Catt+P.+-+Just+War

Home Small Wars Project Just Wars Essays

Just Wars Essay - Catt Perry Paragraph 1: Introduction Personally, I believe in the sanctity of life and am a pacifist by nature, with the exception of using necessary force for self-defense, or when innocent lives are in danger or people are being tortured, and intervention is either necessary or inevitable. However, I hold the latter of the two to be an exception only as long as that war is reasonably justified in every other way. There is a set of criteria that determines the legitimacy of a war’s justification. When going to war (//jus ad bellum//), one of the most important measures a war must meet is //Just Cause//, with which //Right Intention// tags along. //Right Intention// is the rule that force may not be used for material gain or for maintaining economies (Criteria for a Just War). Any war, as clearly seen in the past, that is declared for any reason other than to protect innocent life in peril is typically declared for material gain or for maintaining economies -- reasoning for going to war that is clearly unjust (Criteria for a Just War). Just conduct within war (//jus in bello//) is essential as well; the two criterion I find most important are //Distinction// and //Military Necessity//. //Distinction// maintains that "acts of war should be directed [only] towards enemy combatants;" civilians should not be targeted or terrorized (Criteria for a Just War). //Military Necessity// simply means that any military action must be to help defeat the enemy; any military attack must be directed at enemy combatants only. //Military Necessity//, the goal of which is to use the least amount of force so as to minimize losses, also covers the //jus in bello// criterion //Proportionality//, because it determines that "the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be [relative to] ... [the] military advantage anticipated" (Criteria for a Just War).A great example of //jus ad bellum// criteria is the Rwandan Genocide of 1994; the genocide of the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina supports the //jus in bello// criteria. However, both of these conflicts model what NOT to do, and mistakes we made: get involved too late, too little, or not at all. Paragraph 2: //Jus ad bellum// argument The Rwandan Genocide and the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina best meet the //jus ad bellum// criterion //just cause// and //right intention//. For a war to have //just cause//, "innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life”; //right intention// is the rule that “force may [not] be used ... [for] material gain or maintaining economies” (Criteria for a Just War). T he Rwandan Genocide and the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina both dealt with the clash of two ethnic groups and suffered from genocide during the early 1990’s. Rwanda fell under a Hutu-controlled dictatorship following the death of 14,000 Tutsis during an anti-Tutsi campaign. According to Stacy Gibson and Max Ribar, the consequential rivalries sparked a series of battles that lasted 30 years, “leading to the genocide of 1994, [in which] it is estimated that 800,000 Tutsis were killed [between April and July of that year]” (Gibson and Ribar). The Rwandan Genocide was a perfect opportunity to go to war to protect innocent lives that are in grave danger. However, though “the United States recognized the conflict, [the U.S. refused] to ‘[acknowledge] … that genocide had occurred’, [mainly because] Rwanda was outside of U.S. interests” (Gibson and Ribar). Since no one intervened, there was not an opportunity for //just cause// to come into play or for there to be a //right intention//. The War in Bosnia-Herzegovina (formerly Yugoslavia) was about genocide as well, during which the Rwandan Genocide took place. Similarly, this conflict, which did turn into a war, revolved around two ethic groups, but instead of being Hutu and Tutsi, the combatants were Serbian and Bosnian. Yugoslavia divided into two individual countries after communism fell apart: Slovenia and Croatia. Slovenia gained their independence easily; Croatia had too large a Serbian population to be allowed independence from Yugoslavia. Shea Stiebler and Michael Mitiska wrote that the Yugoslav National Army, controlled by a Serbian president, terrorized Bosnians and the people of Herzegovina with their ‘ethnic cleansing’, “‘ systematically brutalizing, [murdering], and expelling non-Serbs ’” (Stiebler and Mitiska). The goal was “‘to erase all traces of [Bosnian] culture,’ while seizing territory” (Stiebler and Mitiska).

Although it was late in the war, the United Nations, NATO, the U.S., France, and Britain became involved, laying out peace negotiations. Bosnian and Serbian leaders met at a conference in Dayton, Ohio, with representatives from Croatia, the United Nations, NATO, the U.S., France, and Britain in 1995. They finalized with a peace treaty, bringing the genocide to an end. Since intervention was to save innocent lives that were in danger, the involvement had //just cause//, though the reasons for the Serbs’ invasion was not, and had no //right intention//. //Jus ad bellum// in general is important, and having a legitimate reason for going to war is even more so. Paragraph 3: //Jus in bello// argument The Rwandan Genocide and the War in Bosnia-Herzegovina best meet the //jus in bello// criterion //distinction// and //military necessity//. For a war to have //distinction//, actions/attacks may not "be directed … towards non-combatants” and “committing acts of terrorism … against civilians [is prohibited]”. //Military necessity// means that the intention of “an attack or action must be … to help in the … defeat of the enemy,” and an attack must be directed towards enemy combatants (Criteria for a Just War). It also means that any “harm caused to civilians/civilian property must [remain relative] to the … military advantage anticipated,” so that minimum force is used to limit unnecessary losses (Criteria for a Just War). Both conflicts dealt with the clash of two ethnic groups and suffered from genocide during the early 1990’s. In a civil war between ethnic groups, everyone is targeted, and it is not up for debate whether terrorism is allowed or not. ~You said I could stop here. Paragraph 4: Rank and explanation
 * You must explain why your first choice is superior as well as why your second is less just than the first but more just than the third choice.**

Works Cited:
 * "Criteria for a Just War." N.d. //Wikispaces//. Web. 10 Dec. 2011. 
 * Gibson, Stacy, and Ribar, Max. Wiki page. //Rwandan Genocide: April - July 1994//. N.p., 6 Dec. 2011. Web. 10 Dec. 2011. 
 * Stiebler, Shea, and Mitiska, Michael. "The War in Bosnia-Herzegovina: April 1992 - December 1995." //Wikispaces//. N.p., 5 Dec. 2011. Web. 10 Dec. 2011. 

RUBRIC: A quality essay will Explain why you selected **jus ad bellum** and **jus in bello** the criteria, Use the __four__ criteria to analyze why the three small wars are "just wars", Support your analysis of each war with evidence from the Small Wars Wiki, Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, Explain why the __second__ choice fell short compared to the __first__ choice but is more just than the __third__ choice, Organize you writing in extended power paragraphs, Identify the source and establish its credibility with an appositive phrase, Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited.
 * RUBRIC: A quality essay will **
 * • **** Explain why you selected the two jus ad bellum and the two jus in bello the criteria, **** criteria identified and clearly explained **
 * •Use the __four__ criteria to analyze why the three small wars are "just wars", **** criteria used to analyze the wars **
 * •Support your analysis of each war with evidence from the Small Wars Wiki, **** evidence used to effectively support your claims **
 * •Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, **** evidence and insightful reasoning are clear **
 * •Explain why the __second__ choice fell short compared to the __first__ choice but is more just than the __third__ choice, **
 * •Organize you writing in ** **extended power paragraphs****,** ** You write well. However, you don't always follow a citation with a sentence which explains how the evidence gives your thesis authority. **
 * •Identify the source and establish its ** **credibility** **with an appositive phrase,** ** done clearly **
 * •Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited. **** internal citation correct; WC has some minor errors **