Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Lesser Evil Dilemma for Sparing Civilians

  • Published:
Law and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The rule I call ‘Civilian Immunity’ – the rule that prohibits targeting civilians in war – is the heart of the accepted jus in bello code. It prohibits targeting (viz., intentionally killing) civilians in a wide variety of war circumstances. Seth Lazar's brilliant book, Sparing Civilians, attempts to defend Civilian Immunity. In this essay I show, first, that his ‘Risky-Killing based argument’ fails to provide civilians with the robust protection Sparing Civilians promises. I argue, secondly, that the moral framework that Sparing Civilians employs, a moral framework that centralizes the Deontological Clause (stating that one's intentional killing is worse than enabling others to kill), leaves the immunity of civilians against Leaders unexplained.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yitzhak Benbaji.

Additional information

I am grateful to Seth Lazar, to Victor Tadros, to Alec Walen and especially to Johannes Himmelreich for very helpful comments. The research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation, grant number 304/15.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benbaji, Y. The Lesser Evil Dilemma for Sparing Civilians. Law and Philos 37, 243–267 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-017-9312-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-017-9312-6

Navigation