In the aftermath of the horrific terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, as our country signs international alliances, as Congress allots $40 billion to fighting terrorism, as more and more of our friends and relatives in the Armed Forces are deployed to the Middle East, it would seem to be an appropriate time to discuss and debate the proper response made on behalf of our aching, mourning nation. At Saint Louis University there are thousands of unique people voicing their sentiments and opinions, which creates a vast spectrum of “proper responses.”
Due to our fateful and deplorable circumstances, the term “Just War” has re-entered into the vernacular of the campus, and it should. Given our University’s Catholic heritage, it makes sense that the Church’s most famous treatise on war has been brought into the dialogue. What may be lacking is a general background and exposition of the theory, which is a necessity when conscientious people are trying to make sense of their beliefs and opinions. The task is before us:
In the fifth century, St. Augustine of Hippo developed the doctrine of just war, which was later refined and supported by St. Thomas Aquinas in the 1200s. For centuries, Catholics and Christians all over the world have cited the Just War Theory as a defense of the use of war. In order to initiate a just war, the military action must be evaluated against criteria developed by these early Church fathers. The guidelines for declaring war follow:
(1) Because war must serve the common good of society, a legitimate authority must declare it.
(2) War must be waged with good intention. War must lead to a good outcome; the postbellum situation must be more humane than the antebellum situation. War must be the last resort for conflict resolution; all peaceful means must have been exhausted. War must be waged for defensive and not offensive reasons.
A just war may be initiated if and only if each of these criterion is upheld. In that case, Augustine and Aquinas provide two more principles for how a just war is to be fought: The means for war must be proportional to the ends; the methods used must not be worse than the evil opposed. Combatants must be distinguished from citizens, and the civil population must not be attacked.
If war is to be waged justly, it is imperative that each and every one of these principles be maintained. They are not relative to the circumstances of a war, and they cannot be compromised without compromising the entire justification. Sadly, friends, few, if any, modern wars have met these requirements. World War II brought about the martyrdom of civilian Jews and Japanese alike. The Vietnam Conflict was not declared a war by the legitimate authority of the United States Congress. The Persian Gulf War and its lasting effects of diplomatic sanctions have claimed the lives of countless, innocent Iraqi.
One may argue that our history does not dictate our future, that this “War on Terrorism” will be different. If that means that not a single, solitary civilian life-a mother, grandfather, little brother or aunt to someone-will be lost, then you are an idealist. If you actually believe that our government will wage a proportional war complete with car bombs and misdirected Boeing 767s then you are ridiculous.
Of course it is possible that the just-war principles limiting destruction might be followed. Even if entertaining that dream for a moment, unfortunately, the criteria for initiating just war have already been ignored. There is no doubt that the intentions of President Bush, his cabinet, and Congress are good. In the words of President Bush, this is a “monumental struggle of good versus evil.” Our leaders say that they are pursing the ends of an improved global situation, the common good of society, peace, and justice, but their means contradict the Just War Theory.
The prospect of war is not being utilized as a final resort. Sure, we have tried to sanction and bully our way through the Taliban to Osama bin Laden, but are those the only peaceful means at our disposal? Do we have any intention of attempting to utilize the United Nations, Security Council and International Tribunal to bring the criminals to justice for crimes against humanity? It would hardly seem to be the case since our president is seeking bin Laden-“dead or alive”.
The Just War Theory cannot be applied to contemporary warfare. Augustine and Aquinas were writing about wars fought with swords, spears and shields. It was very easy to compare the proportionality of one’s force to that of the opposition. Combatants could be distinguished from civilians quite readily by the possession of a weapon.
These guidelines are obsolete in terms of today’s military encounters. With bombs that indiscriminately blow-up strategic centers along with any person who might be walking by them, with technological advances whose sole aim is to gain a disproportionate advantage over one’s enemy, with governments that have multiple administrative positions for military defense and not a single office for peaceful conflict resolution,
Just war does not and cannot exist in the present era.
Pete Mosher is a junior studying physical therapy and spanish.
