"Just War" Essays

These two essays on the concept of "Just War" were prepared as an assignment for the International Law of War & Crime seminar at Albany Law School this semester.

Just War Theory: Ambiguities and Varying Approaches

By Eric Brenner
Eric Brenner is a third-year student at Albany Law School. He graduated with honors from Siena College in 2014 with a degree in Finance.  At the law school, he is currently the Executive Managing Editor for Volume 80 of the Albany Law Review.
Eric has been a teaching assistant and research assistant for members of the Albany Law faculty, and he has also served as a judicial intern in U.S. District Court for both the Hon. Lawrence E. Kahn and the Hon. Charles J. Siragusa.
Later this year, his Note on reverse mortgages will be published by the Albany Law Review.
Read the Essay.


Jus ad Bellum

By Corey Carmello
Corey Carmello is a third-year student at Albany Law School. He graduated summa cum laude from the University at Albany in 2014 with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science.
While in law school, Corey has interned with Judge Lawrence E. Kahn, of the Northern District of New York, the Albany County District Attorney’s Office, and the Appeals and Opinions Bureau of the New York State Attorney General’s Office. He is also a member of the Albany Law Review.
Upon graduation, Corey will be working as an associate for Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy.
Read the Essay.

Jus ad Bellum

By Corey Carmello

Corey Carmello is a third-year student at Albany Law School. He graduated summa cum laude from the University at Albany in 2014 with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science.
While in law school, Corey has interned with Judge Lawrence E. Kahn, of the Northern District of New York, the Albany County District Attorney’s Office, and the Appeals and Opinions Bureau of the New York State Attorney General’s Office. He is also a member of the Albany Law Review.
Upon graduation, Corey will be working as an associate for Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy.
This essay was prepared as an assignment for the International Law of War & Crime seminar this semester.

            The concept of a “just war,” or jus ad bellum, has been discussed and debated on for hundreds of years.  In fact, one of the first and most influential formulators of the just war theory, Saint Augustine, lived in the fourth and fifth centuries.[1]  Augustine explained that a war is just when it is necessary for defense and the protection of the common good.[2]

            In the thirteenth century, Saint Thomas Aquinas opined that a war is just if, among other considerations, the attack is due to some fault of those attacked and the intentions are to advance good and avoid greater evil.[3]

Although early Christian thinkers were the ones that theorized the just war concept,[4] it is still extremely important and relevant in the international law community today.[5]  That community is split, however, on what makes a war just.  On one end of the spectrum, pacifists are of the belief that a war is always immoral and never just—even when attacked first.[6]  On the other end, realists contend that war is outside the realm of moral judgment and is a mere “human activity.”[7]

The vast majority of legal scholars fall somewhere in the middle, and the suggestion of Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas—that a war is just when it prevents some greater evil—is intertwined in many of their theories.[8]

Legal scholars and philosophical thinkers seem to focus on two things when discussing the concept of a just war: (1) nature/natural law and (2) international law.  First, scholars have opined that the just war concept cannot be fully understood without grasping human nature and the “call to justice” that is embedded in it.[9]

Augustine opined that human nature calls for us to “love our neighbor.”[10]  Because of that, Augustine and his current following believe that a war is just when it furthers this instinct of protecting and loving your neighbor.[11]  That is to say, when “the aim is to repair that which has been torn asunder by a prior violence and to protect a community for which one has responsibility, the war is just.”[12]  When a war is just, according to this theory, the violence helps keep civic peace and possibly even minimizes the civilian casualties that would otherwise result from not fighting the war.[13] 

Next, in modern day, we have rules and regulations that guide us in our quest to determine what makes a war just.  The Charter of the United Nations permits the use of military force on two occasions: (1) it is approved by the Security Council, and/or (2) if the force is being used in self-defense from an armed attack.[14]

According to Sweeney, the United States’ entry into World War II was a classic example of a just war under this definition due to Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor.[15]  On the other hand, it is less clear whether the Iraq War, which was not approved by the Security Council, was just.[16]

Additionally, as an aside, many scholars believe that this self-defense idea in the context of just war extends to anticipatory self-defense.[17]  But “the requirement of an armed attack in the U.N. Charter implies a suicidal wait for a nuclear first strike.”[18]

Whether founded in human nature or international rules and regulations, at the most basic level, the concept of just war refers to a war that is aimed at correcting a wrong, defending oneself or others, and supporting civic peace.

---

[1] John F. Coverdale, An Introduction to the Just War Tradition, 16 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 221, 225 (2004).

[2] Id. at 225–27.

[3] Joseph C. Sweeney, The Just War Ethic in International Law, 27 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1865, 1869 (2004).

[4] Coverdale, supra note 1, at 223.

[5] Id.

[6] Id. at 276.

[7] Id.

[8] Id. at 277.

[9] See, e.g., Jean Bethke Elshtain, The Just War Tradition and Natural Law: A Discussion, 28 Fordham Int’l L.J. 742, 750 (2005).

[10] Id. at 749.

[11] Id. at 750–52.

[12] Id. at 750.

[13] Id. at 751.

[14] Sweeney, supra note 3, at 1867–68.

[15] Id. at 1872.

[16] Id. at 1883.

[17] Id. at 1893–94.

[18] Id.

"Just War"

Here are two essays on the concept of "Just War" prepared as an assignment for the International Law of War & Crime seminar at Albany Law School this past fall semester.

Just War Influence

By Nick Gargano
Nick Gargano is a third year student at Albany Law School. He graduated from Long Island University (C.W. Post) with a B.A. in History concentrating in military air and sea power.
Prior to law school, Nick worked in concert production touring around the world with well-known musical groups for 15 years thus, expanding his love for history and igniting his interest in working in the field of international law.
This essay was prepared for Professor Bonventre's Fall 2014 International Law of War and Crime Seminar. Read the Essay.


The Earthly City Must Hold Violence in Check

By Kate Roberts
Kate Roberts is a second-year student at Albany Law School.  She graduated magna cum laude from Iona College with a major in Political Science and minors in Psychology and Philosophy.
Ms. Roberts is a sub-editor on the Albany Government Law Review, and a student editor for the New York State Bar Association Environmental Lawyer. After her first year of law school, Ms. Roberts interned at the New York State Attorney General’s office in the Environmental Protection Bureau. In her free time, Ms. Roberts enjoys hiking, running, and cooking.
This essay was prepared for Professor Bonventre's Fall 2014 International Law of War and Crime Seminar. Read the Essay.

The Earthly City Must Hold Violence in Check

By Kate Roberts
Kate Roberts is a second-year student at Albany Law School.  She graduated magna cum laude from Iona College with a major in Political Science and minors in Psychology and Philosophy.
Ms. Roberts is a sub-editor on the Albany Government Law Review, and a student editor for the New York State Bar Association Environmental Lawyer. After her first year of law school, Ms. Roberts interned at the New York State Attorney General’s office in the Environmental Protection Bureau. In her free time, Ms. Roberts enjoys hiking, running, and cooking.
This essay was prepared for Professor Bonventre's Fall 2014 International Law of War and Crime Seminar.


Under an Augustinian argument, “by nature, no man has dominion over any other . . . by nature, we are not evil.”[1] Additionally, just war is “driven by a call to justice . . .” whereby the goal “is to repair that which has been torn asunder by a prior violence and to protect a community for which one has a responsibility.”[2]

Just war theory focuses on two issues: (1) jus ad bellum—the conditions that can justify recourse to war, and (2) jus in bello—the limitations on the methods that may justly be used in waging war.[3] Just war requires a justification not only for entering into a war, but also for the killing of enemy combatants.[4] According to many just war theorists, the deliberate killing of enemy combatants is only morally justified if the conditions of jus ad bellum and jus in bello are met.[5]

Jus ad bellum—the justification of war—is met with four conditions: (1) just cause; (2) declaration by a lawful authority; (3) appropriate proportion between the goals sought and the costs; and (4) war is the last resort.[6] Contemporary causes sufficient to justify war include individual and collective self-defense,[7] humanitarian interventions, and preemptive attacks.[8]

Islamic Philosophy in Just War Theory and International Law

Whatever Happened to the Faith of Peace?

By Patrick M. Domery
Patrick Domery is a 2013 graduate of Albany Law School. He is currently an Excelsior Fellow at the Higher Education Services Corporation.  Writing this paper was an educational experience for Patrick who, despite having studied philosophy as an undergraduate, had relatively little exposure to Islamic philosophy.  Patrick built upon previous work on just war in the West to learn about Islamic philosophy and draw parallels and distinctions from Christian and Greek traditions. 
Patrick's essay, "The Just War Philosophy," was previously published on ILS.
This paper was prepared for the International Law of War & Crime Seminar, Fall 2012.


In the United States, the Islamic world is often portrayed negatively in the media and popular culture as a region of terror and bloodshed. Contrast this with the repeated claim that Islam is a faith of peace.

By looking at the philosophical underpinnings of Western just war theory and Islamic philosophy, this paper attempts to show the major similarities and differences between the two. Ultimately, this paper attempts to determine whether Islamic philosophy is compatible with the current system of international law.
____________________________
To read the paper, open HERE.

Just War: Augustine, Aquinas, & Today

By Andrea A. Long
Andrea Long, a third-year student at Albany Law School, is the Executive Editor of the Center for Judicial Process. She is a magna cum laude graduate of the Crane School of Music at SUNY Potsdam. Andrea is a Senior Editor on the Albany Law Review, she served as Project Director of the Education Pro Bono Project, and she works year-round as a law clerk in the Office of General Counsel of New York State United Teachers. She was both the winner and Best Oral Advocate of the 2011 Domenick L. Gabrielli Appellate Advocacy Moot Court Competition. For the Fall 2012 semester, Andrea is a legal intern in the law school's Domestic Violence Prosecution Hybrid Clinic.
Andrea's essay is the second in the series on Just War prepared for the International Law of War & Crime Seminar, Fall 2012.


Just war is a concept that has been widely debated and philosophized for as long as there has been war. It offers a moderate view of war that is appealing: the concept that in certain circumstances, war is justified without being morally wrong.

Just war encompasses two separate prongs. The first is jus ad bellum, or the right to go to war, and the second is jus in bello, or proper conduct within war.[1] Both prongs must be met in order to consider a war just.

The right to go to war is typically thought to mean war waged in self-defense, or sometimes in defense of another nation. Conduct within war also must be proper in order for the war to be considered just. Proper conduct could mean a proportional response or fair treatment of prisoners of war.

Two philosophers in particular, Augustine and Aquinas, are known for their contributions to just war theory.  Augustine was heavily influenced by his Christian beliefs and the religious beliefs of society in general.[2] His notions of what just war meant to people and Christians were radical for his time period. However, Augustine himself saw the just war concept as an extension of Christian beliefs, rather than a philosophy that diverged from them.

Essays on Just War

This post introduces a collection of short essays on the concept of just war--jus ad bellum and jus in bello. They were prepared by students in the International Law of War and Crime Seminar at Albany Law School, Fall Semester 2012.

The Just War Philosophy
By Patrick M. Domery
Patrick Domery, a third-year law student at Albany Law School, graduated from Boston University where he majored in philosophy. He is an Associate Editor of the Albany Law Review. Read the Essay.

Just War: Augustine, Aquinas, & Today

By Andrea A. Long

Andrea Long, a third-year student at Albany Law School, is the Executive Editor of the Center for Judicial Process and an Associate Editor of the Albany Law Review. She is a graduate of the Crane School of Music at SUNY Potsdam. (Her essay will appear in the next post.) Read the Essay

Introduction to the Just War Tradition
By Michelle K. Mallette
Micky Mallette, a third-year student at Albany Law School, is the Executive Director of the Center for Judicial Process and the Albany Law Review's Executive Editor for State Constitutional Commentary. She is a graduate of the United States Military Academy. (Her essay will appear in the following post.) Read the Essay

The Just War Philosophy

By Patrick M. Domery
Patrick Domery is a third-year law student at Albany Law School.  Writing about philosophy was a return to old habits for Patrick, who graduated from Boston University in 2009, where he majored in philosophy and mass communications with a concentration in advertising.  Patrick currently works for the New York State Education Department, and is an Associate Editor of the Albany Law Review.  
Patrick's essay is the first in a series on Just War prepared for the International Law of War & Crime Seminar, Fall 2012.


As a philosophical matter, the concept of “just war” is one possible framework for answering a simple question. Any inquiry into just war boils down to the essential question of ethics: What ought we do? In more nuanced terms, just war theorists seek to define the boundaries of when war should be waged, and by what means.[1] Just war discussions have been taken up by a who's-who of classical ethicists such as Aristotle, Cicero,[2] Augustine, and Aquinas.[3] The discussion continues today in the realm of law and international relations.

As one more recent philosophy writer puts it, “War is a brutal and ugly enterprise. Yet it remains central to human history and social change. These two facts together might seem paradoxical and inexplicable, or they might reveal deeply disturbing facets of the human character.”[4] As such, war has proven to be fertile ground for philosophers and legal scholars who seek to rationalize, justify and explain this apparent contradiction.

From this philosophical urge, three major theories have developed: Realism, passivism, and just war theory.[5] The easiest way, it seems, to explain just war theory is to set it apart from the former two theories.