JUSTNESS OF WAR ON

TERRORPresented by Steffi Michelle Wanniang

I.D NO: 596(Business Law)

JUST WAR THEORY

Terrorism itself is old practice. War on terror is a new type of war that challenges the very nature of conflict especially the “Just War Theory”.

The concepts and principles of Just Wars have been developed over the cause of human history with roots as ancient civilization such as the Greeks and even the Sumerians.

Just War Theory (Just Bellum Iustium) is a doctrine of military ethics of Roman Philosophical and Catholic origin studied by moral theologians, ethicists and international policy markets which holds that a violent conflict ought to meet philosophical, religious or political criteria.

This theory deals with the justification of how and why was war fought and it begins with Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas.

Just War Theory offers a series of principles that aim to retain a plausible moral framework for war.

Criteria of Just War Theory

Just War Theory has two sets of criteria,

I. The first established just ad Bellum (the right to go to war) and

II. The second establishing just in Bello (right conduct within war).

Just ad Bellum (The right to go to war)

The reason to go to war needs to be just and therefore cannot be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong to innocent life.

There may be rights and wrongs on all sides of a conflict but to overcome the presumption against the use of force, the injustice suffered by one party must significantly out weight that suffer by the other.

Force may be uses only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose, maintaining material gains economics is not.

Aims may not be used in a futile cause or in case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success.

Force may be used only after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been seriously tired and exhausted and not making any meaningful concessions then only it should be used as last resort.

Just in Bello (right conduct within war)

The acts of war should be directed towards enemy combatants and not towards non-combatants caught in circumstances they did not create:-The prohibited acts include bombing civilian residential acts that include no military targets and committing acts of terrorism or reprisal against civilians.

Proportionality: The proportionality of the use of force in a war. The degree of allowable force used in the war must be measured against the force required to correct the just cause and limited by just intension (see just ad Bellum).

Discrimination: The combatants discriminate between combatants and non combatants. Innocent, non-military people should never be made for attacks.

Responsibility: A country is not responsible for unexpected side effects of its military actuary as long as the following three conditions are met:

The action must carry the intention to produce good consequences.

The bad effects were not intended.

The good of the war must out weight the damage done by it.

Principles of Just War

A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

A just war can only be fought to redressed a wrong suffered – for example –self defense against an armed attack is always considered to be just caused and it should be with right intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redressed the injury.

A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success –deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace.

The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

Civilians are never permissible targets of war and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians.

(The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack or a military target).

What is a war on terror?

The war on terror also known as the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT is a term commonly applied to and international military campaign which is started as a result of the 9/11/2001 Terrorist attacks on the US)

The phrase war on terror was first used by US president George W Bush on 20th Sept 2001.

The Bush administration and the western media have since used the term to allege a global military targeting organizations designated as terrorist and regimes accused of supporting them.

The conflict has also been referred to by names such as World War III, the long War, The Global war of terror, The war against Al-Qaeda.

When did it all started? Events of Sept 11-2001

2 planes crash into the world Trade Centre twin Towers.

Plane crashes into the Pentagon. Plane headed to Capital Hill –Congress-brave

American Citizens tried to fight the terrorist on board; plane crashes in Somerset country in Shanksville PA

Nearly 3,000 lives were lost. Al-Qaeda members hijacked the planes –leader

Osama Bin Laden claimed responsible for the attacks in 2004.

Consequences of 9/11 in US

Bush Speech stated we are at war and either you are with us or against us.

US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrote “This will be a war like none other nation has faced”.

Sept 11, 2001 will be remembered forever not only by the Americans but by the whole world.

There are US military forces moving in and out of the Middle East on a constant basis.

The United States has 10 years brought Iraq into the state of democracy and moved a large majority of the country and into Afghanistan.

There is more security at airports, more racial profiling and more fear of another terrorist attack.

The War or Terror has transformed many Americans citizen into victims.

Can counter terror War be just? War in Afghanistan 2001 (Present)

War in Afghanistan 2001 (present) refers to the intervention by NATO and allied forces in the Afghan political struggle, falling the terrorist attacks on Sept 11, 2001 to dismantle the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization and to remove power of the Taliban government which at the time controlled 90% of Afghanistan and hosted Al-Qaeda leadership.

The US and allies drove the Taliban from power and gradually built new military bases near major cities across the country. The State Department in a memo dated 14th Sept demanded that the Taliban surrendered all known Al-Qaeda associates and expel all terrorist from Afghanistan.

On 20th Sept, President Bush, in an address to congress, demanded the Taliban deliver Osama bin Laden and destroy bases of Al-Qaeda.

On 21th Sept/ Taliban representatives in Pakistan reacted to the US response with defiance. He said that the Taliban were ready if necessary for war with the United States.

On 5th October Taliban offered to try Bin Laden in an afghan court so long as the US proved what is called ‘solid evidence of quilt’.

In 2007 Bin Laden indicated that the Taliban had no knowledge of his plans for the 9/11 attacks.

2001: Overthrow of the Taliban: History and the conflict

On 7th October 2001 US govt. launched military operators in Afghanistan and air strikes were reported in Kabul, at the airport at Kandahar and in the city of Jalahalad.

On the ground teams from the CIA’s Special Actuaries Division (SAD) were the first US forces to enter Afghanistan and begin combat operations soon joined by the US Army Special Forces.

Bush stated that the Taliban military sites and terrorist training grounds would be targeted.

The US forces and the Northern Alliance also began to diverge in their objectives while the US was continuing the search for Osama bin Laden, the Northern Alliance was pressuring for more support in their efforts to finish off the Taliban and control the country.

Impact of the war in Afghan Societies

According to a report by the UN in June 2001 states that 2,777 civilians, were known to have been killed in 2010, with insurgents being responsible for 75% of the civilian casualties. In July 2011, 1,462 non-combatants died. In 2011 a record of 3,021 civilians were killed in the ongoing insurgency. In total 96% has been affected in some way, either personally or due to the wider consequences of armed conflict.

Around 2.2milion Afghan remain refugees in 2013 and UN estimated that there are 5,47,500 internally displaces persons within Afghanistan a 25% increase over Jan 2012 a figure reflected by Amnesty International when it reported that hundreds of Afghans were forced to flee their homes everyday during 2012.

Throughout the war in Afghanistan war crimes have been committed by both sides in the conflict. Includes crimes like massacre of civilians bombings of civilian targets, terrorism, use of torture and the murder of prisoners of war.

Obama announces Troops Drawdown

President Obama outlines a plan to withdraw thirty-three thousand (33,000) troops by the summer of 2012 – the surge troops sent in Dec 2009 –including ten thousand (10,000) by the end of 2011.

Many Americans do not support the war.

Obama faces pressure From lawmakers. After the surge troops leave on estimated to thousand US troops are scheduled to stay through at least 2014.

US is holding preliminary peace talks with the Taliban leadership.

Ten years of War

President Barrack Obama plans to withdraw all combat troops by 2014, but serious doubts remain about the Afghan government’s capacity to secure the country.

A decade in the war’s tools include 1,800 US Troops casualties and billion and trillions in spending.

The cost have eroded US public support

with a global economic downtown a 9.1% unemployment and 1.3 trillion annual

budget deficit.

War in Iraq: 2003 Beginnings of Insurgency The first was invasion of Iraq starting on 20th March 2003 by an

invasion force led by the united states.

The Government of US and UK claimed that Iraq’s alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) pose a treat to their security and that of their coalition / regional allies.

US official accused Iraq President Saddam Hussein of harboring and supporting Al-Qaeda.

Iraq’s financial support for the families of Palestine suicide bombers and an effort to spread democracy in the country.

For president George W. Bush consistently referred to the Iraq War as “the central front in the war on terror” and argued that if US pulled out of Iraq terrorists will follow us here.

Conflict has dragged on, members of US Congress, the US public and even US troops have questioned the connection between Iraq and the fight against anti US terrorism.

Human rights violation and War on Terror Repressive laws have been passed like the setting up of military

commissions with the purpose to detain and try foreigners, suspect of terrorist acts abroad, on the base at Guantanamo (Cuba) is not only in violation of the US constitution, but constitutes a serious breach of the Third Genera Convention of 1949.

Citizens risk a wide range of social sanctions such as the loss of job, opportunities, damage to their professional carrier etc if they raise their voice against those abuses.

The war on terror has raised many serious issues relating to human rights like killing of innocent persons in drone attack in Afghanistan and Pakistan, illegal detention and torture.

The detainees of War on terror were labelled as enemy combatants and were denied due process of law, tortured and tried in military tribunals.

GUANTANAMO BAY”GITMO”(IN

CUBA)

The facilities was established in 2002 by the bush administration to hold detainees from the war in Afghanistan and later in Iraq.

Controversial- UN and other global groups protested the legal status and the physical conditions of prisoners at Guantanamo.

Obama wanted to close Guantanamo because the controversial human rights and possible torture occurring there to prisoners that may not even be terrorists- Wants to have the prisoners a fair trial.

Effects on the idea of Global Village

Terrorist has led to the stagnant of globalization and it creates tensions among countries and a gap from being co-ordinary as one.

The war polarized regimes and Islamist opposition not only in Saudi Arabia but also in Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia countries where freedoms score diminished in the past couple of years.

There has been impact on the globalization of security.

After the American attack states has encourage to police their borders far more cautiously with a myriad of security checks needed in travelling between nations and for strickerregulations on who is allowed to travel.

The war on terror has sparked numerous policies to be undertaken and legislations enforced which would have preciously been even considered due to the threat they pose to human rights.

The impact of the war on terror of the status of citizens free world vs. terrorism

Iraq or other Muslim nations, citizens have often become victims of an indiscriminate use of force and there is collateral damage. The citizens of those countries are hostages in US War against the government of their own country.

The US war on terror may further aggravate internal tensions, ethnic rivalries, existing social problems etc in certain allied countries.

The war on terror in regard to allied countries may further complicate their relations with neighboring countries forcing upon an agenda that may not always compatible with regional peace and stability.

In US and its allied countries in Europe the war on terror has a negative impact on civil liberties such as freedom of expression, freedom of information , protection of the private sphere, etc.

Political and Social Implications of an Alternatives to the Global War on Terror

The erosion of civil liberties on the national level corresponds to the marginalization of undermining of national security in the relations between states.

Future is much more uncertain in regards to the sovereign states and entire regions.

The war on terror must not only respect the sovereignty of states and the basic rights of citizens everywhere it must complemented by a war on justice.

US policies and objectives declaring War on Terror

USA Patriot Act enacted in Oct 2001 which gave law enforcement increased authority to investigate suspected terrorists, including enhanced surveillance procedures.

Defeat the existence of terrorists. Identify, locate and demolish terrorists along with

their organizations. Deny sponsorship, support and sanctuary to

terrorists. Abolish terrorist sanctuaries and havens.

War on Terror : Justice or Revenge?

The 9/11 attacks killed more than 3,000 people from 60 different countries. Amnesty international condemned this act and joined condolences to the victims.

On 7th Oct the USA in collaboration with its campaign in Afghanistan as part of President Bush’s declared war on terrorism.

There has also been wave of racist attack directed by people of their appearance in North America, Europe and elsewhere Muslims, Arabs and Sikhs were shot, stabbed and beaten.

After terrorist attack there is torture and detention of people in Guantanamo prison and other places as well as imprisonment of well over 100,000 people without trail.

In UK also such legislation giving security forces much greater power to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects.

To this end they have locked up more than a thousand men of Middle Eastern, Pakistani and Afghani origins have increased their harassment of those who speak out against the so-called war on terror.

This harassment includes the general isolation of all political prisoners in US prisons, greater police violence in supposed searchers for terrorist materials.

The end result is very complicated as to what these are trying to seek justice or is it to take revenge for the killed.

GLOBAL TERRORISM

DEATHS And then there’s also the Global Terrorism Index established by the

Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP). Of the 158 countries covered by the index, only 31 have had no attacks in the ten years to 2011.

However, the majority of attacks are concentrated in just a handful of countries. Iraq ranks first based on a five-year weighted average of the number of incidents, deaths, injuries and estimated property damage. It has suffered from the most attacks, including 11 of the world’s worst 20.

Indeed, Iraqis comprised one third of deaths from terrorism between 2002 and 2011. But while the number of incidents there have climbed since 2007, deaths have actually declined.

Other terrorist hotspots include Pakistan, Afghanistan and India. The worst attack over the period was in Nepal, where 518 people died and 216 were injured. If there is any small cause for comfort, it is that terrorist incidents have plateaued since their peak in 2008.

Rawls Principles of The Law of

Peoples

Parties Have the right to self defense but no

right to War.

Peoples are to observe a duty of non-

intervention.

Peoples are to observe treaties and

undertakings.

Peoples are to observe certain specified

restrictions on the conduct of war.

Peoples are to honor human rights.

CONCLUSION

War should be a last resort but in certain circumstances it becomes necessary if all non-violent means are exhausted.

The war on terror was started with the aim to end the terrorism but the tools used to achieve it can be subject of wide criticism while fighting the war the US and its allies have been guilty of violating human rights and killing of innocents civilians which should have been avoided.

The war on terror has created an international atmosphere against the terrorism and the need of the hour is to ensure that international cooperation is achieved in fight against terrorism.

There is a need to ensure better protection of human rights and to safeguard the interest of the innocent civilians so as to ensure their justice globally.

Declaring the war on terror can only be just only for preventive from the threat of security and not attacking for any other economic gain.