Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T18:40:00.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trends in just war thinking during the US presidential debates 2000–12: genocide prevention and the renewed salience of last resort

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2013

DANIEL R. BRUNSTETTER
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, I explore the place of the just war tradition in US foreign policy by examining the use of just war language in the presidential debates in 2000 (Bush-Gore), 2004 (Bush-Kerry), 2008 (McCain-Obama), and 2012 (Obama-Romney). While critics focus on the use and abuse of just war language as rhetorical gloss to persuade the public an upcoming conflict is morally legitimate while serving the national interest, the debates showcase just war principles as part of a language of critical engagement. Each debate cycle allowed for critical reflection on the foreign policy decisions and just war philosophy of the incumbent president. During the time period I examine, the process of critical engagement identified two moral shortcomings of the past – the failure to act to stop the genocide in Rwanda and the premature use of force in Iraq. These perceived failures catalysed convergence, across party lines, on the way some jus ad bellum principles were understood: Just cause as including the moral obligation to intervene in some way to stop genocide and the renewed salience of the principle of last resort. There remained, however, stark differences in the way legitimate authority was understood.

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 77 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Barack Obama, ‘Obama's Nobel Remarks’, New York Times (11 December 2009).

2 O'Driscoll, Cian, The Renegotiation of the Just War Tradition and the Right to War in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), p. 163Google Scholar.

3 See, for example, McMahan, Jeff, ‘Just Cause for War’, Ethics & International Affairs, 19:3 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Patterson, Eric, ‘Just War in the 21st Century: Reconceptualizing Just War Theory after September 11’, International Politics, 42 (2005), pp. 116–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Holiday, Ian, ‘Ethics of Intervention: Just War Theory and the Challenges of the Twenty-First Century’, International Relations, 17:2 (2003), pp. 115–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Bellamy, Alex J., ‘Is the War on Terror Just?’, International Relations, 19:3 (2005), pp. 275–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rengger, Nicolas, ‘On the Just War Tradition in the Twenty-First Century’, International Affairs, 78:2 (2002), pp. 353–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar; O'Driscoll, Cian, ‘Learning the Language of Just War Theory: The Value of Engagement’, Journal of Military Ethics, 6:2 (2007), pp. 107–16, 113CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 O'Driscoll, Cian, ‘Talking About Just War: Obama in Oslo, Bush at War’, Politics, 31:2 (2011), pp. 82–90, 84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Booth, Ken, ‘Ten Flaws of Just Wars’, in Booth, Ken (ed.), The Kosovo Tragedy (London: Frank Cass, 2001), pp. 314–24Google Scholar; Myers, Robert, ‘Notes on the Just War Theory: Whose Justice, Which Wars?’, Ethics & International Affairs, 10 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Miller, Richard W., ‘The Ethics of America's Afghan War’, Ethics & International Affairs, 25:2 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 O'Driscoll, after a brief comparison of Bush and Obama, raises similar questions that merit close attention, but does not answer them; ‘Talking About Just War’, p. 90.

9 Walzer, Michael sees this as a sign of the ‘triumph of just war theory’; Arguing About War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), p. 11Google Scholar. Carter, Stephen hails Obama use of just war concepts as evidence he has carefully thought about war in the abstract, but claims he has not fully explained his ideas in public; The Violence of Peace: America's Wars in the Age of Obama (New York: Beast Books, 2011), pp. ix–xGoogle Scholar.

10 Crawford, Neta, ‘Just War Theory and the U.S. Counterterror War’, Perspectives on Politics, 1:1 (2003), pp. 5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brunstetter, Daniel and Zartner, Dana, ‘Just War Against Barbarians: Revisiting the Valladolid Debates between Sepúlveda and Las Casas’, Political Studies, 59:3 (2011), pp. 733–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 For example, the speech by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dominique de Villepin, before the UN Security Council on 14 February 2003 in which he said inspections had not yet failed, meaning the recourse to force was premature, and that the authority for any turn to force rested on the unity of the international community, available at: {http://www.republiquesolidaire.fr/438-ministre-affaires-etrangeres/} accessed 10 August 2012. Regarding Germany, Brunstetter and Brunstetter point to the Iraq crisis as a moment of ‘critical solidarity’ whereby German criticism provided a check on the Bush administration's interpretation of jus ad bellum; Brunstetter, Daniel and Brunstetter, Scott, ‘Shades of Green: Engaged Pacifism, the Just War Tradition and the German Greens’, International Relations, 25:1 (2010), pp. 65–84, 76–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 I use the transcriptions of the debates from the Commission on Presidential Debates {www.debates.org}.

13 For a good summary of the arguments on humanitarian intervention, see Fixdel, Mona and Smith, Dan, ‘Humanitarian Intervention and Just War’, Mershon International Studies Review, 42:2 (1998), pp. 283–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The failure to systematically intervene during the 1990s launched a broad discussion on the Responsibility to Protect regime; see Bellamy, Alex J., ‘The Responsibility to Protect – Five Years On’, Ethics & International Affairs, 19:2 (2005)Google Scholar.

14 Kaufman, Whitley, ‘What's Wrong with Preventive War? The Moral and Legal Basis for the Preventive Use of Force’, Ethics & International Affairs, 19:3 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 For a summary of recent arguments in the tradition, see Rigstad, Mark, ‘Jus ad bellum After 9/11: A State of the Art Report’, The ITP Beacon, 3 (2007), pp. 1–30Google Scholar. Rigstad identifies two competing factions, the conventionalist view drawing from the Walzerian approach limiting just cause and the revisionist approach that expands jus ad bellum in light of 9/11, pp. 3–4, 27.

16 See, for example, Walzer, Michael, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations (New York: Basic Books, 2006), p. xiiiGoogle Scholar; Crawford, ‘Just War Theory and the U.S. Counterterror War’, pp. 14–18; and Patterson, Eric, ‘Just War in the 21st Century: Reconceptualizing Just War Theory after September 11’, International Politics, 42 (2005), pp. 116–34, 122–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Elshtain, Jean Bethke harkens back to the founding principles of what she calls Augustinian realism, Just War against Terror: The Burden of American Power (New York: Basic Books, 2003)Google Scholar. Johnson, James Turner cites the importance of legitimate authority and right intention in Aquinas; The War to Oust Saddam Hussein: Just War in the Face of New Conflict (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2005)Google Scholar.

18 Walzer, Just and Unjust War, p. xiii.

19 O'Driscoll, Renegotiation, pp. 9–26.

20 1996 National Security Strategy, available at: {http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/national/1996stra.htm} accessed 29 July 2012.

21 McMahan, Jeff, ‘Preventive War and the Killing of the Innocent’, in Sorabji, Richard and Rodin, David (eds), The Ethics of War: Shared Problems in Different Traditions (Ashgate, 2006), pp. 169–90Google Scholar.

22 Gershkoff, Amy and Kushner, Shana, ‘Shaping Public Opinion: The 9/11-Iraq Connection in the Bush Administration's Rhetoric’, Perspectives on Politics, 3:3 (2005), pp. 525–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also O'Driscoll, Renegotiation, especially chs 2 and 3.

23 The just war tradition was not the only influence; for a discussion of the impact of the neo-conservatives, see Ayyash, Mark, ‘The Appearance of War in Discourse: The Neoconservatives in Iraq’, Constellations, 14:4 (2007), pp. 613–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 US Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research (29 September 2002), Intelligence Assessment.

25 George Weigel, ‘Reality of Terrorism Calls for a Fresh Look at Just War Tradition’, The Catholic Difference (20 September 2001).

26 US Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research (29 September 2002), ‘Problems and Prospects of “Justifying” War with Iraq’.

27 2002 National Security Strategy, p. 15, available at: {http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/63562.pdf} accessed 30 July 2012.

28 The Iraq war was justified by what Brian Orend calls Bush's ‘scattershot’ approach, which amounts to throwing out sometimes dubious arguments in succession – that is, the imminent threat of WMD, the perceived link to Al-Qaeda, and finally democratisation. For a critical discussion, see Orend, Brian, The Morality of War (Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press, 2006), pp. 78–83Google Scholar.

29 Bellamy, ‘Is the War on Terror Just?’, p. 293.

30 On jus post bellum, see Orend, The Morality of War, chs 6 and 7; for a critique, see Bellamy, Alex J., ‘The Responsibilities of Victory: Jus Post Bellum and the Just War’, Review of International Studies, 34:4 (2008), pp. 601–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Cited from the Obama-Clinton debate (31 January 2008), available at: {www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/31/dem.debate.transcript/index.html} accessed 15 May 2010.

32 Obama, ‘Nobel Remarks’.

33 2010 National Security Strategy, p. 22, available at: {http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf} accessed 10 August 2012.

34 See, for example, see Pattison, James, ‘The Ethics of Humanitarian Intervention in Libya’, Ethics & International Affairs, 25:3 (2011), pp. 1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brunstetter, Daniel and Braun, Megan, ‘The Implications of Drones on the Just War Tradition’, Ethics & International Affairs, 25:3 (2011), pp. 337–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Bellamy, Alex J., ‘Libya and the Responsibility to Protect: The Exception and the Norm’, Ethics & International Affairs, 25:3 (2011), pp. 263–9, 264CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 O'Driscoll, ‘Learning the Language of Just War Theory’, pp. 107–16, 113–14.

37 Ibid., pp. 113–14.

38 For an excellent review of the major positions of humanitarian intervention, including genocide, along with an examination of recent cases, see Bellamy, Alex J., Just Wars: From Cicero to Iraq (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006), pp. 199–228Google Scholar.

39 Remarks by the President to Genocide Survivors, Assistance Workers, and US and Rwanda Government Officials (25 March 1998), available at: {http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/Africa/19980325-16872.html} accessed 2 July 2012.

40 2006 National Security Strategy, pp. 17, 23, available at: {http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/speeches/nss2006.pdf} accessed 30 July 2012.

41 Johnson, James Turner, ‘Humanitarian Intervention after Iraq: Just War and International Law Perspectives’, Journal of Military Ethics, 5:2 (2006), pp. 114–27, 123CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 Bellamy, Just War, p. 226.

43 2010 National Security Strategy, p. 48, accessed 5 August 2012.

44 Bellamy, ‘Libya’, p. 264.

45 Although the subject of red lines did not come up in the debates, Obama intimated elsewhere that the threshold of last resort would be crossed if the Asaad regime were about to use chemical weapons. This would be evidence of an imminent threat of a humanitarian disaster on the same level as genocide, a scenario the US has, in Obama's view, a responsibility to prevent. Mark Landler, ‘Obama Threatens Force Against Syria’, New York Times (21 August 2012).

46 Crawford, Neta C., ‘The Slippery Slope of Preventive War’, Ethics & International Affairs, 17:1 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Nicholas, Thomas, ‘Just War, Not Prevention’, Ethics & International Affairs, 17:1 (2003)Google Scholar.

47 This echoes Kaufmann's argument that preemptive war is the right of individual states, but preventive war ‘belongs to the central authority vested with a monopoly on international force – that is the Security Council’, ‘What's Wrong with Preventive War?’, p. 37.

48 Totten, Mark, First Strike (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2010), pp. 186, 172CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, pp. xv–xvi.

50 Brunstetter and Braun, ‘The Implications of Drones’, pp. 345–46.

51 David Kilcullen, ‘Effective Counterinsurgency: The Future of the U.S. Pakistan Military Partnership,’ Hearing of the House Armed Services Committee (23 April 2009).

52 On how such uses of force would alter the jus ad bellum principles, see Brunstetter, Daniel and Braun, Megan, ‘From Jus ad Bellum to Jus ad Vim: Recalibrating Our Understanding of the Moral Use of Force’, Ethics & International Affairs, 26:1 (2013)Google Scholar.

53 This is the critique levelled against the tradition by Ronald Dworkin, ‘To Each His Own’, New York Review of Books (1992).

54 Obama, ‘Nobel Remarks’.