undue civilian casualties or destruction disproportionate to the gain is unjust.
Necessity: Only the minimum force necessary to achieve a legitimate military objective should be used. Unnecessary destruction or suffering is a violation of this duty.

Forging a Just Peace: The Aftermath of Conflict

The principle of justice does not end with the cessation of hostilities; it extends into the critical phase of establishing peace. Jus post bellum outlines the moral obligations of victors and vanquished alike in ensuring a stable and equitable post-conflict order. This phase is crucial for preventing future conflicts and healing societal wounds.

Just Cause for Termination: Peace terms should be designed to address the original just causes for the war and prevent their recurrence.
Proportionality of Peace Terms: The terms imposed on the vanquished should not be unduly punitive or designed for revenge. They should be proportionate to the wrongs committed and aim for reconciliation.
Discrimination in Peace Settlements: Punishments for war crimes should target culpable individuals, not entire populations. Collective punishment violates the principle of individual responsibility.
Reconstruction and Reparations: Victorious powers have a duty to assist in the reconstruction of war-torn societies and, where appropriate, to offer reparations for damages caused by unjust aggression. This aligns with the broader principle of restorative justice.
Accountability: Holding individuals accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity is essential for upholding international law and preventing impunity. This reflects a deep commitment to the duty of justice for victims.

(Image: A classical relief sculpture depicting Lady Justice, blindfolded and holding scales in one hand and a sword in the other, standing between two figures, one representing war (a soldier in armor) and the other representing peace (a figure holding an olive branch), illustrating the delicate balance and impartial judgment required to navigate conflict and achieve harmony.)

The Perpetual Pursuit of Justice in Peace

Beyond the immediate aftermath of war, the principle of justice remains paramount in maintaining domestic and international peace. Thinkers like Immanuel Kant, in his essay Perpetual Peace, argued for a federation of free states governed by international law as the path to lasting global harmony. He posited that moral duty compels humanity towards a state of perpetual peace, where the rights of individuals and nations are respected.

In civil society, the duty of the state is to ensure justice for all its citizens, guaranteeing rights, providing for the common good, and maintaining order. This involves a continuous effort to address inequalities, uphold the rule of law, and foster inclusive institutions. The ongoing philosophical discourse on social justice, human rights, and international law are all extensions of this fundamental principle.

Conclusion

The principle of justice in war and peace is a profound and complex subject, rooted in centuries of philosophical inquiry. From the ancient insights of Plato and Aristotle to the rigorous frameworks of Augustine, Aquinas, and Kant, the duty to act justly remains a constant beacon. Whether we are contemplating the legitimacy of armed conflict, the conduct within it, or the arduous process of building a lasting peace, the ethical imperative to uphold justice guides our path. It is a testament to humanity's enduring aspiration for a world where reason and morality prevail, even in the face of our greatest challenges.

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Just War Theory Explained Philosophy""