The Just War Tradition

By The Very Rev. Dr. Brian Baker, Dean of the Cathedral
Trinity Cathedral, Sacramento, California
September 7, 2006

A set of ethical guidelines to determine whether a state can go to war and what actions can be used in war, initially developed by St. Augustine and extensively developed throughout the centuries. The just war tradition puts limits on the use of force in an attempt to limit our impulse for vengeance, power, etc. It’s use in our political discourse is evidenced by the title given to the first Gulf War, “Operation Just Cause.”

The classic tradition . . . begins with the presumption that rightly constituted public authority is under a strict moral obligation to defend the security of those for whom it has assumed responsibility, even if this puts the magistrate’s own life in jeopardy. George Weigel, “Moral Clarity in a Time of War.” First Things

The just war argument recognizes that there are circumstances in which the first and most urgent obligation in the face of evil is to stop it. George Weigel, “Moral Clarity in a Time of War.”

Jus Ad Bellem (Justice of War)

A state is justified in going to war if the following 6 criteria are met:

just cause A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause. In the classic just war tradition, “just cause” was understood as defense against aggression, the recovery of something wrongfully taken, or the punishment of evil. As the tradition has developed since World War II, the latter two notions have been largely displaced, and “defense against aggression” has become the primary, even sole, meaning of “just cause.”

declared by a proper authority A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.

possessing right intention A war can redress a wrong, not annihilate the enemy or exact punishment. The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. Some would argue that the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

having a reasonable chance of success A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

last resort A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

proportionality The desired end should be proportional to the means used. (This is a cost-benefit analysis. The value of the benefit (goal, i.e. restore a border) should be proportional to the cost (lives lost, etc.)

Jus In Bello (Justice in War)

discrimination Who are legitimate targets? (Noncombatant immunity, wounded, etc.)

proportionality How much force is morally appropriate? (Minimal force, limited objectives.)

Jus Post Bellum (Justice after war)