An examination of the concept of just war

Abstract

We shall approach the concept of just war from the point of view of a citizen who is attempting to decide whether or not he ought, or whether or not it is permissible for him, to take part in a war. At the outset we must note an ambiguity in the English 'a just war'. By it we may mean either of the things designated by the Latin terms' jus ad bellum' and 'jus in bello'. It is the former with which we shall be concerned here and it is to that that I am referring when I use the phrase 'just war'. That is to say, we will be considering the question of justice in relation to engaging in a war, not the question of justice in relation to the prosecution of a war. Of course, the two ideas are closely related. For example, it might be held that if one has a right to go to war then one is justified in using any means to exercise that right, thus brushing aside any considerations of justice in the prosecution of the war. On the other hand, it might be argued that the standards in the prosecution of war are such that there can never be a right to go to war. But despite this fact of the close inter-relatedness of the two conceptions, it is necessary to keep them distinct in our thought about just war in order to avoid confusion. It is simply as an aid to clear thinking that this distinction is made.