2007Unpublished venueRequires access

Chapter 1. A Revival of the Just War Theory?

Ivan Shearer

Open publisher page 20 citations

Abstract

A new interest in just war theory has been prompted by pressures to justify, in legal terms, forms of armed attack or forcible intervention lying outside, or at the margins of, the uses of armed force in international relations allowed by orthodox interpretations of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Although, the chapter is concerned principally with the jus ad bellum, there is a connection with the jus in bello in that one commonly accepted proposition of just war theory is that a use of force is not justified where the necessary means to be employed to achieve the object would be inherently excessive or indiscriminate. The author argues that the attack on Iraq in March 2003 has been shown to have been illegal after the event and that he is justified by legal opinions to that effect to disobey what, to him, have become unlawful commands. Keywords: jus ad bellum; armed force; customary international law; humanitarian intervention; Iraq; just war theory; United Nations Charter

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A new interest in just war theory has been prompted by pressures to justify, in legal terms, forms of armed attack or forcible intervention lying outside, or at the margins of, the uses of armed force in international relations allowed by orthodox interpretations of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Although, the chapter is concerned principally with the jus ad bellum, there is a connection with the jus in bello in that one commonly accepted proposition of just war theory is that a use of force is not justified where the necessary means to be employed to achieve the object would be inherently excessive or indiscriminate. The author argues that the attack on Iraq in March 2003 has been shown to have been illegal after the event and that he is justified by legal opinions to that effect to disobey what, to him, have become unlawful commands. Keywords: jus ad bellum; armed force; customary international law; humanitarian intervention; Iraq; just war theory; United Nations Charter

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 20 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A new interest in just war theory has been prompted by pressures to justify, in legal terms, forms of armed attack or forcible intervention lying outside, or at the margins of, the uses of armed force in international relations allowed by orthodox interpretations of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Although, the chapter is concerned principally with the jus ad bellum, there is a connection with the jus in bello in that one commonly accepted proposition of just war theory is that a use of force is not justified where the necessary means to be employed to achieve the object would be inherently excessive or indiscriminate. The author argues that the attack on Iraq in March 2003 has been shown to have been illegal after the event and that he is justified by legal opinions to that effect to disobey what, to him, have become unlawful commands. Keywords: jus ad bellum; armed force; customary international law; humanitarian intervention; Iraq; just war theory; United Nations Charter

Key concepts: Jus ad bellum, Use of force, Charter, United Nations Charter, Law, Just war theory, Political science, Law of war

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Chapter 1. A Revival of the Just War Theory? — Research Paper | ScholarLens