|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
Carnegie Council Podcast |
 |
Carnegie Council RSS |
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Home > Resources > Ethics & International Affairs Journal > Volume 17.1 (Spring 2003) > Roundtable: Evaluating the Preemptive Use of Force |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Evaluating the Preemptive Use of Force [Full Text]
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
March 2, 2003
In soliciting these articles, the editors of Ethics & International Affairs asked authors to respond to several questions. First, preemptive and preventive uses of force are often justified by claiming either that there is substantial risk of a future attack or that it is difficult to ascertain how dangerous the target is. Under what conditions does the existence of risk and uncertainty about possible threats license the use of military force? Second, what consultative procedures should be required in order to legitimate the preventive or preemptive use of force? There exist both domestic and international institutions that constrain the use of military force, but which, if any, should be granted authority to block or authorize military actions of these kinds? Third, if preemptive or preventive military action is taken, what jus in bello criteria apply? Are there different and perhaps more stringent jus in bello criteria if states act preemptively?
For over a year, the Bush administration has warned that Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction poses a serious threat to global security. Moreover, the administration has invoked this threat to justify a preemptive military strike against Iraq. Once confined to strategic and international legal debates, preemptive war and its cousin, preventive war, have subsequently figured prominently in the discussions about the war on terrorism and the proposed military action against Iraq.
The Bush administration has supported the idea of preemptive military action in its National Security Strategy and in various international and national forums. These justifications for preemptive military action have drawn heavily on often-conflated discourses of self-defense, terrorism, and humanitarianism. These discourses, however, have distinct heritages and rationales. And while combining different kinds of arguments is intended to make the case for preemptive use of force overwhelmingly persuasive, the wavering of support both nationally and internationally suggests that combining these distinct rationales may have led to confusion rather than illumination.
The issue of what constitutes preemption and prevention bears upon what is perhaps the most vital question facing those concerned with ethics in international relations: whether a country is defending itself or committing aggression. While this question turns out to be more complicated than it may at first appear, particularly when judgments must be made in the midst of tension and insecurity, the contributions to this Roundtable suggest that it may indeed be possible to draw a distinction between the two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The Carnegie Council's flagship publication, Ethics & International Affairs is an interdisciplinary resource for scholars, students, and policy analysts concerned with the moral dimensions of global issues. The journal covers global justice, civil society, democratization, international law, intervention, sanctions, and related topics.
SUBSCRIPTIONS
To subscribe to Ethics & International Affairs, or to purchase individual issues and articles, go to Wiley-Blackwell.
RESPONSES
The Editors welcome responses to Features and Essays published in Ethics & International
Affairs. To be considered for publication, responses should be no longer than one
thousand words, including endnotes (which
should be kept to a minimum). Responses
are not peer-reviewed, and are published at
the Editors' discretion. All responses are
subject to editing for length and style. In the
event of any questions or substantive editing,
the response will be returned to the author
for final approval prior to publication.
Responses are published online, alongside
the article they address.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
How will President Obama deal with the hopes and fears of people abroad?
> More
|
|
|
|
David Speedie Interviews Gary Sick on the future of this troubled relationship.
> More
> All Videos
|
|
|
|
"Somali Pirates Scuttle Sea Laws," by Matthew Hennessey: Pirates are once again trolling the high seas.
> More
|
|
|
|
Go to the Journal for articles on ethics and foreign policy.
> More
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
