Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseMost people agree that war is terrible. Yet some people argue that, in rare cases, fighting is the lesser of two evils. For example, a country might have to defend itself from an invader who is killing civilians. Just War theory is a set of rules for deciding when going to war is morally acceptable and how a war must be fought. Its starting point is that war is always an evil, but it may sometimes be the lesser evil, if strict conditions are met.
Where does it come from?
Key terms:
The usual list has seven conditions. A war should meet all of them.
1. Just cause: a good reason, such as defending against attack or protecting people from serious harm.
2. Proper authority: declared by a legitimate government or ruler, not by a private group.
3. Right intention: the aim must be to bring about good, such as peace, not revenge or gaining land.
4. Last resort: talking, sanctions and other peaceful ways have been tried first.
5. Reasonable chance of success: there is no point in a war that cannot be won.
6. Proportionate force: use no more force than needed. The good achieved must outweigh the harm done.
7. No deliberate harm to civilians: soldiers must not target people who are not fighting.
Thinkers separate two questions. The right to go to war asks whether starting a war is justified (conditions 1 to 5). Right conduct in war asks whether it is being fought fairly (conditions 6 and 7). A war can begin for a good reason and still be fought badly. The Geneva Conventions are the best known rules on conduct: they say prisoners and the wounded must be treated humanely and civilians must be protected.
Supporters reply that the theory still gives a useful test, and that it makes leaders explain and defend their decisions.
A holy war is a war believed to be fought for God or for a religion. It is different from a just war. A just war is judged by moral conditions that anyone can apply. A holy war has religious aims, such as defending or spreading a faith or winning back a sacred place. It is declared by religious authority, and the people who fight may be promised spiritual rewards.
The Crusades are a historical example. From 1095, Christian armies from Europe, called to fight by the Pope, set out to win control of Jerusalem and the Holy Land. Those who took part were promised spiritual rewards.
Religions differ on this idea, and many believers argue that religion should never be used to justify fighting. Each religion's own teachings on war are covered in that religion's lessons.
Passive resistance means refusing to obey or co-operate with injustice without using violence. People who use it believe that you can fight an unfair law or ruler without hurting anyone. Common methods are:
Mohandas Gandhi led campaigns against British rule in India. In 1930 he led the Salt March, a long walk to the sea to make salt in protest at the British tax on it. People also boycotted British cloth. India became independent in 1947.
Martin Luther King led the civil rights movement against racial segregation. In 1955-56 the Montgomery bus boycott, in which black passengers refused to use the city buses, was one of its first big successes. In 1963 a huge march on Washington was held. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made segregation in public places unlawful.
Does it work? Supporters say it keeps the moral high ground, wins public sympathy and avoids killing. Critics say it can be slow, protesters can be beaten or jailed, and it may fail against a ruler who has no conscience and ignores the protest. Other events also played a part in both examples, so success is rarely down to protest alone.
Key terms:
(a) Identify three conditions that Just War theory says must be met before a war is fought. [3 marks] (Paper 1, AO1)
(b) Outline two methods of passive resistance. [4 marks] (Paper 1, AO1)
(c) Explain why some people criticise Just War theory. [6 marks] (Paper 1, AO1 and AO2)
(d) 'Passive resistance is always better than war.' Evaluate this statement, showing you have considered different points of view. In your answer you should refer to at least one religion. [12 marks] (Paper 1, AO1 and AO2)
(a) 1. A just cause (1) 2. Declared by a proper authority (1) 3. War must be a last resort (1)
(b) One method is a boycott (1), where people refuse to buy or use something, such as Gandhi's followers refusing British cloth, to put pressure on those in power (1). Another is a sit-in (1), where people sit in a place and refuse to leave, to show peacefully that they will not accept an unfair rule (1).
(c) One criticism is that any side can claim a just cause. In most wars both sides say they are defending themselves or doing what is right, so the rules do not help to decide who is correct, and leaders can use them to excuse a war they want to fight. A second criticism is about modern weapons. Today's weapons can reach a long way and harm huge numbers of people at once, so it is very hard to keep force proportionate and to avoid harming civilians, which the theory says must not happen. This means that, in practice, a war may be impossible to fight in a way that meets every condition, which is why some people say the theory is out of date.
(d) Plan. For: passive resistance avoids killing and keeps the moral high ground. Gandhi's campaigns in India and Martin Luther King's civil rights movement both won major change. Many religions teach that life is precious and that peace should be sought, and non-religious people may argue that no cause is worth killing for. Against: it can be slow and protesters can be hurt or jailed. It may fail against a ruler who ignores it, and some argue that when civilians are being killed by an invader, force may be the lesser evil under Just War theory. The key word is always: one failure or one case where force is justified disproves it. Conclusion (example): passive resistance is often better and has achieved great things, but not in every situation, so "always" goes too far. In your own answer, add what the teachings of your own religion say about war and peace, and contrast them with a humanist or other non-religious view.
For the 12-mark question, use the lesson's examples by name (the Salt March, the Montgomery bus boycott) and judge each argument as you go, instead of just listing them.