This research paper describes and assesses Jean Elshtain's argument for the use of force against terrorists in her book, Just War Against Terror, and assesses it in the light of just war theories and my own approach to the subject.
Since the end of the cold war, international peace and order have been threatened by the potentially lethal consequences of internal political instability within states, including conflicts of ethnic and religious origin, the rise of terrorist groups and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Elshtain articulates justification for a military response by the United States to these threats which draws upon a number of strains in western thought on the subject of war and its limitations. She relies especially on Christian realism, a perspective which accepts the moral necessity of waging war to defend Western values while at the same time accepting the need for restraint in waging war. Her perspective is in my opinion sound and preferable to the muddy thinking about the use of force on the part of many self-styled moral philosophers and religious leaders. However, it is unclear whether Elshtain has thought through as comprehensively as she might have the ethical dilemmas and practical consequences which may flow from her reasoning.
Walzer (1997) said that two broad issues regarding war must be faced: why we fight and how we wage war, known as jus ad bello and jus in bello, respectively (p. 21). Elshtain rejects the notion at the outset that America can go to war without moral justification. She cites with disapproval the thinking of the classical Athenians who claimed that power realities were the only basis for international relations. According to Pangle & Ahrensdorf (1999), internal debates among the Athenian generals concerning whether Athens should destroy the smaller and much weaker city-state of Melos led them to the conclusion that "the real world is indifferent to justice" (p....