{"title":"JUS POST BELLUM AS A SECTION OF THE THEORY OF JUST WAR","authors":"N. Shaveko","doi":"10.35634/2587-9030-2022-6-3-359-368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article considers problems which are raised within the theory of just war in relation to the question of a just end to a war (jus post bellum). It is shown that in modern academic literature there is not even a clear understanding of the subject of jus post bellum, not to mention a broad consensus on specific moral issues. All this distinguishes this section of the theory of just war from other sections. There are three groups of questions that are raised by various authors under the heading of jus post bellum: 1) when should hostilities cease? 2) who should be held responsible for war crimes? 3) how to guarantee peace and security for the future after the end of the war? On each of these issues, the author of the article presents the points of view of the most famous authors who study the theory of just war, and also substantiates his own point of view. In particular, it is concluded that war must be stopped when the principles of jus ad bellum (right to war) cease to be satisfied. The principles of just cause, last resort and proportionality should be of particular importance. The scope of responsibility of political leaders, military commanders, ordinary combatants, as well as the civilian population in violation of the principles of just war is substantiated. Despite the fact that the responsibility of the civilian population for its political passivity is fundamentally permissible, the difficulty lies in the fact that the very criteria of legal capacity are largely guided by the typical characteristics of the civilian population. It is shown that a peace treaty or other act ending the war, in order to become a guarantee of peace and security in the future, must earn legitimacy from the population of all the warring states. Another such guarantee is the reform of the UN in order to increase its effectiveness. Finally, it is proved that post-war reconstruction (aimed at security, rule of law and development) is the task of all parties involved and the world community as a whole.","PeriodicalId":263017,"journal":{"name":"Вестник Удмуртского университета. Социология. Политология. Международные отношения","volume":"81 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Вестник Удмуртского университета. Социология. Политология. Международные отношения","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35634/2587-9030-2022-6-3-359-368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article considers problems which are raised within the theory of just war in relation to the question of a just end to a war (jus post bellum). It is shown that in modern academic literature there is not even a clear understanding of the subject of jus post bellum, not to mention a broad consensus on specific moral issues. All this distinguishes this section of the theory of just war from other sections. There are three groups of questions that are raised by various authors under the heading of jus post bellum: 1) when should hostilities cease? 2) who should be held responsible for war crimes? 3) how to guarantee peace and security for the future after the end of the war? On each of these issues, the author of the article presents the points of view of the most famous authors who study the theory of just war, and also substantiates his own point of view. In particular, it is concluded that war must be stopped when the principles of jus ad bellum (right to war) cease to be satisfied. The principles of just cause, last resort and proportionality should be of particular importance. The scope of responsibility of political leaders, military commanders, ordinary combatants, as well as the civilian population in violation of the principles of just war is substantiated. Despite the fact that the responsibility of the civilian population for its political passivity is fundamentally permissible, the difficulty lies in the fact that the very criteria of legal capacity are largely guided by the typical characteristics of the civilian population. It is shown that a peace treaty or other act ending the war, in order to become a guarantee of peace and security in the future, must earn legitimacy from the population of all the warring states. Another such guarantee is the reform of the UN in order to increase its effectiveness. Finally, it is proved that post-war reconstruction (aimed at security, rule of law and development) is the task of all parties involved and the world community as a whole.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
战后法是正义战争理论的一部分
本文考虑了在正义战争理论中提出的与战争的公正结束问题(战争后正义)有关的问题。研究表明,在现代学术文献中,对战后正义的主题甚至没有一个清晰的认识,更不用说在具体的道德问题上达成广泛的共识。这就是正义战争理论的这一部分区别于其他部分的地方。在“战争后法”的标题下,不同的作者提出了三组问题:1)敌对行动何时应该停止?2)谁应该为战争罪负责?3)战争结束后如何保障未来的和平与安全?在这些问题上,本文的作者提出了研究正义战争理论的最著名的作者的观点,并证实了自己的观点。特别是,它的结论是,当战争权原则不再满足时,战争必须停止。正当理由、最后手段和相称原则应特别重要。政治领导人、军事指挥官、普通战斗人员以及平民违反正义战争原则的责任范围得到证实。尽管平民人口对其政治被动的责任从根本上是允许的,但困难在于法律行为能力的标准在很大程度上是由平民人口的典型特征所指导的。研究表明,结束战争的和平条约或其他行为,为了成为未来和平与安全的保障,必须获得所有交战国家人民的合法性。另一个保障是对联合国进行改革,以提高其效力。最后,事实证明,战后重建(以安全、法治和发展为目标)是有关各方和整个国际社会的任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
FEATURES OF LATIN AMERICAN SOCIALISM ON THE EXAMPLE OF CHILE, BOLIVIA, VENEZUELA AND NICARAGUA SOCIAL ASPECTS OF MANAGING RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT OF NEURAL NETWORKS THE HISTORY OF ISLAM IN THE POLITICS OF MEMORY IN INDONESIA (mid-2010s to early 2020s) "MYSTERIOUS ALBION": NEGOTIATION BEHAVIOR PATTERN OF THE BRITISH SPECIFICS OF THE RUSSIAN COGNITARIATE OF GENERATION Z
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1