Is There Such Thing as a Just War?

Is there such thing as a just war?

It is alleged that warfare tends to produce more warfare, and it has been showed so throughout history. That is not arguable, however what is, and what is one of the greatest stand points of “the just war theory” is that war should therefore only be promoted and actively engaged in, only on the rarest of occasions, exercising infinite caution. One of the greatest misconceptions about a “just war” lies therefore in its interpretation, and specially the confusion between the terms “aggression” and “attack”. To attack in the military sense means to open hostility. It is possible that a state strikes out of self-defense from a forthcoming or carried out attack from another state. Technically if this happens, then the attacker in military sense is not the aggressor.

This has proved to be what is lacking in human history, the just and peace-promoting war efforts. Warfare should therefore only be justified as a last resort. However, this is a point that is mostly located at the bottom of the list we it comes to discussing the just war theory, when it is in fact the first principle of it, because after all, the ultimate justifying aim of war is the protection of the innocent and the promotion of peace. The just war theory attempts to envision how the utilization of arms might be restrained and become more humane, and ultimately directed towards the aim of creating lasting righteousness and peace.

If the satisfactory conditions for waging war are abided by, the theory of “just war” is quite consistent and could be justified. Nonetheless, a failure to abide by the essential requirements would destroy the sole purpose of this theory, which is to validate war. The theory of “just war”, is a set of conditions under which the reason of the war is morally legitimate; holding itself by the rules for the moral conduction of war.

First and foremost a just war can only be waged