Abstract
This paper critically examines Just War Theory and its philosophical foundations, which are conventionally positioned in opposition to pacifism and nonviolent conflict. This paper, however, takes the view that both, Just War Theory as well as pacifism and nonviolent conflict, are equally necessary and complementary approaches to living with the possibilities and tragedies of the human condition. Its approach is grounded in feminist theory and methodology and their connections with Galtung’s models of violence and peace. The paper argues that the weaknesses of Just War Theory are intrinsic to the concept and its intent. The inherent contradiction of Just War Theory being that it intended to translate universal moral principles into reality, which makes them context dependent. Fundamentally, Just War Theory is derived from an ethic of justice ultimately centred on the right to use violence and kill. The right is conditional but means that a path to peace inevitably starts from death. An ethic of care is a philosophy where feminist thought meets pacifism and nonviolent conflict. It starts from the creation of life and charts paths to positive peace through the nurture of the conditions for lives in dignity. If we seek to contain the destructive and give space to the creative aspects of the human condition and understand its two extremes, life and death, in their relation to human agency, better we need to complement the traditional ethic of justice (of war and violence) with an ethic of care.
Publisher
National Documentation Centre (EKT)
Reference33 articles.
1. Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1998.
2. Babic, Jovan. “Pacifism: Is its Moral Foundation Possible or Needed?” In Contemporary Yugoslav Philosophy: The Analytic Approach, edited by Aleksandar Pavković, 57-70. Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Kluwer, 1988.
3. Bailey, Greg, for ICRC Global Affairs Team. “Ethics of Fighting in Ancient Indian Literature.” Religion and Humanitarian Principles. October 3, 2022. https://blogs.icrc.org/religion-humanitarianprinciples/ethics-fighting-ancient-indian-literature/.
4. Cockburn, Cynthia, and Cynthia Enloe. “Militarism, Patriarchy and Peace Movements.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 14, no. 4 (2012): 550-557. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2012.726098.
5. Cockburn, Cynthia. “The Continuum of Violence.” In Sites of Violence: Gender in Conflict Zones, edited by Wenona Giles and Jennifer Hyndman, 24-44. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520937055-004.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献