This book uses an historical body of knowledge, Just War Theory, as the basis for analyzing modern conflicts involving Armed Non-State Actors who employ force against states. As the global community faces the challenges of globalization, terrorism, 24-hour international news coverage, super power collapse, weapons of mass destruction, and failed states, the author explores whether the historic bodies of knowledge governing decision makers during conflict remain relevant. Tracing the evolution of Just War Theory, he analyzes circumstances involving Armed Non-State Actor (ANSA) groups possessing powerful and destructive capabilities and a desire to use them, and pursues answers to the central research question: how does Just War Theory apply in modern scenarios involving ANSA groups who challenge the state and international institution’s monopoly on use of force? The study finds that Just War Theory still has the capacity to accommodate modern day statecraft and application in scenarios involving Armed Non-State Actors. This book will be of great interest to those researching and studying in the fields of political theory, security studies, international relations, war and conflict studies, and public ethics.

Just war theory exists to stop armies and countries from using armed force without good cause. But how can we judge whether a war is just? In this original book, John W. Lango takes some distinctive approaches to the ethics of armed conflict. DT A revisionist approach that involves generalising traditional just war principles, so that they are applicable by all sorts of responsible agents to all forms of armed conflict DT A cosmopolitan approach that features the Security Council DT A preventive approach that emphasises alternatives to armed force, including negotiation, nonviolent action and peacekeeping missions DT A human rights approach that encompasses not only armed humanitarian intervention but also armed invasion, armed revolution and all other forms of armed conflict Lango shows how these can be applied to all forms of armed conflict, however large or small: from interstate wars to UN peacekeeping missions, and from civil wars counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations.

This title undertakes an impartial, authoritative, and in-depth examination of the moral arguments and ideas behind the laws and policies that govern personal, corporate, and government behavior in the United States. This A–Z encyclopedia surveys the moral arguments that provide the foundation for many of the most important and/or divisive laws, policies, and beliefs that govern modern American society. The work discusses such controversial and important issues as abortion, civil rights, drugs and alcohol, euthanasia, guns, hate crimes, immigration, immunization, natural resource use and protection, prostitution, same-sex marriage, and workplace laws. In the process of surveying historical and current beliefs about appropriate legislative responses to these issues, this work will help readers to understand how conservative and liberal conceptions of justice, fairness, and morality are at the center of so many hot-button political and social issues in 21st century America. The essays featured in the volume cover wide-ranging and controversial topics related to constitutional and religious freedoms, crime and punishment, sexuality and reproduction, environmental protection and public health, national security and civil liberties, social welfare programs, and education.

This new Handbook offers a comprehensive overview of contemporary extensions and alternatives to the just war tradition in the field of the ethics of war. The modern history of just war has typically assumed the primacy of four particular elements: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, the state actor, and the solider. This book will put these four elements under close scrutiny, and will explore how they fare given the following challenges: • What role do the traditional elements of jus ad bellum and jus in bello—and the constituent principles that follow from this distinction—play in modern warfare? Do they adequately account for a normative theory of war? • What is the role of the state in warfare? Is it or should it be the primary actor in just war theory? • Can a just war be understood simply as a response to territorial aggression between state actors, or should other actions be accommodated under legitimate recourse to armed conflict? • Is the idea of combatant qua state-employed soldier a valid ethical characterization of actors in modern warfare? • What role does the technological backdrop of modern warfare play in understanding and realizing just war theories? Over the course of three key sections, the contributors examine these challenges to the just war tradition in a way that invigorates existing discussions and generates new debate on topical and prospective issues in just war theory. This book will be of great interest to students of just war theory, war and ethics, peace and conflict studies, philosophy and security studies.

"Waging Just Wars: The Ethical and Legal Principles of Modern Warfare" provides a comprehensive examination of the moral and legal dimensions of contemporary conflict. Authored by an expert in military ethics and international law, this book delves into the foundational principles of Just War Theory, including jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum. The book explores historical precedents and modern applications, offering a detailed analysis of self-defense, humanitarian interventions, and the prevention of atrocities. It critically examines the impact of technological advancements, such as AI and autonomous weapons, on the conduct of war. Through rigorous ethical analysis and case studies, the author addresses the complexities of applying Just War principles in today's geopolitical landscape. "Waging Just Wars" also highlights the importance of legitimate authority, right intention, and proportionality in the decision to go to war. The book discusses the ethical challenges of ensuring that military actions align with these principles and the necessity of exhausting all non-violent options before resorting to force. Additionally, the book provides insights into the treatment of prisoners of war, the use of prohibited weapons, and the ethical considerations of modern warfare tactics. The analysis extends to post-war responsibilities, emphasizing the need for fair treatment of former enemies, reconstruction efforts, and accountability for war crimes. This scholarly work is essential reading for national security researchers, scholars, policymakers, and ethicists. It offers a nuanced understanding of how ethical and legal standards can guide the conduct of warfare, ensuring that the use of force is both morally justified and legally compliant. With its thorough examination of Just War Theory and its application to contemporary conflicts, "Waging Just Wars" is a vital resource for anyone seeking to navigate the moral complexities of modern warfare.

In original essays written by both senior scholars as well as rising younger scholars in the field of international ethics, this volume addresses the ethics of war in an era when non-state actors are playing an increasingly prominent role in armed conflict.

This book offers a systematic critique of recent interventionist just war theories, which have made the recourse to force easier to justify. The work argues that these theories, including neo-traditionalist prerogatives to national leaders and a cosmopolitan human rights paradigm, offer criteria for war that are insufficient in principle and dangerous in practice. Drawing on a plurality of moral considerations, the book recommends a modified legalist national defense paradigm, which includes an atrocity threshold for humanitarian intervention and a legitimate authorization requirement. The plausibility of this restrictive framework is applied to case studies, including the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, ongoing targeted killing, and possible interventions in Syria and elsewhere. Various arguments which seek to loosen the criteria for war are also systematically analyzed and criticized. This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, military history, ethics, political philosophy, and international relations.

In the vocabulary of International Relations (IR), States had traditionally been the centre of the discourse; such State-Centric elucidation concentrates on Westphalian model of Nation-State that laid down the foundation of contemporary state system and understanding of International Relations. Theoretically, the understanding of IR was dominated by Realist paradigm and field was often described as child of Morgenthau, Hobbesian, Machiavellian etc. revolved around the concept of Power. However, the end of Bipolarity witnessed a paradigm in two distinct ways. The first is in a geographical sense, with power moving from certain traditional strong states such as U.K, U.S to other states like China, Japan. Second is parallel where power is shifting from State to Non-State Actors (NSAs). Parallel Shift is more transformative and is substantially a different kind of shift. In such circumstances, new actors have increased its involvement in IR. Scholarly analysis in the discourse was built on State not NSAs. There is less comprehensive understanding on NSAs. If one agrees on parallel shift then such transformation needs further theoretical analysis. This book provides an analysis on parallel shift and uses ISIS to elucidate transformation that has been taking place in IR.

Widespread cross-cultural and cross-ideological agreement on the justifiable limits of war has become an increasingly complex yet vital element of global peace and conflict policies. Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues and Danny Singh bring together a truly international cohort of philosophers, ethicists, political scientists, criminologists, sociologists, and other scholars to address the morality of war from a comparative perspective. While conceptions of when to enter war (jus ad bellum) and how to fight war (jus in bello) have been well researched in Western liberal contexts, non-Western philosophies have been largely excluded from debate. This volume seeks to correct that imbalance by addressing concrete examples alongside concepts of Confucian Yi/Rightness, Ahimsa, feminism, class struggles, Ubuntu, anarchism, pacifism, Buddhism, Islam, Jihad, among others. Comparative Just War Theory provides a global conceptual framework to deal with the morality of war in our modern world. With fresh insights into how the normative problems that arise from just war can be addressed, the book will be a valuable resource for a wide variety of students, scholars, and policymakers.

The chief means to limit and calculate the costs of war are the philosophical and legal concepts of proportionality and necessity. Both categories are meant to restrain the most horrific potential of war. The volume explores the moral and legal issues in the modern law of war in three major categories. In so doing, the contributions will look for new and innovative approaches to understanding the process of weighing lives implicit in all theories of jus in bello: who counts in war, understanding proportionality, and weighing lives in asymmetric conflicts. These questions arise on multiple levels and require interdisciplinary consideration of both philosophical and legal themes.