Just and Unjust Wars

Michael Walzer delineates the conception of just and unjust wars and states that no war can be just on both sides, though a war can be unjust on both sides. In general, war is unjust for the one at fault and just for the defender against aggression. Walzer indicates how the legalist paradigm of aggression has been used to differentiate between the two, between the just and the unjust war. This paradigm begins with the domestic analogy which holds that aggression is the international equivalent of armed robbery or murder. Walzer points out that international society is and is not like domestic relationships, but to the degree that it is like domestic relationships, the legalist paradigm may suffice to demonstrate who is at fault. International aggression is worse than domestic crime because the threat is so much greater and there is no policeman to act as protector. There are police powers, but they are dispersed through all the members of the society. However, the United states has often acted as world policeman, a role that the U.S. denies is its intention or goal, but one that it is seen as having undertaken on several occasions. Two such occasions can be found in the intervention in the Dominican Republic in 1965 and the invasion of Grenada in 1983. These will be analyzed according to the legalist paradigm to qualify them as just or unjust wars and to test the use of the paradigm.

Walzer makes two assumptions based on the domestic analogy as it pertains to the l

Related Essays

Walzer's Conception of Just & Unjust Wars Michael Walzer has discussed a conception of just and unjust wars, stating that no war can be just on both sides. .... Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars. .... (1831 7 )

A Concept of Just War This research paper describ .... Eds.). (1999). Justice among nations. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Walzer, M.(1972). Just and unjust wars. New York: Bantam (3423 14 )

CONCEPT OF JUST WAR This research paper describ .... Eds.). (1999). Justice among nations. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Walzer, M.(1972). Just and unjust wars. New York: Bantam (3426 14 )

Issue of Power and Violence: Just War Theory .... Arendt, Hannah. On Violence. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1970. Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars. Third edition. New York: Basic Books, 2000. (536 2 )

Kant and Walzer on Peace and War .... 1983. Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument With Historical Illustrations. 3rd ed. New York: Basic Books, 1977. (877 4 )

o avoid a flagrant military intervention with serious repercussions not only in the United States but in Latin America. It was thought that the mere presence of the marines might be enough to discourage the rebels and encourage the Loyalists. the marines at first took no part in the fighting but restricted themselves to taking positions around the American embassy and other important areas, far from the combat zone and in the middle of the evacuation operation. While the policy seemed to succeed at first, in time it was apparent that this intervention could not restore San Isidro's offensive capabilities. The Constitutionalists seized the initiative. The political character of the intervention became apparent as President Johnson then stated that communist leaders trained in Cuba were taking advantage of the situation to gain a foothold. Military troops now set out to save the Loyalists. The U.S. action is difficult to defend under the legalist paradigm. There was indeed an organization of independent states in the OAS (Organization of American States), but Washington neglected to inform the OAS that there was to be a military intervention, in direct contravention of articles 15 and 17 of the OAS charter. The interventi

Category: Government - J