Just War Theory: Principles of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello in Contemporary Conflict

Overview

This essay examines just war theory as a philosophical framework for determining when nations are justified in going to war and how they should conduct themselves during armed conflict. The paper analyzes two primary components of just war theory: jus ad Bellum (right to go to war) and Jus in Bello (proper conduct in war), with examples including the US intervention in Afghanistan and NATO's Libya intervention.

What this essay covers

Preview

Philosophy of War and Peace

Student Full Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Full Name

Professor Full Name

Due Date

Philosophy of War and Peace

Question 1

Introduction

A just war theory is a philosophy used to illustrate how wars should be conducted and why a country should go to war with another nation. I prefer the just war theory because it has been effective in the past years. This essay aims to demonstrate the just war theory and its use in war zones. The theory is divided into two categories: the right to go to war (jus ad Bellum) and proper conduct in war (Jus in Bello). People in the field use the two sets of criteria to decide how they will conduct themselves on the battlefield. For example, it stipulates how prisoners of war are supposed to be treated. It also emphasizes the kind of weapons that are supposed to be used.

Philosophy of War and Peace

Right to Go to War (Jus Ad Bellum)

Each country has a right to go to war as long as the war is justified. Before a nation goes to war, it must observe both jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello. The two criteria for going to war are essential because they ensure a country adheres to international conventions. A nation will also get the international community's support if it has observed the two criteria (Frowe, 2015). Several things fall under jus ad Bellum or the right to war.

More Philosophy samples