Abstract
Abstract
My starting point is the fact that there are powerful moral objections to the attacking, and indeed targeting, of non-combatants. This is a key element in the moral guidance offered by the jus in bello for the conduct of war. As we shall see, however, there are ambiguities in the interpretation of the terms ‘combatant’ and ‘non-combatant’ that make this guidance contestable in various ways. Moreover, on any plausible interpretation, this prohibition was more honoured in the breach than in the observance during many of the wars of the twentieth century that were dominated by the awesome power of air bombardment. Against this trend, the prohibition has become more respected, at least in word, if not always in deed, during some of the larger scale wars of the past fifteen years or so. There is, of course, no reason to become complacent about this since non-combatants are still directly targeted in many contemporary conflicts, and where they are not, their lives and property are still at great risk from the morally glib acceptability of the doctrine of ‘collateral damage’.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Cited by
8 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
1. Moral dimension of military uniform;Vojno delo;2023
2. Epigraph;The Meaning of Terrorism;2021-05-25
3. Dedication;The Meaning of Terrorism;2021-05-25
4. Copyright Page;The Meaning of Terrorism;2021-05-25
5. List of Abbreviations;Asymmetric Killing;2020-04-29