Just War And Human Rights: Fighting With Right Intention

Description

Discusses how just war theory needs to be revised to better secure and respect human rights. Warfare in the twenty-first century presents significant challenges to the modern state. Serious questions have arisen about the use of drones, target selection, civilian exposure to harm, intervening for humanitarian reasons, and war as a means of forcing regime change. In Just War and Human Rights Todd Burkhardt argues that updating the laws of war and reforming just war theory is needed. A twenty-year veteran of the US Army, Burkhardt claims that war is impermissible unless it is engaged, fought, and concluded with right intention. A state must not only have a just cause and limit its war-making activity in order to vindicate the just cause, but it must also seek to vindicate its just cause in a way that yields a just and lasting peace. A just and lasting peace is motivated by the just war tenet of right intention and predicated on the realization of human rights. Therefore, human rights should not only dictate how a state treats its own people but also how a state treats the people of other countries, insulating them and protecting innocent civilians from the harms of war. Cover Half Title Title Copyright Dedication Contents Preface Acknowledgments Introduction Chapter 1. Right Intention and a Just and Lasting Peace General Conduct Required for a Just and Lasting Peace Public Acts Specific Conduct Required for a Just and Lasting Peace Human Rights Due Care Self-determination Education Totality of Conduct Conclusion Chapter 2. Reasonable Chance of Success: Analyzing Postwar Requirements in the Ad Bellum Phase Empirical Case The Victor’s Responsibility The International Community’s Responsibility Conclusion Chapter 3. Post Bellum Obligations of Noncombatant Immunity The Distinction Between Combatants and Noncombatants Human Rights Dual Purpose Targets Purely Military Versus Dual Purpose Targets Ex Post Obligation: Belligerents Should Immunize Civilians from Residual Effects Ex Post Obligation: Belligerents Should be Responsible for Gross Miscalculations The Difference Between Noncombatant Immunity and Human Rights Conclusion Chapter 4. Negative and Positive Corresponding Duties of the Responsibility to Protect The Iciss, World Summit, and Implementing the Responsibility to Protect Sovereignty and the Right to Nonintervention are Conditional Intervention is Required Physical Security Rights Take Precedence Safeguarding Basic Rights The International Community Should Fulfill this Duty Via the Un The International Community has a Duty to Intervene Reasonable Chance of Success Last Resort Welcome the Intervention Stipulated Timeline All Things Considered Proportionate Rights of Soldiers The Volunteering and Availability of Military Resources If the Un Fails to Act, Individual States may Act The Un’s Duty to Improve Conclusion Chapter 5. Justified Drone Strikes are Predicated on Responsibility to Protect Norms Imminent Threat Responsibility to Protect Additional Necessary Conditions Moderate Instrumental Approach Precedent Psychological Strain Secrecy and Program Control Ally Restriction Precedent Conclusion Chapter 6. Updating the Fourth Geneva Convention Revised Geneva Convention Ad Hoc Legal Arrangements The United Nations Postwar Obligations Conclusion Conclusion Notes Bibliography Index Vita