Rewriting the Just War Tradition: Just War in Classical Greek Political Thought and Practice

O’Driscoll, Cian

doi:10.1111/isqu.12187

Cited by 17 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…S ohledem na stanovování limitů použití síly a konkrétní navrhovaná restriktivní opatření ve vztahu k válce mají sice někteří tendenci vybrané osobnosti starověku na mapu tradice spravedlivé války skutečně zakreslit (viz např. Johnson 1991;Bellamy 2006, 15 -29;Sorabji 2006;Husby 2009;Syse 2010;Raymond 2010;O'Driscoll 2015O'Driscoll a 2018aKoniar 2016;Cox 2018b aj.). Mezi tehdejším a současným uchopením oboru spravedlivé války se ovšem rozprostírá propast mimo jiné i kvůli široce rozšířenému způsobu, jakým docházelo v antickém světě k selektivnímu přístupu k ochraně lidských životů a odepření universality základních lidských práv -jde pochopitelně o otázku tzv.…”

Section: Tradice Spravedlivé Války a Proč Je Nadále Obtížné Nalézt Po...unclassified

Kdy se zrodila teorie spravedlivé války v západním kulturně-civilizačním prostoru?

Rigel¹

2023

filozofia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tradice Spravedlivé Války a Proč Je Nadále Obtížné Nalézt Po...unclassified

Kdy se zrodila teorie spravedlivé války v západním kulturně-civilizačním prostoru?

Rigel¹

2023

filozofia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 This way of thinking about war has a long history (Johnson, 1975, 1981; Reichberg et al, 2006; Russell, 1975). Scholars usually trace its origins to early Christian political theology, though there is evidence to suggest that its roots extend much further back in time (Cox, 2017; O’Driscoll, 2015, 2018; Raymond, 2010). Over time it coalesced around three discrete but interlocking sets of principles bearing on the conditions that justify the recourse to war ( jus ad bellum ), the limits that constrain the conduct of war ( jus in bello ), and the desiderata that should guide its conclusion ( jus post bellum ).…”

Section: The Victory Of Just Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

No substitute for victory? Why just war theorists can’t win

O’Driscoll

2019

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Victory has historically been regarded as the ‘ telos’ or ‘very object’ of war. As one well-placed commentator has noted, war is all about winning. It is baffling to note, then, that contemporary just war theory, the predominant framework for addressing the moral and legal questions that war raises, makes no allowance for victory. Today’s just war theorists shun the language of victory, preferring instead to speak about the ‘endings’ of warfare. This article investigates why just war theorists have been so reluctant to engage with the idiom of victory. It identifies seven principal objections to accommodating victory in just war theory and subjects them to cross-examination. It concludes that while there are good reasons for regarding the discourse of victory as deeply problematic, these same reasons could (and arguably should) be taken as an argument for embracing rather than ignoring victory within the just war framework. Such a move would not only spare just war theory of the charge of irrelevance by ensuring that it remains connected to the material realities of modern warfare, it would also illuminate the tragic character of just war itself, revealing both its necessity and limitations.

show abstract

“…This article concentrates on Egyptian ideology and warfare during the three major periods of centralized monarchy: the Old Kingdom (2686-2181 BCE), Middle 1 For Greek and Roman just war thought: Ober (1994); Bellamy (2006, 15-20); Reichberg, Syse, Begby (2006, 3-59); Syse (2006;; Lanni (2008); Neff (2008, 13-38); Raymond (2010); Cox (2015, 2-4); O'Driscoll (2015). Nevertheless, the focus remains fixed on the West.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the History of the Just War: The Ethics of War in Ancient Egypt

Cox

2017

International Studies Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article expands our understanding of the historical development of just war thought by offering the first detailed analysis of the ethics of war in ancient Egypt. It revises the standard history of the just war tradition by demonstrating that just war thought developed beyond the boundaries of Europe and existed many centuries earlier than the advent of Christianity or even the emergence of Greco-Roman thought on the relationship between war and justice. It also suggests that the creation of a prepotent ius ad bellum doctrine in ancient Egypt, based on universal and absolutist claims to justice, hindered the development of ius in bello norms in Egyptian warfare. It is posited that this development prefigures similar developments in certain later Western and Near Eastern doctrines of just war and holy war. Kingdom (2055-1650 BCE), and New Kingdom (1552-1069 BCE). 3 During this time the Egyptians suffered and repulsed invasions as well as pursuing imperialist policies of their own in Nubia (modern southern Egypt and northern Sudan), Libya, and Syria-Palestine. 4 At the level of international relations, the Egyptian state engaged in warfare and diplomacy with a variety of states and peoples over the course of its long history. There existed no "international organizations, law codes or jurists" between the third and first millennium BCE, but there did exist "a recognizable international legal community" in the area from the Nile to the Tigris-Euphrates (Ziskind 1967, 202-3). 5 Within this international legal community, Egypt developed its own distinctive ethics of war; yet scholars have given little attention to the emergence of Egyptian just war thought. 6 The ethics of war in ancient Egypt was founded upon three tenets of Egyptian culture that displayed remarkable longevity and consistency: 1) the cosmological role of Egypt; 2) the divine office of the pharaoh; 3) the superiority of the land of Egypt and its inhabitants over all other lands and peoples. These ideological foundations led the Egyptian political elite to develop an ethics of war that possessed elements analogous to later Western concepts of proper authority and just cause: so-called ius ad bellum criteria. The relationship between war and justice in Egyptian culture was so intimate that we can identify an ancient Egyptian just war doctrine. Egyptian pharaohs claimed exclusive possession of legitimate authority and just cause in warfare. In contrast, while the conduct of Egyptian warfare followed a small number of norms, the development of in bello restraints are invisible to the historian. 7 3 Dates should be taken as approximate. The dating of Egyptian dynastic periods and the reign-lengths of pharaohs remains subject to debate: I have followed the date system used in Morkot (2010). 4 See Supplemental Information: Appendix 2 "Note on ancient Egyptian warfare." 5 Munn-Rankin (1956); Ziskind (1967, 43-4, 203). The attempt to reconstruct an ancient Near Eastern legal system goes back to Selden (1640). For subsequent early attempts, see Ziskind (19...

show abstract

Rewriting the Just War Tradition: Just War in Classical Greek Political Thought and Practice

Cited by 17 publications

References 60 publications

Kdy se zrodila teorie spravedlivé války v západním kulturně-civilizačním prostoru?

Kdy se zrodila teorie spravedlivé války v západním kulturně-civilizačním prostoru?

No substitute for victory? Why just war theorists can’t win

Expanding the History of the Just War: The Ethics of War in Ancient Egypt

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About