Law and Morality at War offers a broadly instrumentalist defense of the authority of the laws of war: these laws serve combatants by helping them come closer to doing what they have independent moral reason to do. We argue that this form of justification (invoked by many legal and political theorists) sets too low a bar. An authority’s directives are not binding, on instrumental grounds, if the subject could, within certain limits, adopt an alternative, and superior, means of conforming to morality’s demands. It emerges that Haque’s argument fails to vindicate the law’s authority over all (or even most) combatants
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...
The laws of war are under mounting pressure and yet recent developments in the ethics of war have en...
This doctoral thesis addresses questions in contemporary just war theory about the relationship betw...
Despite a recent explosion of interest in the ethics of armed conflict, the traditional just war cri...
achievement of a just cause are morally impermissible and it is wrong to fight in a war that lacks a...
This article challenges the tendency exhibited in arguments by Michael Ignatieff, Jeremy Waldron, an...
The revisionist critique of conventional just war theory has undoubtedly scored some important victo...
Despite a recent explosion of interest in the ethics of armed conflict, the traditional just war cri...
The paper examines the justification of warfare. The main thesis is that war is very difficult to ju...
This “liability gap”-the fact that sovereigns and statesmen, but not subordinate officers and soldie...
Jeff McMahan's challenge to conventional just-war theory is an attempt to apply to the use of force ...
Defence date: 5 April 2017Examining Board: Professor Chris Reus-Smit, The University of Queensland, ...
First published in When Battle Rages, How Can Law Protect? 7 14th Hammarskjold Forum, John Carey ed....
According to the dominant position in the just war tradition from Augustine to Anscombe and beyond, ...
The paper builds on a current debate in the philosophy of war, which are rules that contribute to th...
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...
The laws of war are under mounting pressure and yet recent developments in the ethics of war have en...
This doctoral thesis addresses questions in contemporary just war theory about the relationship betw...
Despite a recent explosion of interest in the ethics of armed conflict, the traditional just war cri...
achievement of a just cause are morally impermissible and it is wrong to fight in a war that lacks a...
This article challenges the tendency exhibited in arguments by Michael Ignatieff, Jeremy Waldron, an...
The revisionist critique of conventional just war theory has undoubtedly scored some important victo...
Despite a recent explosion of interest in the ethics of armed conflict, the traditional just war cri...
The paper examines the justification of warfare. The main thesis is that war is very difficult to ju...
This “liability gap”-the fact that sovereigns and statesmen, but not subordinate officers and soldie...
Jeff McMahan's challenge to conventional just-war theory is an attempt to apply to the use of force ...
Defence date: 5 April 2017Examining Board: Professor Chris Reus-Smit, The University of Queensland, ...
First published in When Battle Rages, How Can Law Protect? 7 14th Hammarskjold Forum, John Carey ed....
According to the dominant position in the just war tradition from Augustine to Anscombe and beyond, ...
The paper builds on a current debate in the philosophy of war, which are rules that contribute to th...
International law grants to legitimate combatants the right to kill enemy soldiers both in wars of a...
The laws of war are under mounting pressure and yet recent developments in the ethics of war have en...
This doctoral thesis addresses questions in contemporary just war theory about the relationship betw...