What are the main justifications for violence / armed conflict?
a) Just War Theory
Just War theory is ancient and simple in itself - aspects of it make up some of the most robust aspects of the international regime. Make connections here between the work we completed on Humanitarian Law in the HR unit, as well as to discussions of R2P in considerations of sovereignty
|
Lesson presentation:
|
Note Frame:
|
|
|
Lesson Resources:
For the case study, use either your case study presentation topic (if armed conflict or likely to end in armed conflict). Or review NATO intervention in Libya...
b) What are some other justifications for violence?
a) Alternative justifications for 'war'
Due to the definitions of 'war', this is at the higher levels of analysis (national and above). In terms of between states, 'Just War Theory' is largely accepted by the international community (at least publicly), however there are some other conceptions. One example is 'Just War' in Islam. It is interesting to note that there are primarily similarities between mainstream Islam and Just War theory, but some extreme differences in relation to extremist interpretations.
Review the BBC summary below:
1. C & P this text to your document under the heading above.
2. Write some short sentences identifying similarities to Just War Theory. Are there any differences?
3. Explain how extremists may challenge this view
Review the BBC summary below:
1. C & P this text to your document under the heading above.
2. Write some short sentences identifying similarities to Just War Theory. Are there any differences?
3. Explain how extremists may challenge this view
b) Justifications of Violence at other levels of analysis
Of course, the majority of violence (as opposed to war) is conducted at lower levels of analysis. Using pages 164-166 below, make brief notes under the following thesis statements:
How is violence justified at other levels of analysis?
1. Violence is so widespread that societies have many justifications to cover it all
2. Personal violence is justified by reference to culture, religions and even blanket statements about 'human nature'
3. Violence can be justified by the dehumanisation of the victims
4. State violence can be justified by a widespread acceptance that the State should have a 'monopoly on violence'
5. Violent non-state actors may be justified if they win!
How is violence justified at other levels of analysis?
1. Violence is so widespread that societies have many justifications to cover it all
2. Personal violence is justified by reference to culture, religions and even blanket statements about 'human nature'
3. Violence can be justified by the dehumanisation of the victims
4. State violence can be justified by a widespread acceptance that the State should have a 'monopoly on violence'
5. Violent non-state actors may be justified if they win!