The precise origins of the just war theory are unknown, as a myriad of theorists have added their own varying inputs to it over time, making the theory more extensive. The just war theory dates back to the Ancient Greek and Roman empires, and was later built upon by Christian theologians like Thomas Aquinas. This theory is still relevant in modern times and is outlined in various texts such as War and Justice by Michael Walzer. This is because the circumstances wherein wars can be considered ethically correct is still a topic of elaborate debate. Thus, the just war theory is used in present times as a framework to determine the ethical implications of wars and the categorisation of military action.
The just war theory outlines a set of distinct parameters, which if fulfilled, justify wars and thus negate the need for collective action against the aggressor. The first criterion is legitimacy. A war is considered legitimate if an authorised governing body approves it. For example, a war will be considered just if a legitimate intergovernmental organisation such as the UN Security Council authorised the military action. Secondly, a war is just if the objective is both peaceful and achievable. The objective of the war must not be materialistic in nature, or selfish, it must be aimed towards peaceful restoration of harmony. Moreover, the objectives must be realistic and accomplishable, otherwise a war is not just as it is merely unnecessary violence evoked to accomplish the unattainable. Thirdly, the act of war must be proportional to the initial act of aggression that instigated the turbulence in relations between the stakeholders involved, as in order to be fair, there can not be disproportionate levels of violence. The fourth parameter is exhaustion of all other options which may have resolved the conflict such as diplomacy and negotiations, thus making war the last resort. The fifth criterion is that the war does not violate any international treaties, as Jus in bello, justness of how the war is fought, is equally important as Jus ad bellum, ‘justness for entering the war’ in the just war theory. International treaties such as the Geneva Protocol which bans the usage of chemical and biological weapons in war are critical components of abiding by the just war theory. Lastly, international law recognises military action to be legitimate if a stakeholder involved in the conflict asked for aid.
A recent example that aptly demonstrates the framework known as the just war theory is the military action launched by the NATO against the Gadaffi regime in Libya in 2011. The NATO led war in Libya is considered to be a just war, as it fulfils the parameters coined under the just war theory.
Firstly, the war in Libya was legitimate as it was authorised by a UN Security Council Resolution, agreeing “all necessary measures to protect civilians”, thus enabling the NATO to determine whether military action was necessary in order to restore negative as well as positive peace in the turbulent nation state of Libya, amidst the disruptive political climate due to the Arab Spring Uprisings, causing worldwide tension.
Secondly, the objectives of the war were both peaceful and achievable. The purpose of the military action against Gadaffi was to protect the civilians of Libya. The 2005 UN general assembly outlined that nation states have a responsibility to protect their populations from crimes against humanity and if a nation state fails to do so, the UN Security Council has the
responsibility to use its powers to intervene. Under this pretext, the objective of the military action against Gadaffi was justified as he failed to exercise responsible sovereignty by calling his own citizens “cockroaches” and “rats”, even resorting to threatening them with violence, calling for his supporters to ‘go out and cleanse the city of Benghazi’. Gaddafi had sworn to hunt those who protested his rule ‘inch by inch, room by room, home by home, alleyway by alleyway, person by person’. Furthermore, the violence of Gaddafi’s regime soon extended beyond just threats. On February 25 pro-Qaddafi gunmen in Tripoli attacked unarmed protesters and others as they emerged from mosques after Friday prayers. Moreover, the objective of the NATO to remove Gaddafi from power, in order to protect Libyans was achievable, as we view this situation with hindsight, as the campaign was a success as Gadaffi was removed from power within the same year, 2011, of the beginning of the military campaign. Additionally, the military intervention was under a coalition of nation-states, thus putting Gaddafi’s regime in a significantly weaker and less equipped position than the NATO led coalition. Thus, the military campaign in Libya was prompted by both achievable objectives, and goals aimed at restoring peace in the country plagued with civil war.
Thirdly, the war in Libya was just as it was proportional to the initial acts of aggression, as well as a last resort due to all other forms of peace restoration failing. The initial acts of aggression which prompted the international community to retaliate were Gaddafi’s regime causing crimes against humanity. For example, On March 15 Gaddafi loyalists launched a heavy assault on the eastern city of Ajdābiyā, the last large rebel-held city on the route to Benghazi. Moreover, a UN report stated that some detainees, largely constituting of Sub Saharan Africans, had been subject to torture. Rebel forces had emptied entire villages of black Libyans, and raped black women outside refugee camps. The international community was appalled by these horrifying inhumane acts, and tried various methods to peacefully end the mistreatment of Libyans at the hands of the Gaddafi regime. For example, the UN Security Council unanimously approved exacting sanctions, imposing a travel ban, an arms embargo, and freezing the Gaddafi family’s assets. The situation in Libya was also referred to the International Criminal Court. On February 28 the United States announced that it had frozen at least $30 billion in Libyan assets. However, these measures had failed, as the civil war in Libya continued to aggravate at a rapid pace, as is evident from the attack on Ajdābiyā in March by Gaddafi loyalists. Hence, the military campaign in Libya was a just war as it was both a last resort to restore peace in the nation-state, as well as proportional considering the horrifying extent to which Gaddafi went to curb the revolts, sinking to the level of human rights abuses which violate international law.
Lastly, the military campaign of 2011 in Libya was a just war because military action is seen as legitimate in international law if a nation state requests help from others. In the case of Libya, the government of Libya directly did not ask for international aid, because the ruling party was the dictatorship under Gadaffi. However, a number of high-level officials of Libya, including the minister of justice and a number of senior Libyan diplomats, including the Libyan ambassador to the United Nations; resigned in protest and issued statements condemning the regime. A number of Libyan embassies around the world began to fly Libya’s pre-Gaddafi flag, signalling support for the uprising against the dictator. Additionally, two Libyan fighter pilots flew their jets to Malta, choosing to defect rather than obey orders to bomb Benghazi. These actions vividly outlined a profound anti-Gaddafi atmosphere which was prevalent in even the highest ranking posts of governance. Thus, signalling that the majority of Libyans were against the abusive rule of Gadaffi, consequently justifying the military intervention led by the NATO as it was in sync with the desires of the majority of civilians of the nation-state, thus the military action represented their collective desires and respected their right to choose their political future.
In all, the just war theory is an elaborate theory which is used as a framework to determine whether a war has occurred for justifiable reasons or if it is an unnecessary measure that disrupts peace. It consists of two parts, jus ad bellum and jus in bello, which mean justice before a war and justice during a war, respectively. The NATO led military intervention in Libya in 2011 is a contemporary example of a war which is considered to be justifiable under the just war theory as it fulfils all the parameters.