Just Cause, Just War Essay

Fighting among tribes, clans, and nations have occurred all throughout history. Civilizations have engaged in warfare to conquer new territories or defend their lands. Debates concerning the justness of war have been going on for many years. While some assert that a just cause is reason enough to engage in war, others believe that nothing can justify war. For my part, to know whether war is just is to understand its cause. In other words, to declare war against another is necessary when it seeks to protect rather than destroy. Based on the just war theory, or jus ad bellum, nations can wage wars when certain circumstances happen. For instance, the bombing of the Pearl Harbor and the threat presented to the nation during World War II were very justifiable reasons to involve the nation in war against Japan and its allies. It retaliation, the U. S. attacked enemy troops and enemy lands. If the United States did not actively participate in neutralizing the enemies, then, it probably would have fallen under the control of foreign troops. On Japan’s side, it attacked the U. S. naval base because it wanted control of a particular route. Its reason for starting a fighting with the U. S. is not justifiable because it sought to destroy and take control of something that does not belong to them. The roots of jus ad bellum came from St. Thomas Aquinas’ writings, which dealt with the moral side of war. Hugo Grotius, a Dutch jurist and philosopher of the seventeenth century, identified three instances wherein war can be considered just. First, it has to done as self-defense. A state attacked by enemies should arm itself and ward off the attackers. Leaders of countries who do not challenge invading forces should be held morally responsible for the fate of their citizens. Those who easily succumb to the will of foreign troops do not remain faithful to their duties of protecting their nations’ commerce, sovereignty, and the life of their people. Second, war is permissible in order to restore what has been lost, which implies that lands or properties taken by force by a foreign army should be retrieved using warfare. And lastly, war can be made against another state to exact punishment. In the case of Germany and its allies during the Second World War, they received punishment when the allied forces attacked their countries in order to make them pay for having started the war. Notable people since ancient times have believed that war is just. According to Cicero, war should have a clear goal by determining who and when to fight the enemies. Immanuel Kant notes that war is an important element of humanity. Without it, Kant thinks that people won’t reach their perfect state. On another note, Jihad is ideally fought to expand and protect Islamic states. It has to be conducted in such a way that it won’t kill women and children, nor destroy residences. Some extremists have used the Jihad as a means to incite war versus Christians. In this sense, the Jihad postulated by Saddam Hussein was wrong because it resulted to indiscriminate killings. Just like the Jihad, Christians too have their own religious warfare against heretics, Muslims, and pagans, among others. These wars are called crusades, which aimed to defend Christian lands from getting conquered by foreign armies and to recover territories that have been conquered by non-Christians. To conclude, despite the loss of lives as a result of fighting in large scales, it’s unavoidable for men to engage in war due of differences in cultures, goals, and values.However, war should only happen as a last course to resolve conflicts. References Grotius, Hugo. On the Law of War and Peace De Jure Belli ac Pacis. 11 April 2008, http://www. constitution. org/gro/djbp_101. htm Maiese, Michelle. Jus Ad Bellum. June 2003. Beyond Intractability. org. 11 April 2008, http://www. beyondintractability. org/essay/jus_ad_bellum/ Why War Home Page. Kant, Hegel and Deleuze on War. 11 April 13, 2008, http://www. why-war. com/commentary/2004/12/kant_hegel_deleuze_war. html