Graham+D.+-+Just+War

Home Small Wars Project Just Wars Essays

Comparison Essay: How Just Were the U.S.’s Small Wars?

The Just War Theory has two parts. Study the Just War handout and select the two most significant criteria for **//jus ad bellum//** and two most significant criteria for **//jus in bello//**. With these criteria in mind, select one war from each of your three tables that best meets these criteria. In the essay, you will analyze, compare and rank these three wars.

Write an essay that compares the three small wars and analyzes how well all three meet the four criteria that you believe are most important. Based on this comparison, select the __"most just"__ of the three wars and explain the reasons for the choice. Also, explain why your __second choice__ fell short and were not as just as your __first choice__ but is more just than your __third choice__.

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.

POST JUST WAR ESSAY HERE

The three most just wars were Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1992-1995, Rwanda in July of 1994, and Somalia form 1992 to 1994. These three small wars fall under four theories of Jus ad bellum and Jus in bello. For Jus ad bellum the first criteria is just cause which is the reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot therefore be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. The second criteria these wars fit is comparative justice where there may be rights and wrongs on all sides of a conflict, to overcome the presumption against the use of force, the injustice suffered by one party must significantly outweigh that suffered by the other. For jus in bello the first theory is proportionality where just war conduct should be governed by the principle of proportionality. An attack cannot be launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality). The second jus in bello theory these three wars fit is military necessity where just war conduct should be governed by the principle of minimum force. An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. This principle is meant to limit excessive and unnecessary death and destruction. Basically the wars compare to the jus in bellos and jus ad bellum by the United States and/or NATO interfering with foreign affairs to stop ethic cleansing and genocide or basically to protect the little guy. The war in Bosnia-Herzegovina accrued between April 1992 and December 1995 and was researched by Michael M. and Shea S. In Bosnia-Herzegovina there was a difference in cutlers and Serbs saw an opportunity to gain power. “At the beginning of April 1992, Serb forces swept through much of Bosnia and Herzegovina, systematically brutalizing and expelling non-Serbs, particularly Bosnian Muslims in a campaign of terror. In the process the term “ethnic cleansing” was created to encapsulate the brutality of a conflict in which the principle aim was to erase all traces of a culture” (Michael and Shea’s Wiki). What happen in Bosnia-Herzegovina falls under Just cause because punishing people who have done wrong (the Serbs); innocent life (non-Serbs) must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. Also, the small war of Bosnia-Herzegovina falls under comparative justice because the injustice suffered by one party must be significantly outweigh that suffered by the other. The conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina fits proportionality and military necessity because NATO (United States) acted as described. The Serbs killed anyone who wasn’t a Serb just because they were different. This was a just war because people were being killed for no reason besides their differences fromm the people with more power. The Rwandan Genocide in 1994 and was researched by Stacy G. and Max R. what happen in Rwandan was mass genocide because of conflict between two groups the Tutsis and the Hutus. “Following a 1963 anti-Tutsi campaign launched by the Hutus, that resulted in as many as 14,000 deaths, the country became a one-party dictatorship under Hutu control”(Stacy’s and Max’s Wiki). So, The Rwandan Genocide meets the criteria of both just cause and comparative justice because one party (Hutu) gained control and killed a helpless other party of 14,000 Tutsis. The Rwandan Genocide also falls under comparative justice because the injustice because there were more Tutsis killed then Hutus. The Rwanda conflict also fits proportionality and military necessity because NATO (United States) acted as described. The Hutu killed the Tutsis in the thousands just because they were different. This was a just war because people were being killed for no reason besides their differences from the people with more power. Lastly the 1992 to 1994 small war in Somalia done by Sarah Heuerman and Cat Perry where the “U.S., along with Canada, took a risk and gambled that their military muscle could protect millions of civilians from political chaos and clan fighting"(Perry/ Heuerman’s wiki). That quote fits both just cause and comparative justice under jus ad bellum because “The United States and the United Nations felt it was necessary to get involved in Somalia in order to create peace and save innocent peoples' lives” "(Perry/ Heuerman’s wiki). Somalia also fits both jus in bello because NATO acted without disobeying proportionality and military necessity. Somalia was the criteria’s for a just war because again, NATO/The United States came in between two fighting groups to bring piece and protect the little guy.

Out of the three wars i chose the most just was Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1992-1995 followed by Somalia form 1992 to 1994 and then Rwanda in July of 1994. Bosnia-Herzegovina was the most just out of the three because NATO came in and was affective in creating peace and stopping the killing of innocent people, unlike Somalia and Rwanda where NATO wasn't as affective. Somalia was the next best because unlike Rwanda NATO help Innocent citizens out of harms way. NATO was more effective in Somalia then Rwanda but not as effective as they were in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The third most just was was Rwanda because NATO was in Rwanda but couldn't fight, they were just there. Rwanda was different from the first two wars because in Rwanda NATO was the least involved but, NATO was trying to stop the genocide which was just. In all three wars NATO/The United States came in between two fighting groups to bring piece and protect the little guy which is just.

S. Shea, and Michael M. “April 1992 - December 1995: War in Bosnia-Herzegovnia."//American Studies Wiki//. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Dec. 2011. .
 * Works Cited **

RUBRIC: A quality essay will

Explain why you selected the two jus ad bellum and the two jus in bello the criteria, definitions of the criteria are offered

Use the __four__ criteria to analyze why the three small wars are "just wars", criteria is analyzed

Support your analysis of each war with evidence from the Small Wars Wiki, evidence is credited to source

Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, supporting evidence offered

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, not all paragraphs are organized this way

Identify the source and establish its credibility with an appositive phrase, sources credited when first cited

Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited. some internal citation errors; one source in works cited

Please write with an academic voice, not in the first person.