نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق عمومی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار گروه حقوق عمومی و بین‌الملل دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
جنگ، واقعیتی است که زیست تاریخی انسان را شکل داده است از این رو عجیب نیست که انسان خود را ناگزیر به توجیه آن دیده است. در این میان، نظریه جنگ مشروع به مثابه یک نظریه هنجاری، به‌دنبال توجیه و احیانا ضابطه مند کردن پدیدار جنگ است. در دوران معاصر، مایکل والزر برجسته ترین نظریه‌پرداز در این سنت فکری است که سعی دارد تبیینی فلسفی از این دیدگاه به‌دست دهد. تبیینی که هم ریشه در تجربه مشترک تاریخی انسانها دارد و هم در قالب قواعد مخاصمات مسلحانه صورت موضوعه یافته است. پرسش این است که رابطه اخلاق و حقوق جنگ در نظریه جنگ مشروع والزر چگونه است؟ والز با روش شناسی تاریخی و فهم عرفی از اخلاق جنگ مشروع و مبتنی بر پیش فرض های هگلی به دنبال توجیه واقعگرایانه جنگ و قواعد حاکم بر آن است. در این مقاله با روش تحلیل محتوا نشان داده شد که نظریه جنگ مشروع مدرن به واسطه هگلی بودن (در پیش فرض و روششناسی)، از حیث اخلاقی معیوب و از حیث حقوقی پوزیتیویستی است. برای این امر پس از بررسی تاریخی نظریه که زمینه مفهومی بحث را شکل می دهد، به نقد و بررسی پیش فرض ها و روششناسی هگلی نظریه پرداخته شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Michael Walzer’s Just War Theory: From Moral Realism to Legal Positivism
نویسندگان [English]
- Maziyar Khademi 1
- Alimohammad Fallahzadeh 2
1 Ph.D Student, Public Law, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Public International Law, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Introduction
The moral significance of war is not a recent concern. Throughout history, there have been efforts to moralize and potentially control the resort to war. These efforts often appeal to the branch of ethics concerned with strict obligations—namely, justice. Since the time of Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, Saint Augustine, and Aquinas, this inquiry took a serious shape in what came to be known as just war theory. However, the theory truly flourished in the 16th and 17th centuries, thanks to the contributions of thinkers like Vitoria, Suárez, and Grotius. In the centuries that followed, as international law increasingly focused on formulating practical legal rules, the theoretical tradition of just war was largely neglected. It was not until the second half of the 20th century—especially after the Cold War and the two Gulf Wars—that interest in just war theory was renewed and intensified. Amid this revival, Michael Walzer’s influential book Just and Unjust Wars (1977) sought to provide a philosophical account of a perspective with deep historical roots—one that has also been expressed in the form of codified laws governing military conflict. Walzer’s point of departure is a critique of the realist perspective and a defense of the existence of war ethics. He grounds this morality in the shared understanding and lived experiences of governments and soldiers—the primary actors in war—as well as in the literature that reflects their perspectives. For Walzer, the ethics—or more precisely, the justice—of war appears to be a conventional and contextual concept, rather than a strictly normative and universal one. This raises a critical question: Can customary morality serve as the foundation for determining the requirements of the justice of war? This question demands serious consideration. The present research aimed to explore the relationship between the ethics and the law of war. The study focused on the modern theory of just war, particularly through Walzer’s interpretation, which stands as the most recent, influential, and significant contribution in this field. The research question is as follows: How does Walzer’s modern theory of just war conceptualize the relationship between morality and the law of war? First, the study addresses the historical development of just war theory, providing the conceptual background for the analysis. It then examines the interplay between ethics, law, and war, while offering a critical assessment of Walzer’s theory.
Literature Review
Among the Persian-language literature, there is no specific case that directly addresses the subject of this research. The topic can be found in English-language sources, which are cited in this study.
Materials and Methods
This research employed a descriptive–analytical method and relied on library resources to examine the topic. Michael Walzer is the key theorist within the intellectual tradition of just war theory. He seeks to offer a philosophical account that is both grounded in the shared historical experience of humanity and formulated in the framework of the laws of armed conflicts.
Results and Discussion
War is a persistent reality that has shaped human history. It is therefore unsurprising that humanity has long sought to justify it. Within this context, just war theory—conceived as a normative theory—aims both to legitimize and to regulate the phenomenon of war. In contemporary discourse, Michael Walzer stands out as one of the most influential theorists of just war, offering a philosophical account grounded in shared historical experiences and established rules governing armed conflicts. This raises a central question: What is the relationship between morality and the law of war in Walzer’s theory of just war? Walzer draws on a historical methodology and a common understanding of just war ethics based on Hegelian assumptions, striving to provide a realistic justification for both war itself and the rules that govern it.
Modern theories of just war are essentially Hegelian in nature. This concise statement encapsulates the central argument of the present research, that the modern theory of just war is ethically flawed and legally positivistic. The norms governing warfare can be divided into two categories: the laws of war and the rights in war—where, in moral discourse, justice replaces the notion of rights. In most modern theories of just war, legal and moral dimensions are deeply intertwined, often without a clear distinction between the two. Discussions tend to occur within a normative framework, without clearly separating the laws of war from ethics of war. This issue is not merely a matter of conceptual oversight; rather, it stems from the methodological foundations and assumptions underlying the modern theory of just war. These theories are state-centered in both subject and origin, customary in their normative orientation, and historical in methodology—all of which can be traced back to Hegelian thought. This Hegelian influence is the primary reason for the two flaws identified earlier: ethical inadequacy and legal positivism. Despite its emphasis on the Westphalian order, the modern theory of just war excludes everything outside formal treaties and agreements. Ultimately, the modern theory of just war is not able to provide a genuine moral justification—in the strict sense of morality rather than the conventional one—for the laws of war, a shortcoming which stems from its concretely positivist nature.
Conclusion
Adopting a descriptive–analytical approach, the current research argued that the modern theory of just war—shaped by its Hegelian foundations in both assumptions and methodology—is ethically flawed and legally positivistic. To support this argument, the research offered a historical overview that established the conceptual background of the discussion, followed by a critical examination of its Hegelian assumptions and methodological underpinnings. The study specifically argued that Walzer’s version of the modern theory of just war, while attempting to offer a philosophical and moral justification rooted in historical human experience and formalized practice, is nothing more than a tautology.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Law
- Customary Ethics
- War
- Walzer
- Just War Theory
- حسینی اکبرنژاد، هاله، (1388)، «جنگ علیه حقوق انسانها»، حقوقی بین‌المللی، سال 26، شماره 40، صص 13-40.
- قرباننیا، ناصر، (1382)، «حقوق جنگ در اسلام». رواق اندیشه، شماره ۲۲، دسترسی در:. https://ensani.ir/fa/article
References
- Aquinas, Thomas, (1965), Aquinas: Selected Political Writings, A.P. D’Entreves (ed.) Oxford: Blackwell.
- Aquinas, Thomas, (1975), Saint Summa Theologica, Translated by Marcus Lefébure ed., London: Blackfriars.
- Aristotle, (1984), Politics, Translated by C. Lord, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Augustine, (1962), The Political Writings, Translated by H. Paolucci ed., Chicago: Regnery.
- Augustine, (1969), The Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers, Translated by P. Schaff Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
- Augustine, (1998), The City of God, Translated by R. Ryson Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Axinn, S., (1989), A Moral Military, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
- Bailey, S., (1972), Prohibitions and Restraints in War, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bailyn, B., (1992), The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Barnes, Jonathan, (2005), The Presocratic Philosophers, London and New York: Routledge.
- Best, G., (1994), War and Law Since 1945, Oxford: Clarendon.
- Boemeke, M., (1998), The Treaty of Versailles, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Boucher, D., (1998), Political Theories of International Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Brownlie, I., (1963), International Law and The Use of Force by States, Oxford: Clarendon.
- Christopher, P., (1994), The Ethics of War and Peace Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Coates, Anthony, (2008), “Is the Independent Application of Jus in Bello the way to Limit War?” In David Rodin & Henry Shue, Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Crookston, Emily & May, Larry (2008), War: Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Deane, H.A., (1963), The Political and Social Ideas of St. Augustine, New York: Columbia University Press.
- Doyle, W., (1990), The Oxford History of the French Revolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Eland, I., (2005), The Empire Has No Clothes Oakland, CA: The Independent Institute.
- Elshtain, J.B., (1992), Just War Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.
- Eppstein, (1935), The Catholic Tradition of the Law of Nations, Washington, DC: CAIP.
- Evans, Gareth, (2001), The Responsibility to Protect, Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
- Ferguson, N., (2004), Colossus, New York: Basic.
- Ford, J. (1944), “The Morality of Obliteration Bombing,” Theological Studies, No. 5, pp. 261–309.
- France, J., (1999), Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000–1300, London: University College of London Press.
- Gilbert, M., (1987), The Holocaust, New York: Henry Holt.
- Grotius, H., (1949), The Law of War and Peace, Translated by L.R. Loomis RoslynNY: WJ Black Inc.
- Grotius, Hugo, (2006) “On the Law of War and Peace,” in The Ethics of War: Classic and Contemporary Readings, Gregory Reichberg, Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby (eds.), Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- Hardt, M. & Negri, A., (2004), Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire, New York: Penguin.
- Hartle, A., (1989), Moral Issues in Military Decision-Making Kansas, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.
- Hegel, G.W. F., (2008), Elements of the Philosophy of Right, Translated by T.M. Knox, Stephen Houlgate (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Ignatieff, M., (1994), Blood and Belonging, Toronto: Viking.
- Ignatieff, M., (1997), The Warrior’s Honor, New York: Doubleday.
- Ignatieff, M., (2000), Virtual War, Toronto: Viking.
- James T. Johnson, (1987), The Quest for Peace, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Johnson, J.T., (1984), Can Modern War Be Just?, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Johnson, James T., (1975), Ideology, Reason and The Limitation of War, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Johnson, James T., (1981), The Just War Tradition and The Restraint of War, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Johnson, James T., (1997), The Holy War Idea in Western and Islamic Traditions, Philadelphia: Penn State University Press.
- Johnson, James Turner, (2006), “The Just War Idea: The State of the Question”, Social Philosophy and Social Policy, Vol. 23, Issue 1, pp. 167–195., 167.
- Kant, I., (1991), Political Writings, Hans Reiss (ed.), H. B. Nisbet (trans.), New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Keegan, J., (1990), The Second World War, New York: Vintage.
- Keegan, J., (2000), The First World War, New York: Vintage.
- Kelsay, J., (1993), Islam and War, London: John Knox.
- Kelsay, J., & Johnson, James T., (1991), Just War and Jihad, New York: Greenwood.
- Kraut, R., (2002), Aristotle’s Political Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Lackey, D., (1989), The Ethics of War and Peace, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Langan, J., & O’Brien, W.V., (1986), The Nuclear Dilemma and The Just War Tradition, Lexington, New Britian, Connecticut, U.S.A.: Lexington Books
- Reichberg, Gregory, (2008), “Just War and Regular War: Competing Paradigms”, In David Rodin & Henry Shue, Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 193—213.
- Locke, J., (1988), Two Treatises of Civil Government, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- MacMillan, M., (2003), Paris 1919, Toronto: Random House.
- McKenna, J., (1960), “Ethics and War: A Catholic View”, American Political Science Review, No. 54, pp. 647–58, Doi: 10.2307/1953943.
- McMahan, Jeff, (1994), “The Divergence Between the Morality of War and the Laws of War, in Innocence, Self-Defense, and Killing in War”, Journal of Political Philosophy, 2, No. 3, pp.193–221, Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.1994.tb00021.x.
- Melzer, Y., (1975), Concepts of Just War, Jerusalem: Hebrew University.
- Moore, J.N., (1974), Law and Civil War in the Modern World, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- O’Brien, W.V., (1965), The Law of Limited Armed Conflict, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
- Orend, B., (2000), War and International Justice: A Kantian Perspective, Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
- Orend, B., (2002), Human Rights: Concept and Context, Peterborough, Waterloo, Ontario: Broadview.
- Orend, B., (2006), The Morality of War, Canada: Broadview Press.
- Osgood, R., & Tucker, R., (1967), Force, Order and Justice, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Phillips, R., (1984), War and Justice, Oklahoma City: University of Oklahoma Press.
- Ramsey, P., (1961), War and The Christian Conscience, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Ramsey, P., (1968), The Just War, New York: Scribners Sons.
- Regan, R., (1996), Just War: Principles and Cases Washington, DC: Catholic University Press of America.
- Reisman, W. Michael & Antoniou, Chris T., (1994), The Laws of War: A Comprehensive Collection of Primary Documents on International Laws Governing Armed Conflict, New York: Vintage Books.
- Riley-Smith, J., (1999), The Oxford History of The Crusades, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rodin, David, (2008), Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rosen, S., (2004), Holy War: Violence and The Bhagavad Gita, Bombay: Deepak.
- Rosenwein, B., (2002), A Short History of the Middle Ages, Peterborough, Waterloo, Ontario: Broadview.
- Russell, F., (1975), The Just War in the Middle Ages, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Ryan, J.K., (1940), Modern War and Basic Ethics, Milwaukee, WN: Bruce.
- Schmitt, C., (2011), Writings on War, Translated by Timothy Nunan, Berlin: Polity Press.
- Shue, Henry, (2008), “Do We Need a "Morality of War"?”, In David Rodin & Henry Shue, Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sterba, J., (1985), The Ethics of War and Nuclear Deterrence, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Teichman, J., (1986), Pacifism and The Just War, Oxford: Blackwell
- Temes, P., (2003), The Just War, New York: Ivan Dee.
- Thucydides, (1974), History of the Peloponnesian War, Translated by Rex Warner, M. I. Finley (ed.), Penguin Books.
- Tooke, J.D., (1975), The Just War in Aquinas and Grotius, London: SPCK.
- Tuck, R., (1999), The Rights of War and Peace, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Tucker, R., (1960), The Just War, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Tzu, Sun, (1963), The Art of War, Translated by S. Griffith, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Walker, M., (1995), The Cold War: A History, New York: Henry Holt.
- Walzer, M, (Fall, 1992), “The Idea of Holy War in Ancient Israel”, The Journal of Religious Ethics, 20, No. 2, pp. 215-228.
- Walzer, M., (2000), Just and Unjust Wars, New York: Basic Books.
- Walzer, M., (2004), Arguing About War, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Wasserstrom, R., (1970), War and Morality Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Williams, Howard, (1991), International Relations in Political Theory, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
- Williams, Howard, (2012), Kant and the End of War: A Aritique of Just War Theory, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Dan, Zupan (2008). “A Presumption of the Moral Equality of Combatants: a Citizen Soldier' Perspective” In David Rodin & Henry Shue, Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 214—225.
Références
- Cicero, (1928), De Re Publica, 3, XXIII, Translated by C. Keyes, New York: Putnam.
- Cicero, (1961), De Officiius, Translated by W. Miller Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
)