2021 CHOICE Outstanding Academic Title Moral Responsibility in Twenty-First-Century Warfare explores the complex relationship between just war theory and the ethics of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). One of the challenges facing ethicists of war, particularly just war theorists, is that AWS is an applicative concept that seems, in many ways, to lie beyond the human(ist) scope of the just war theory tradition. The book examines the various ethical gaps between just war theory and the legal and moral status of AWS, addresses the limits of both traditional and revisionist just war theory, and proposes ways of bridging some of these gaps. It adopts a dualistic notion of moral responsibility—or differing, related notions of moral responsibility and legitimate authority—to study the conflicts and contradictions of legitimizing the autonomous weapons that are designed to secure peace and neutralize the effects of violence. Focusing on the changing conditions and dynamics of accountability, responsibility, autonomy, and rights in twenty-first-century warfare, the volume sheds light on the effects of violence and the future ethics of modern warfare.

This volume brings together scholars from intellectual history, social sciences, philosophy and theology to evaluate central questions concerning political violence and aggression. This multidisciplinary collection of essays critically investigates forms and modes of justification of political violence from historical and contemporary perspectives, especially within the context of the development of the idea of Europe and modern European identity. What is meant by political violence and aggression? When and under which conditions is it justified? Who has the right to exercise it and against whom? Answers differ depending on various factors such as pre-established ends, available resources and possibilities of action, historical and socio-economic context, the ideological, political, and religious-theological background of the actors. The volume pays special attention to (a) how the above questions have been addressed and answered political, philosophical and theological thought, and (b) what kind of ideological currents and historical events lay at the background of such considerations.

'Restoring the First-century Church in the Twenty-first Century: Essays on the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement in Honor of Don Haymes' is a snap-shot of a major American religious movement just after the turn of the millennium. When the ÒDisciplesÓ of Alexander Campbell and the ÒChristiansÓ of Barton Warren Stone joined forces early in the 19th century, the first indigenous ecumenical movement in the United States came into being. Two hundred years later, this American experiment in biblical primitivism has resulted in three, possibly four, large segments. Best known is the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), active wherever ecumenical Christians gather. The denomination is typically theologically open, having been reshaped by theological Liberalism and the Social Gospel in the twentieth century, and has been re-organized on the model of other Protestant bodies. The largest group, the Churches of Christ, easily distinguished by their insistence on 'a cappella' music (singing only), is theologically conservative, now tending towards the evangelical, and congregationally autonomous, though with a denominational sense of brotherhood. The Christian Churches/Churches of Christ (Independent) are a 'via media' between the two other bodies: theologically conservative and evangelical, congregationally autonomous, pastorally oriented, and comfortable with instrumental music. The fourth numerically significant group, the churches of Christ (Anti-Institutional), is a conservative reaction to the 'a cappella' churches, much in the way that the Southern ''a capella' churches reacted against the emerging intellectual culture and social location, instrumental music and institutional centrism of the Northern Disciples following the Civil War. Besides these four, numerous smaller fragments, typically one-article splinter groups, decorate the history of the Restoration Movement: One-Cup brethren, Premillennialists, No-Sunday-School congregations, No-Located-Preacher churches, and others. This movement to unite Christians on the basis of faith and immersion in Jesus Christ, and to restore New-Testament Christianity, is too little recognized on the American religious landscape, and it has been too little studied by the academic community. This volume is focused primarily on the 'a cappella' churches and their interests, but implications for the entire Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement abound. The voices that speak freely within were unimpeded in authoring these essays by standards of orthodoxy imposed from without. All of the contributors are acquainted with Don Haymes, the honoree of the volume, and have been inspired by this friend and colleague, a man with a rigorous and earthy intellect and a heavenly spirit. David Bundy, series editor Studies in the History and Culture of World Christianities

"Because of the increasing use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs, also commonly known as drones) in various military and para-military (i.e., CIA) settings, there has been increasing debate in the international community as to whether it is morally and ethically permissible to allow robots (flying or otherwise) the ability to decide when and where to take human life. In addition, there has been intense debate as to the legal aspects, particularly from a humanitarian law framework. In response to this growing international debate, the United States government released the Department of Defense (DoD) 3000.09 Directive (2011), which sets a policy for if and when autonomous weapons would be used in US military and para-military engagements. This US policy asserts that only "human-supervised autonomous weapon systems may be used to select and engage targets, with the exception of selecting humans as targets, for local defense ...". This statement implies that outside of defensive applications, autonomous weapons will not be allowed to independently select and then fire upon targets without explicit approval from a human supervising the autonomous weapon system. Such a control architecture is known as human supervisory control, where a human remotely supervises an automated system (Sheridan 1992). The defense caveat in this policy is needed because the United States currently uses highly automated systems for defensive purposes, e.g., Counter Rocket, Artillery, and Mortar (C-RAM) systems and Patriot anti-missile missiles. Due to the time-critical nature of such environments (e.g., soldiers sleeping in barracks within easy reach of insurgent shoulder-launched missiles), these automated defensive systems cannot rely upon a human supervisor for permission because of the short engagement times and the inherent human neuromuscular lag which means that even if a person is paying attention, there is approximately a half-second delay in hitting a firing button, which can mean the difference for life and death for the soldiers in the barracks. So as of now, no US UAV (or any robot) will be able to launch any kind of weapon in an offensive environment without human direction and approval. However, the 3000.09 Directive does contain a clause that allows for this possibility in the future. This caveat states that the development of a weapon system that independently decides to launch a weapon is possible but first must be approved by the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)); the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)); and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Not all stakeholders are happy with this policy that leaves the door open for what used to be considered science fiction. Many opponents of such uses of technologies call for either an outright ban on autonomous weaponized systems, or in some cases, autonomous systems in general (Human Rights Watch 2013, Future of Life Institute 2015, Chairperson of the Informal Meeting of Experts 2016). Such groups take the position that weapons systems should always be under "meaningful human control," but do not give a precise definition of what this means. One issue in this debate that often is overlooked is that autonomy is not a discrete state, rather it is a continuum, and various weapons with different levels of autonomy have been in the US inventory for some time. Because of these ambiguities, it is often hard to draw the line between automated and autonomous systems. Present-day UAVs use the very same guidance, navigation and control technology flown on commercial aircraft. Tomahawk missiles, which have been in the US inventory for more than 30 years, are highly automated weapons with accuracies of less than a meter. These offensive missiles can navigate by themselves with no GPS, thus exhibiting some autonomy by today's definitions. Global Hawk UAVs can find their way home and land on their own without any human intervention in the case of a communication failure. The growth of the civilian UAV market is also a critical consideration in the debate as to whether these technologies should be banned outright. There is a $144.38B industry emerging for the commercial use of drones in agricultural settings, cargo delivery, first response, commercial photography, and the entertainment industry (Adroit Market Research 2019) More than $100 billion has been spent on driverless car development (Eisenstein 2018) in the past 10 years and the autonomy used in driverless cars mirrors that inside autonomous weapons. So, it is an important distinction that UAVs are simply the platform for weapon delivery (autonomous or conventional), and that autonomous systems have many peaceful and commercial uses independent of military applications"--

This interdisciplinary book presents an intervention into methodological practices in the subfield of Critical Terrorism Studies, and features established and early career scholars. The volume interrogates the role that research methods play in shaping the sub-discipline of Critical Terrorism Studies (CTS). It responds to two major methodological gaps within CTS: (1) the dearth of Global South cases and voices, and decolonial and feminist approaches; and (2) the lack of engagement with ‘traditional’ disciplines and quantitative methods. Together, authors demonstrate that interdisciplinary methodological dialogues can open up new possibilities for researchers seeking pathways towards and definitions of emancipation, social justice and freedom from violence. Simultaneously, the book shows that by focusing on the possibilities that methodologies open up to us and by maintaining a commitment to reflexive practice, we expand our understandings of what are ‘legitimate’ and ‘acceptable’ forms of research, thus challenging the Critical/Terrorism Studies divide. The chapters draw upon a wide range of empirical cases, including Nigeria, Kenya, France, Brazil and the UK, focusing on three key issues within Critical Terrorism Studies: its own relationship with and perpetuation of epistemic violence; decolonial, postcolonial, Global South, feminist and queer approaches; and more ‘traditional’ approaches and methods as a means to interrogate the methodological binary between Critical Terrorism Studies and Terrorism Studies. This book will be of much interest to students of critical terrorism studies, counter-terrorism, security studies and International Relations in general.

This feminist critique of just war reasoning argues for an expansion of responsibility for harms inflicted on civilians in war.

Contemporary war is as much a quest for decisive technological, organizational, and doctrinal superiority before the fighting starts as it is an effort to destroy enemy militaries during battle. Armed forces that are not actively fighting are instead actively reengineering themselves for success in the next fight and imagining what that next fight may look like. Twenty-First Century Military Innovation outlines the most theoretically important themes in contemporary warfare, especially as these appear in distinctive innovations that signal changes in states’ warfighting capacities and their political goals. Marcus Schulzke examines eight case studies that illustrate the overall direction of military innovation and important underlying themes. He devotes three chapters to new weapons technologies (drones, cyberweapons, and nonlethal weapons), two chapters to changes in the composition of state military forces (private military contractors and special operations forces), and three chapters to strategic and tactical changes (targeted killing, population-centric counterinsurgency, and degradation). Each case study includes an accessible introduction to the topic area, an overview of the ongoing scholarly debates surrounding that topic, and the most important theoretical implications. An engaging overview of the themes that emerge with military innovation, this book will also attract readers interested in particular topic areas.

These essays set the relationship between the Army and society in the context of the 20th century as a whole. They then consider the key areas of current controversy - the pressure on the Army caused by changes in society, the Army's "right to be different", race, homosexuality and gender.

Explores the nature and grounds of moral reasoning, the relation between public and private morality, and how just war teaching needs to be refashioned to provide practical guidance.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have focused new attention on a perennial problem: how to end wars well. What ethical considerations should guide war’s settlement and its aftermath? In cases of protracted conflicts, recurring war, failed or failing states, or genocide and war crimes, is there a framework for establishing an enduring peace that is pragmatic and moral? Ethics Beyond War’s End provides answers to these questions from the just war tradition. Just war thinking engages the difficult decisions of going to war and how war is fought. But from this point forward just war theory must also take into account what happens after war ends, and the critical issues that follow: establishing an enduring order, employing political forms of justice, and cultivating collective forms of conciliation. Top thinkers in the field—including Michael Walzer, Jean Bethke Elshtain, James Turner Johnson, and Brian Orend—offer powerful contributions to our understanding of the vital issues associated with late- and post conflict in tough, real-world scenarios that range from the US Civil War to contemporary quagmires in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and the Congo.