Much water has swirled around the rocks of the “war on terrorism” in recent academic literature. Both political and strategic as well as legal analysts have delineated their views on how best the world community should tackle the phenomenon of terrorism. The clash of competing demands of civil liberties, international law and domestic security and whether or not violent responses to violence render both sides morally indistinguishable are only some of the difficult questions that the current debate is facing. It is often said, that the first casualty in “war” is the truth, and the second is law. While, in the present conflict, it might be an exaggeration to declare thatsilent leges inter arma,the law has certainly been used as an instrument by many in the debate, and its clarity has become increasingly obfuscated in the process.1The discussions about the anti-terrorism-laws in the British House of Commons in the first months of 2005 are, again, highlighting the fact that very different views can be held as to how the laws, the government and the society should retort to terrorist threats. Such discussions, quite clearly, do not only occur in the domestic sphere but also on the international echelon. The numerous recent Security Council Resolutions issued during the debate revolving around terrorism are a case in point.
In this short paper we wish to firstly outline a few issues of a more general nature, drawing attention to some terminological particularities of the “war on terrorism” as well as some engaging moral aspects of the debate. Secondly, and being the main part of this paper, we will attempt to depict and analyse some of the aspects of both the “jus ad bellum” and the “jus in bello” in order to shed some light on the sometimes unclear legal situation regarding anti-terror measures.
Methodologically, we will approach the core answer to the essay-question from two angles. One will consist of an investigation into selected prominent regulations and concepts of international law. The second will comprise the analysis of contemporary world experiences that might reflect a shift in the perception of international law on an international level. Certainly, we should keep in mind that we ought to avoid the temptation of muddying the water of clear analysis by deducing general insights from single cases.3However, in order to fully appreciate the impact of international law, the application to specific practical cases is indispensable.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- A. Introduction
- B. The analysis of the subject matter
- 1. Terrorism
- 2. Moral aspects of the debate
- 3. The concept of “war”
- C. Conclusion
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This essay aims to explore the applicability of the principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello to the "war on terrorism." It examines the complexities of defining terrorism, the moral considerations involved, and the legal framework governing responses to terrorist threats. The essay considers both the jus ad bellum (justice of war) and jus in bello (justice in war) frameworks, analyzing their relevance to the contemporary context of terrorism.
- The difficulty of defining terrorism and its impact on the legal framework
- The moral dilemmas and justifications surrounding the "war on terrorism"
- The applicability of jus ad bellum and jus in bello to counterterrorism measures
- The balance between security and civil liberties in the fight against terrorism
- The role of international law in shaping responses to terrorism
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- A. Introduction: This section provides an overview of the contemporary debate surrounding the "war on terrorism," highlighting the complexities of balancing civil liberties, international law, and domestic security. It introduces the essay's central question and outlines the methodological approach to be employed.
- B. The analysis of the subject matter: This section delves into the core of the essay, examining various aspects of terrorism, morality, and the concept of war in relation to the "war on terrorism."
- 1. Terrorism: This subsection discusses the elusive nature of defining terrorism, highlighting the lack of universal consensus and the challenges of applying legal frameworks to diverse forms of violence. It examines various definitions, including the "High Level Panel on Reform of UN Policy and Institutions" definition, and explores the difficulty of distinguishing between legitimate resistance and terrorist acts.
- 2. Moral aspects of the debate: This subsection focuses on the ethical dilemmas arising from the "war on terrorism." It explores the tension between moral principles and the consequentialist approach of using less than ethical means to achieve desired outcomes, particularly in the context of self-defense and the "lesser evil" dilemma.
- 3. The concept of “war”: This subsection investigates the applicability of the concept of war to the context of terrorism, considering the unique characteristics of this conflict and its implications for jus ad bellum and jus in bello. It examines the legal and moral challenges of applying traditional warfighting principles to a conflict characterized by asymmetrical warfare and non-state actors.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The core keywords and focus topics of this essay include: terrorism, jus ad bellum, jus in bello, war on terrorism, international law, civil liberties, moral dilemmas, counterterrorism, asymmetric warfare, non-state actors, and legal frameworks.
- Citation du texte
- Master of Arts in Diplomacy, Law and Global Change Gabriel Vockel (Auteur), 2005, Can the principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello be applied to the recently declared 'war on terrorism' ? , Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/66214
