War has become a constant in daily news. If there is no War in Middle East, Africa is burning. If these does not appear in the news, then be sure to find how North Korea is planning on attacking U.S. or some stories on NATO.
War is the order of the day. There are numerous innocent casualties in these wars begging the question whether the rules of a just war are applied. The death of a single person is as a huge loss as that of several. People should feel the agony of losing a single life. If wars mean death of people whether innocent or guilty, then they should not have a place on earth.
There are numerous other ways in which differences can be settled. These approaches should be sought and applied. War is used to settle grievances between two parties, however, many others are caught in between and their lives are changed for the worst. For this reason, any war either using principles of war or not should not be allowed. The innocent casualties and huge loss of property show that the principles of a just war have failed in guiding states on how to make decisions on going to war. Principles of a just war recommend that a war be allowed only as a last resort. This principles, therefore, guides states to consider war in every decision they make. This principle is misplaced.
If a state wants to go to war with another, this state can do everything possible to ensure that there is no solution reached between the two rivals (Lackey, 2017). As a result, the last resort will have to be used. This way, one state gets to have its way while the other is denied. This principle in essence allows countries to go to war at any time.
The only thing needed is to show failure of reaching an amicable solution. Principles of war fail to guide states in their decision of going to war. The principles direct that states should only go to war with the right intention. Most wars in the contemporary world are influenced by religious differences. One religion feels exploited or humiliated by another and this becomes an enough reason for a fully-fledged war. In this case, there cannot be a right intention of going to war.
Everyone is entitled to worship in the best way they know how. When states differ with their differences being based on religion, war should never be the last resort and there can never be a right intention to go to war. In other cases, countries go to war because of boundary issues. The right intention of every war is to bring serve justice to everyone (Lackey, 2017). When such countries go to war, no justice can be found. Whichever state wins, innocent people end up dead and property worth millions is lost.
Still, this does not guarantee that the oppressed will find justice. Here, only the strong survive. According to the principles of just-war, the use of force should only affect militia and leave civilians out of the war. Supporters of these principle cite this to show that a just war recognizes the rights of civilians.
While this is a positive from the principles, it is yet to be implemented in any war. NATO, for instance, was involved in a war with Libya as they tried to dislodge the then president Muammur Gaddafi. This war was reached as a last resort. NATO being an international body is expected to engage only in a just war. In this war, hundreds of innocent people died (Lazar, 2017). Some were killed by the NATO forces while others died in the hands of the Pro-Gaddafi militia. While this happens, it is difficult to claim that principles of just war protect the right of innocent people.
In many cases, whether in a just or other wars, one side of the militia use innocent civilians to shield themselves. This is a popular tactic used by terrorist groups. At the end of the day, just wars end up like any uncontrolled war. Innocent lives die while still it is claimed that the war is just.
Justice can never be found in a violent area. People must first be calm so that they can agree to a common ground. Justice cannot be forced on people.
A just war seek to force justice to another party. For it to be called justice, the parties should be allowed to raise their concerns. War, on the other hand works with the rule that the strong have their say and dictate what the weaker ones will get. Instead of war, morality should be enhanced.
With morality, the society embraces ethics. With a just war, parties only engage when they are certain they will win. This makes it clear that a just war is after supremacy. On the other hand, embracing ethics means that parties involved will only seek to do what is considered right by everyone.