Emily+M.+-+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. To classify a war as just, it must meet the criteria of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Jus ad bellum consists of a Just Cause, Comparative Justice, Legitimate Authority, Right Intention, Probability of Success, Last Resort, and Proportionality. Jus in bello consists of Distinction, Proportionality, and Military Necessity. In Somalia, Rwanda, and the Boxer Rebellion the criteria that is established for jus ad bellum are comparative justice and just cause. In jus in bello, the criterion establishes these wars are proportionality and distinction; however, under these circumstances it can make un unjust war.

For Somalia, under jus ad bellum the war is just because of its ability to establish a Just cause and comparative justice. This war falls under just cause because innocent lives were under imminent danger that needed an intervention but it is also a comparative justice because the injustice suffered by one party greatly outweighed the other. The US intervened in Somalia, wishing to bring peace and end starvation, because the warlords were raging havoc on the innocent Somalis,on Catherine and Sarah's wiki, fellow classmates who studied the war in Somalia, “Mohammad Aidde killed many innocent people and restricted access to vans full of food and aid to regions of Somalia during a drought." In terms of comparative justice, the Somalis endured a great injustice by the warlords so the US came to try and keep peace between the warlords and the citizens. Because of this slaughter of their own people, the war is just under the terms of jus in bello because of distinction. The US citizens didn’t target any Somalis; on the contrary, they tried to help aid the citizens being terrorized by the warlords. Even though the, “triumphant Somalis dragged the body of an American helicopter pilot through the city streets” (Ronayne) this doesn’t violate distinction because no Somali civilians were targeted by the Americans only military personnel. In the terms of proportionality for this war it was unjust. Because of the broadcasted image of Somalis dragging a dead American soldier around the streets, “President Clinton decided to bring troops home” (Panchyk). American troops were sent home and Somali still to this day remains in violence.

Rwanda was a just war because of the jus ad bellum criteria of a just cause and comparative justice and in the jus in bello criteria of distinction and proportionality. Similar to Somalia, Rwanda was in the middle of genocide between the Tutsis and Hutus causing many innocent Rwandans to lose their lives. Our reasoning for going into Rwanda was a just cause because we needed to keep peace between the two parties though we never sent troops into Rwanda, in Stacy and Max's wiki, fellow class mates who studied the war in Rwanda, said the US, “used their forces to help enforce peace between the Hutus and Tutsis as Rwanda worked to became more stable." The comparative justice between the two parties was not balanced because of the anti-Tutsi campaign the Hutus followed eventually in 1994, “it is estimated that 800,000 Tutsis were killed”(Stacy and Max’s wiki). For distinction, because the US wasn’t really involved in Rwanda no Rwandans were hurt or targeted. In terms of proportionality, since we didn’t get involved with the violence and instead made, “diplomatic negotiations and humanitarian relief in non-vital interest trouble spots” (Stacy and Max’s wiki) there was no unnecessary massacre carried out by the American troops.

The Boxer Rebellion was a just war because of the jus ad bellum criteria of a just cause and comparative justice and in the jus in bello criteria of distinction and proportionality. The Boxer Rebellion took place in China and started when a group called the Boxers wasn’t accepting the westernization occurring in their country. When the US joined the Eight- Nation Alliance and started fighting The Boxers it was a just cause because the Boxers, “targeted foreigners, missionaries, priests, and Chinese citizens who had converted to Christianity (Wert, Hal). Because of the Boxers targeting innocent people, this made the comparative justice off balance because foreigners were suffering a great injustice. In terms of distinction, the US only fought the enemy and didn’t harm any Chinese civilians. However the military proportionality could be questioned because of, “Japan, Russia, Great Britain, France, the United States, Germany, Italy, and Austria-Hungary” (Fontenoy 2) forming the Eight- Nation Alliance and going against only the Boxers.

These threes wars are different in many ways, one of the ways being how just they were. The war being the most just was Rwanda. American troops did the right thing by going into Rwanda because of the genocide. If the US wouldn’t have stepped in for as long as they could until we started getting hurt even more Tutsis could have died. By trying to negotiate peace in Rwanda we also touched on the jus ad bellum criteria of last resort. The next war that was the most just was Somalia. Somalia is a lot like Rwanda because we went there to try to make peace between two fighting parties again using the tactic of last resort. The only reason Somalia isn’t as just as Rwanda is because we didn’t give as much military action as we should have because of the image of the dead American soldier being dragged around the streets. We retreated because of this letting Somalia’s violence rage on. The least just war out of all three of these is The Boxer rebellion. The Boxer rebellion had two intentions of going to war. The right intention for going to war was because of the slaughter of missionaries in China. However, in Brooks and Lexie's wiki, fellow classmates who studied the Boxer Rebellion, there was the intention of being in war because, “The Boxer Rebellion was fought to keep US trade with China still available” (Brooks and Lexie’s wiki). It seems that we were also in China for our own personal gain, which is not in the criteria for a Just War. In the future, hopefully America will learn from our past to only fight in wars that are completely necessary and not for selfish intentions. 959730?terms=Boxer+Rebellion>. Wert, Hal. "Hoover's Brush with the Boxers." EBSCO host. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2011. < [|http://web.ebscohost.com] >. Catherine and Sarah's Wiki Stacy and Max's Wiki Brooks and Lexie's Wiki
 * Ronayne, Peter. "Somalia, Intervention in." //Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity//. Ed. Dinah L. Shelton. Vol. 2. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 973-976. //Gale Virtual Reference Library//. Web. 20 Nov. 2011. < [] >
 * Panchyk, Richard. //"Clinton, William Jefferson."// Americans at War//. Ed. John P. Resch. Vol. 4: 1946-Present. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. 35-37.// //Gale Virtual Reference Library.// Web. 16 Nov. 2011. <http:go.galegroup.com/ps
 * Fontenoy, Paul E. "Boxer Rebellion." //ABC-Clio//. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2011. < []

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 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 support your claims Rank the three small wars and explain why one war is more just than the other two, The US did not get involved in the Rwanda genocide, although it is clear you think we should have done so. Your reasoning on this point is clear. Explain why the __second__ choice fell short compared to the __first__ choice but is more just than the __third__ choice, listed, some comparison offered Organize you writing in extended power paragraphs, competently used Identify the source and establish its credibility with an appositive phrase, done clearly Cite evidence __internally__ and in a Works Cited. internal citation when done are mostly correct; WC has some omissions