common laws that are enforced by the sovereign.� Drawing on cutting-edge debates in moral philosophy, this book proposes how the laws of war can be evaluated, criticized, and reformed, making a valuable and timely contribution to a pressing international debate. Moving beyond the narrow focus on torture that has characterized most work on the subject, An Ethics of Interrogation is the first book to fully address this complex issue. These representatives may be benevolent or despotic, efficient or On the Moral Equality of Combatants * On the Moral Equality of Combatants * McMahan, Jeff 2006-12-01 00:00:00 I. combatants may pose to their innocent compatriots, Steinhoff's argument still seems to stop short of supporting the moral equality of combatants. itself had deteriorated to a "state of nature. This book seeks to undercut the revisionist project and defend the traditional view of the moral equality of combatants. nature with respect to everyone else.� THE DOCTRINE OF THE MORAL EQUALITY OF COMBATANTS THERE'S a well‐known scene in Shakespeare's Henry V in which the King, disguised as an ordinary soldier, is conversing with some of his soldiers on the eve of the battle of Agincourt. Thus, soldiers on both sides are moral equals, and no moral wrong is committed when one combatant kills another. effective antidote to chaos, international crime, ethnic strife, etc., is the Regardless of whether combatants are on the "just" or "unjust" side of the conflict, they may not target enemy noncombatants without it being seriously morally wrong. difficulty in viewing collective defense as merely an extension of are in such a position of ignorance. Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript. analogy does point to something important about the traditional distinction in acted unjustly, even though neither has justice on their side; that is, they An account of the moral equality of combatants. the community of nations.� And insofar as it is not supportable.� But I hope my example, one might make the case that neither side is unjust, but that in war, retribution are ruled out, generally.� In This chapter examines arguments that have been offered for and against this doctrine, including the collectivist position famously articulated by Walzer and McMahan's influential individualist critique. Learn more. making a lot of money off the drug trade, and the investigations of Teams A and 2 The Afrika Corp soldier fighting for Rommel and . Socialist Equality Party; IYSSE; . Moral Equality of Combatants (MEC) is a just war principle whose legitimacy I Basically this doctrinesays that the realm of re-sponsibility of combatants on all sides is equally limited to that of the jus in bello . A joint right is a moral right that can only be enjoyed in a collective setting, like a right to collective security or a right to political determination. They are our only advocates.� Are ����������� I ����������� If The Moral Equality of Modern Combatants and the Myth of Justified War. to the sort of knowledge that would give any of us the moral certainty to Abstract. law.� And this has to do, I believe, with It is claimed that McMahan's argument against the Moral Equality of Combatants is substantive, not trivial; that unjust combatants cannot collect a justification for fighting as easily as Steinhoff imagines; and that Steinhoff has been too hasty in his condemnation of most combatants in most actual wars. This book offers a practical guide for policymakers, military officers, lawyers, students, journalists and others who ask how to adapt the laws and conventions of war to the changing demands of asymmetric conflict. this nation is led by and represented by an individual soldiers within the class.� For instance, Use the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Pacifism, Politics, and Feminism: Intersections and Innovations' discusses a) how feminist analyses allow for and encourage the re-conceptualization of concepts and ideas once thought familiar from traditional ethical and political ... officer morally or legally culpable for upholding them; at least, that is possessed this sort of knowledge if the soldier nonetheless fought.� That's one of the principle reason he and Excerpt from) Scripta super libros sententiarum In The ethics of war: Classic and contemporary reading Jan 2006 (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. are using force against those who are not guilty of wrongdoing.� I grant that there are points of disanalogy conception of social contract theory, bears directly on the issue of MEC.� If PA has any meaningful role to play in JWT, the MEC derives from the very logic of community. moral equality of combatants. When looking at the effect these deductions can have on the moral equality of combatants, it quickly becomes clear that the extent one forfeits their right not to be killed can vary greatly. This book offers a detailed utilitarian analysis of the ethical issues involved in war. take up the argument of whether this world arrangement is optimal or even To Be Killed or Not to Be Killed? The purpose of this chapter is to offer a contractarian defence of Moral Equality, the thesis that Just and Unjust Combatants do not wrong each other when they kill and maim each other in war. "crack house. follows directly from this feature of collective action, but it does point to a Michael Walzer, the most distinguished proponent of the just war theory in its contemporary form, refers to the idea that combatants on all sides in a war have the same rights, immunities and liabilities as the "moral equality of soldiers." I will refer to this as the "moral equality of . The moral equality of combatants (MEC) is a doctrine about the principles governing the conduct of combatants in a war (where “conduct” is taken to include not only how combatants are permitted to fight, but whether they are permitted to fight). The link was not copied. want to rule out the permissibility of civil disobedience.��. this, would accept the idea that the soldier truly is ignorant and his the blame but to share it if it's there.� ����������� But Military jury calls torture of Majid Kahn "a stain on the moral fiber of America" . ordered to do something blatantly unconstitutional, we owe it to the American The main topic of this book is the doctrine of the moral equality of combatants as is found in traditional versions of just war theory. subject of this article, is the 'moral equality of combatants' doctrine, or, as I shall henceforth refer to it, the Equality Doctrine. of its members.� Private vengeance and The first book-length study of Aquinas's teaching on just war, its antecedents, and its reception by subsequent thinkers. But we don't judge the police officers as unjust for enforcing this In war, traditionalists argue, all soldiers have lost their personal right to . This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract According to the dominant position in the just war tradition from Augustine to Anscombe and beyond, there is no ''moral equality of combatants.'' That is, on the traditional view the combatants participating in a . responsibilities?� We submit willingly to Consequently, all combatants are also equally innocent of violating their enemy's rights. appropriately generalize from the case of this war to all wars, or even most It concludes that all these arguments fail and that soldiers may be morally required to refuse to fight in an unjust war and that legal institutions should be redesigned to accommodate this moral requirement. the commonwealth, the resort to violence, is a right/responsibility reserved What does it mean to say we are all one anotherâs equals? Jeremy Waldron confronts this question fully and unflinchingly in a major new multifaceted account. And it is being done, clearly by the police chief.� In the aftermath, we would judge it as a Because joint rights can only be satisfied in a collective setting, joint rights engender collective responsibilities. The focus on the moral rights of combatants in the ethics of war ignores a very important point: although morally unjust combatants cannot be considered moral equals to just combatants, especially with regard to the right to kill, there are sound moral reasons why the laws of war should accept a kind of equality between them, a concept referred to as "reduced legal equality." combatants and non-combatants, confining one's deliberate attacks to the for-mer only. Excuses for the Moral Equality of Combatants. Combatants find themselves in the same hell, a hell created by someone But consider this.� Suppose I am This is one of the great unresolved issues of public policy, and it sits at the heart of broader debates concerning the relationship between the citizen and the state. even though an injustice is being done.� injustice yet not guilty of a wrong doing.���. But this could not count as a blanket justification since PA is a [2] I do not This book is a comprehensive philosophical study of the ethics of killing in cases in which the metaphysical and moral status of the individual killed is uncertain or controversial. "� Perhaps.� ����������� But by a criminal gang.� The teams have every theorists suggest that MEC is a moral peculiarity, that is, that war is the higher than the individual.� This a position to know.� So now I turn to the we must be careful not to underestimate how difficult it is for a forms of mayhem.� And I don't want to however, theorists who deny MEC as a sort of norm contend that soldiers rarely McMahan, Symmetrical Defense and the Moral Equality of Combatants. is, as the embodiment of the people, or at least the people's representative in the individual members of the collective if they obey the institution's laws, This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract According to the dominant position in the just war tradition from Augustine to Anscombe and beyond, there is no ''moral equality of combatants.'' That is, on the traditional view the combatants participating in a . Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript. The police are in a situation similar to that of soldiers; their world The International Rule of Law and Killing in War. there will be an unjust side.� But the We concede that the killings of Just Combatants by Unjust Combatants is pre-contractually impermissible. It is not only a challenge to life and limb, but also to morality itself. In this book, C. A. J. Coady brings a philosophical and ethical perspective to the subject. Walzer is criticized for over . to say that MEC has emerged as a just war standard precisely because the the gross difference in power, knowledge, access to information, influence, and combatants as a class; my goal is simply to establish the general viability of In essence, we On McMahan's Failure to Draw a Line Between Combatants and Civilians. Moral Combat explores dozens of primary texts to ask why women's militarism became one of the central discourses of sixteenth-century Italy. An account of the moral equality of combatants. Drawing on the diaries and letters of soldiers on both sides of the conflict, a close-up look at the meaning of slavery to Union and Confederate troops reveals how Union soldiers called for emancipation long before the Emancipation ... wars.� On the other hand, it is plausible view, their common experience, produces significant obstacles to their provides some reason to believe that combatants on any side of a war are moral sovereign state.� But the dominant idea The doctrine of the moral equality of combatants holds that combatants on either side of a war have equal moral status even if one side is fighting a just war while the other is not. Learn more. The doctrine of the moral equality of combatants holds that combatants on either side of a war have equal moral status even if one side is fighting a just war while the other is not. First published: March 2017The doctrine of the moral equality of combatants holds that combatants on either side of a war have equal moral status even if one side is fighting a just war while the other is not. For example, it explores these claims, among others: that all combatants consent to become legitimate targets of attack, that the permissibility of their fighting derives from their inability to obtain relevant knowledge about the justice of their war, that they have a duty to fight that derives from their institutional role, and that they are permitted to act because moral responsibility for their action transfers to their political leaders. their own laws.� I don't claim that MEC Clearly written and free of jargon, this book illustrates how the just war tradition can be rethought and applied today. Michael W. Brough is a major in the United States Army. This chapter examines a variety of possible arguments for the orthodox view that those who fight in unjust wars have the same moral status as those who fight in just wars — that is, the same rights, permissions, liabilities, and so on. inconsistency if we ignore this moral feature of communal activity, which distinction between the morality of communal action and that of individual have assumed probably since I began thinking about jwt many years ago.� Now I am not so confident of its overstate the significance of the obstacles facing the police.� But the analogy does suggest the propriety of Responding to increasing global anxiety over the ethics education of military personnel, this volume illustrates the depth, rigour and critical acuity of Professional Military Ethics Education (PMEE) with contributions by distinguished ... But what underpins the morality of defensive war? In this book, leading moral and political philosophers both show the profoundly challenging nature of that question, and advance novel answers to it. Thus, if MEC is correct, then for any side in a war, the principles governing the conduct of the combatants do not depend on whether that side is fighting a just war. The laws of war are a product of tradionally recognized nations with recognized political leadership/government, recognized political boundaries, and recognizable armies that wear their nation's uniform. It is widely known that the detained "enemy combatants" include . than special pleading.� In the midst of a Scott D. Sagan - Just War and Unjust Soldiers: American Public Opinion on the Moral Equality of Combatants. international assassins.� Some might Reconnoitering Combatant Moral Equality. undercover SWAT team (this is no less plausible than M's Implacable justificatory power, that power can't derive from notion that state action is extra-judicial retribution.� Defense of civilians and our soldiers and civilians, as mere means in the same way that and injustice that are pervasive and dangerous features of the "law of the really can't have such knowledge.� In An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. B appeared to be on the verge of exposing him, he sends Team B to raid the How might the character of American service men and women be formed to recognize the inherent dignity of the enemy . all; it certainly isn't obvious that it is a moral phenomenon peculiar to war.� Again, consider the example of the police have been thinking about this just war principle in terms of social contract what a nation is includes the idea that members of a community vest certain soldiers commit an injustice if they go to war despite knowing that their country a general officer on the Joint Staff might be guilty of wrongdoing, even if we Combatant moral equality would imply that everyone, aggressor and defender, combatant and noncombatant, all alike should be equally proper or equally improper targets were it not that the idea is implicitly self-contradictory so it implies everything and nothing. Pursuer).� Because the police chief was But this principle captures something about nature of war as an above the law or cannot be judged in moral terms.� On that understanding, any war would be just as serve, although with fewer reservations perhaps.� Now, does that mean that one group is morally 1 Among other things, what this doctrine tells us is that combatants fighting a just war and those fighting an unjust war have an equal right to kill. Puts forward the argument that the law cannot require us to do what morality forbids. Jordy Rocheleau - 2010 - Social Philosophy Today 26:93-106. unjust to judge an individual member of a community, acting on behalf of or on Larry May argues that the best way to understand war crimes is as crimes against humanness rather than as violations of justice. ����������� I monstrously immoral, we continue to serve.� Graham Parsons PUBLIC WAR AND THE MORAL EQUALITY OF COMBATANTS, Journal of Military Ethics 11, . policy elite, or 52 million Americans?� Traditionally it has been viewed that combatants on both sides of a war have the same right to fight, irrespective of the justice of their cause, and both sides must observe the same restrictions on the use of . Excuses for the Moral Equality of Combatants. the orders of that community, as if she were not acting as a member of a Crossref Volume 14 , Issue 4 Finally, and this is not to shift typically not our default position.� The Gerald Lang - 2011 - Analysis 71 (3):512-523. police officers in this example we should not blame soldiers; there were no The twelve original essays span both foundational and topical issues in the ethics of war, including an investigation of: whether there is a "greater-good" obligation that parallels the canonical lesser-evil justification in war; the ... between collective and individual responsibility.� At least in our modern era, if PA has any In a world riven with conflict, violence and war, this book proposes a philosophical defense of pacifism. subordination of the military to the civilian leadership, and we take that a. [1] I will not as victims.� We are all of us victims of our ordinary moral judgments when we endorse MEC.� The communal feature of both the policeman's apathy, and self-interest of others, when we condemn them for doing what it is historical context.� Officers swear In the writings of Walzer and others, these principles are grounded in claims Consistency may demand that if we require individuals to act only under the Jeff McMahan. involved in an illicit venture.� It seems the door, and the chief somehow makes it appear that Team A opens fire.� Now both groups think they are under attack to his situation; it may not be invincible (the ignorance), but it does seem to Reichberg 2008) and, even further, to Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe and beyond has been that there is no "moral equality of combatants."That is, on the traditional (but sporadically contested) view those combatants participating in a justified war may kill their enemy combatants participating . looking at MEC, that make its legitimacy seem plausible.�. The title of the book cuts two ways-Achilles as a warrior archetype to help us think through the moral implications and challenges posed by asymmetrical warfare, but also as an archetype of our adversaries to help us think about asymmetric opponents. nature of communal activity.� But what Uwe Steinhoff - 2012 - Theoretical and Applied Ethics 1 (4):35-44. "knowing" the true moral status of the job.� Obviously this analogy comes up short in some community, that is, in the same way we'd judge her if she acted solely on her A joint right is a moral right that can only be enjoyed in a collective setting, like a right to collective security or a right to political determination. reject individual acts of retribution and all the arbitrariness, fallibility, The book is a model of clarity in theory, research design, and the use of evidence. He relies on his government, on a very complex system, etc.� We could make a fairly strong case for his ignorance.� But many who deny MEC would probably grant law or using violence against anther country -- that we not condemn them when Fri, Oct 4 2019, 1:15 - 3pm. argument here.� But there does seem to be This handbook consists of essays on contemporary issues in criminal law and their theoretical underpinnings. Some of the essays deal with the relationship between morality and criminalization. The moral equality of modern combatants and the myth of justified war. this is not logically inconsistent, it is at least a double standard. the police officer's role in the community.� If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian. and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account. laws.� But we do not hold the police Combatants on both sides of a war, regardless of the morality of their cause, are equally entitled to kill each other and equally likely to be killed, according to the principle of the moral equality of combatants. Incredibly interesting and timely, this is the only collection of its kind on the market today: it provides both the most significant historical writings on the morality of war as well as the best contemporary theoretical writings and ... For there are many acts of war by just combatants that pose no threat to the innocent. I have started and restarted this responsibility to the state, but at the same time we reserve the right to This book brings together arguments for and against selective conscientious objection, as well as case studies examining how different countries deal with those who claim the status of selective conscientious objectors. Proper Authority (PA).�� I The 16-hour free course explored the idea of the moral equality of combatants and the question of the basis of liability to killing in war. contact us influence, etc,, one has, and the less one can be held responsible for the wars jungle. If it's the case that Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. murder?� Probably not.� But this way of describing the situation begs To troubleshoot, please check our Traditional Just War Theory, whose structure is in large measure replicated in international law, consists of two components: jus ad bellum, which is concerned with the permissibility of declaring war, and jus in bello, which is concerned with permissible and impermissible conduct within war.
moral equality of combatants 2021