Is There an Obligation to Rebuild?

Chapter
Part of the Boston Studies in Philosophy, Religion and Public Life book series (BSPR, volume 1)

Abstract

In recent years, efforts have been made to create a new norm in international affairs stating that victorious states have an obligation to rebuild those whom they have defeated in war. This chapter challenges the arguments put forward in favor of this norm, showing that they rest on four false assumptions concerning: the alleged post-bellum nature of the rebuilding process; the supposed justice of the wars waged by liberal democratic states; the compatibility of the obligation to rebuild with the Western just war tradition; and the ability of states to successfully rebuild their defeated enemies. The chapter concludes that the practical application of the norm would be counterproductive, as it would serve mainly to allow states which have waged unjust wars to continue unjust occupations of conquered territories.

Keywords

Moral Obligation Liberal Democracy Termination Phase Walk Away Liberal Democratic State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aikins M (2010) Last stand in Kandahar. In: The Walrus, December 2010. http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2010.12-international-affairs-last-stand-in-kandahar/. Accessed 22 Nov 2010
  2. Amin AR (1990) The sovietization of Afghanistan. In: Klass R (ed) Afghanistan: the great game revisited. Freedom House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bass GJ (2004) Jus post bellum. Philos Public Aff 32(4):403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellamy A (2008) The responsibilities of victory: Jus post bellum and the just war. Rev Int Stud 34(4):620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coady CAJ(T) (2011) The just post bellum. In: Tripodi P, Wolfendale J (eds) New wars and new soldiers: military ethics in the contemporary world. Ashgate, FarnhamGoogle Scholar
  6. Elshtain JB (2007) Exit or no exit? Jean Bethke Elshtain’s response. In: Dissent, 2 May. http://www.dissentmagazine.org/online. Accessed 22 Nov 2010
  7. Elshtain JB (2008) The ethics of fleeing: what America still owes Iraq. World Aff 170(4):96Google Scholar
  8. Evans M (2009) Moral responsibilities and the conflicting demands of Jus post bellum. Ethics Int Aff 23(2):154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gheciu A, Welsh J (2009) The imperative to rebuild: assessing the normative case for postconflict reconstruction. Ethics Int Aff 23(2):124Google Scholar
  10. Harakas S (1986) The N.C.C.B. Pastoral letter, the challenge of peace: an eastern orthodox response. In: Reid CJ Jr (ed) Peace in a nuclear age: the Bishops’ pastoral letter in perspective. Catholic University of America Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Iasiello LV (2004) The moral responsibilities of victors in war. Naval War College Rev 57(3/4):42Google Scholar
  12. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001) The responsibility to protect. ICISS, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson R (2008) Jus post bellum and counterinsurgency. J Military Ethics 7(3):216Google Scholar
  14. Kern PB (1999) Ancient siege warfare. Indiana University Press, Bloomington/IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  15. Laber J (1980) Afghanistan’s other war. New York Rev Books 33(2)Google Scholar
  16. McCready D (2009) Ending the war right: Jus post bellum and the just war tradition. J Military Ethics 8(1):68Google Scholar
  17. Moyo D (2009) Dead aid: why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Orend B (2002) Justice after war. Ethics Int Aff 16(1):47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Orend B (2007) Jus post bellum: the perspective of a just war theorist. Leiden J Int Law 20(3):581Google Scholar
  20. Pape R (2005) Dying to win: the strategic logic of suicide terrorism. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Peceny M, Pickering J (2006) Can liberal intervention build liberal democracy. In: Mason T, Meernik J (eds) Conflict prevention and peacebuilding in post-war societies. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Reichberg GM, Syse H, Begby E (2006) The ethics of war: classic and contemporary readings. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Robinson P (2003) On resistance to evil by force: Ivan Il’in and the necessity of war. J Military Ethics 2(2):145–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Robinson P, Dixon J (2010) Soviet development theory and economic and technical assistance to Afghanistan. Historian 72(3):620–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rodin D (2008) The moral inequality of soldiers: why jus in Bello asymmetry is half right. In: Rodin D, Shue H (eds) Just and unjust warriors: the moral and legal status of soldiers. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Shroder JF Jr, Assifi AT (1990) Afghan resources and soviet exploitation. In: Klass R (ed) Afghanistan: the great game revisited. Freedom House, LanhamGoogle Scholar
  27. Stewart R (2009) Afghanistan: what could work. In: The New York review of books, 17 Dec. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/jan/14/afghanistan-what-could-work/. Accessed 10 Nov 2010
  28. Walzer M (1992) Just and unjust wars: a moral argument with historical illustrations, 2nd edn. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of International and Public AffairsUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations