Cian O'Driscoll – författare

This book comprises essays that focus on a range of thinkers who challenge the boundaries of the just war tradition.

The ethics of war scholarship has become a rigid and highly disciplined activity, closely associated with a very particular canon of thinkers. This volume moves beyond this by presenting thinkers not typically regarded as part of that canon but who have interesting and potentially important things to say about the ethics of war. The book presents 20 profile essays on an eclectic cast of heretics, humanists, and radicals, from ancient Greece to the twenty-first century, who lived through and theorized about violence. The book asks how ethics of war scholars might benefit from engaging with them. Some of these thinkers engage directly with—to augment or criticize—the just war tradition, while others contribute to military thinking across the ages, pushing the boundaries of what was acceptable in war. Many proffer alternative moral frameworks regarding the legitimacy of political violence. The present volume thus invites scholars to reconsider the ethics of war in a way that challenges the standard delineation between just war theory, realism, and pacifism and to reflect on how those positions might inform our own approach to these matters.

This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics of war, war studies, and International Relations.

This book comprises essays that focus on a range of thinkers who challenge the boundaries of the just war tradition.

The ethics of war scholarship has become a rigid and highly disciplined activity, closely associated with a very particular canon of thinkers. This volume moves beyond this by presenting thinkers not typically regarded as part of that canon but who have interesting and potentially important things to say about the ethics of war. The book presents 20 profile essays on an eclectic cast of heretics, humanists, and radicals, from ancient Greece to the twenty-first century, who lived through and theorized about violence. The book asks how ethics of war scholars might benefit from engaging with them. Some of these thinkers engage directly with—to augment or criticize—the just war tradition, while others contribute to military thinking across the ages, pushing the boundaries of what was acceptable in war. Many proffer alternative moral frameworks regarding the legitimacy of political violence. The present volume thus invites scholars to reconsider the ethics of war in a way that challenges the standard delineation between just war theory, realism, and pacifism and to reflect on how those positions might inform our own approach to these matters.

This book will be of much interest to students of just war theory, ethics of war, war studies, and International Relations.

The just war tradition is central to the practice of international relations, in questions of war, peace, and the conduct of war in the contemporary world, but surprisingly few scholars have questioned the authority of the tradition as a source of moral guidance for modern statecraft. Just War: Authority, Tradition, and Practice brings together many of the most important contemporary writers on just war to consider questions of authority surrounding the just war tradition.

Authority is critical in two key senses. First, it is central to framing the ethical debate about the justice or injustice of war, raising questions about the universality of just war and the tradition’s relationship to religion, law, and democracy. Second, who has the legitimate authority to make just-war claims and declare and prosecute war? Such authority has traditionally been located in the sovereign state, but non-state and supra-state claims to legitimate authority have become increasingly important over the last twenty years as the just war tradition has been used to think about multilateral military operations, terrorism, guerrilla warfare, and sub-state violence. The chapters in this collection, organized around these two dimensions, offer a compelling reassessment of the authority issue’s centrality in how we can, do, and ought to think about war in contemporary global politics.