The Changing Nature of the Just War Tradition: How Our Changing Environment Ought to Change the Foundations of Just War Theory

Hedahl, Marcus; Clark, Scott; Beggins, Michael

doi:10.1080/10999922.2017.1278667

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 406 ] regardless of cause, and would necessarily fail ad bellum criteria such as proportionality and competent authority. 28 Marcus Hedahl, Scott Clark, and Michael Beggins (2017) of the US Navy, argue that environmental change must affect the theoretical framework of the just war tradition at its very core, explicating this at both its ad bellum and in bello levels, as well as post and para bellum. 29 (I return to their discussion of jus ad bellum in the following section).…”

Section: Environmental Military Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Ethics of War: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and the Natural Environment

Meisels

2023

Conatus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conduct of hostilities is very bad for the environment, yet relatively little attention has been focused on environmental military ethics by just war theorists and revisionist philosophers of war. Contemporary ecological concerns pose significant challenges to jus in bello. I begin by briefly surveying existing literature on environmental justice during wartime. While these jus in bello environmental issues have been addressed only sparsely by just war theorists, environmental jus ad bellum has rarely been tackled within JWT or the morality of war. In line with the theme of this special issue, I focus my discussion of war and the natural environment primarily on the jus ad bellum level. I set out with the presumption against the use of force, and its possible exceptions. The principal question raised is whether environmental harm can trigger a new justification for war. Beyond just cause, I consider what might be a proportionate response to “environmental aggression,” or negligent harm to nature. The use of force is clearly justified in response to military attacks, against the natural environment or otherwise. Where harm to nature or its inhabitants are not caused by military aggression, just war theory criteria point in favor of responding via measures short of war. Finally, I suggest that responding by means that are not themselves harmful to nature serves to fulfill the further jus ad bellum criterion of “right intention.”

show abstract

Section: Environmental Military Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Ethics of War: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and the Natural Environment

Meisels

2023

Conatus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Toxic entanglements: Multispecies politics, white phosphorus, and the Iraq War in Alaska

Leep

2022

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores avian experiences with toxic war processes that unfold across space and time. Joining together three evolving areas of interest in global politics – ontologies of war, interspecies relations, and sensory politics – the article develops a view of war that centres ongoing war processes that affect more-than-human life in and outside of international warzones. Advancing a multispecies form of inquiry attentive to local voices, including Upper Cook Inlet Tribes, the article examines how interspecies relations emerge in national security debates about long-lasting ecological costs of war. Specifically, it offers an analysis of US Department of Defense hearings surrounding the controversy over reopening Eagle River Flats – an Alaskan estuary that had been polluted with white phosphorus munitions – for weapons testing and training during the Iraq War. The article also considers the experiences of two migratory avian communities (northern pintails and tundra swans) with toxic white phosphorus pollution, illustrating more-than-human sensory perspectives on the space and time of war processes. These conceptual and empirical moves reposition national security concerns about wartime risk into a much broader post-anthropocentric perspective.

show abstract

Disinformation in Contemporary U.S. Foreign Policy: Impacts and Ethics in an Era of Fake News, Social Media, and Artificial Intelligence

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Changing Nature of the Just War Tradition: How Our Changing Environment Ought to Change the Foundations of Just War Theory

Cited by 4 publications

References 32 publications

Environmental Ethics of War: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and the Natural Environment

Environmental Ethics of War: Jus ad Bellum, Jus in Bello, and the Natural Environment

Toxic entanglements: Multispecies politics, white phosphorus, and the Iraq War in Alaska

Disinformation in Contemporary U.S. Foreign Policy: Impacts and Ethics in an Era of Fake News, Social Media, and Artificial Intelligence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About