Conditions for Just War Not Met
For three years, we have listened to different rationales for the war from President Bush. Does the war in Iraq meet the test of a just war?
In 1983, Catholic bishops in the United States issued a statement that said a just war must meet several criteria: it must be absolutely necessary, waged by a competent authority, use comparative justice (that is, only such force as is necessary), fought with the right intentions, begun only after peaceful means of settlement have been exhausted, have some probability of success, and the costs incurred must be proportionate to the expected good.
The war in Afghanistan has largely met the standard, not perfectly by any means, but well enough.
The war in Iraq is a different matter.
The war in Iraq was not absolutely necessary and if the administration had told the truth in 2002 about the lack real evidence for a nuclear program and the very weak case for a connection to al Qaida (nonexistent in ordinary language), we would not have gone to war.
When the bishops talk of a competent authority, I assume they're talking about a legally responsible authority but the wording is certainly not encouraging. The Bush Administration has clearly not been competent. Rumsfeld, under any other administration, would have been fired two years ago.
There are times we have used far more force than necessary. As just two examples, Abu Ghraib and the destruction of Fallujah violated our own values.
If the Iraq war was fought by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld with the right intentions, they have done a poor job of using the best public relations machine in the world to convince anyone but the right wing base. To be honest, I don't know what their intentions were since Bush and his advisers have given many reasons and excuses that have turned out to be empty words.
We hardly exhausted all diplomacy when we launched the war. In fact, the case for war seemed to be falling apart in March 2003 and many people believe we rushed to war so that the administration would not have its case undermined as the evidence was so obviously falling apart.
As for the probability of success, Bush made any number of obstinate errors; and a number of politically motivated moves undermined the probabililty of success. The lack of sufficient troops in the beginning is still the single biggest blunder; we needed to establish stability quickly and we never got that job done largely due to the lack of planning by the White House and the civilians who head the Pentagon. It appears at this point that the best case scenario in Iraq is likely to be an Islamic Republic that hopefully will not be as hardline as Iran though ties with Iran may be unavoidable. This is not a goal that the Bush administration was seeking when the war began. It's also highly unlikely that the experiment in Iraq will inspire democracy in other Middle Eastern countries which was another Bush administration goal.
And finally, whatever we gain, which doesn't look to be much, is hardly justified by the cost we have endured and will continue to endure because of the lack of an exit policy. Our adventure in Iraq has not made us more secure. The clear gain for Iraqis is far from certain. And the damage that has happened to our leadership position in the world will take years to repair.
As a just war, defined in the second paragraph above, our war in Iraq fails on nearly every count.
In 1983, Catholic bishops in the United States issued a statement that said a just war must meet several criteria: it must be absolutely necessary, waged by a competent authority, use comparative justice (that is, only such force as is necessary), fought with the right intentions, begun only after peaceful means of settlement have been exhausted, have some probability of success, and the costs incurred must be proportionate to the expected good.
The war in Afghanistan has largely met the standard, not perfectly by any means, but well enough.
The war in Iraq is a different matter.
The war in Iraq was not absolutely necessary and if the administration had told the truth in 2002 about the lack real evidence for a nuclear program and the very weak case for a connection to al Qaida (nonexistent in ordinary language), we would not have gone to war.
When the bishops talk of a competent authority, I assume they're talking about a legally responsible authority but the wording is certainly not encouraging. The Bush Administration has clearly not been competent. Rumsfeld, under any other administration, would have been fired two years ago.
There are times we have used far more force than necessary. As just two examples, Abu Ghraib and the destruction of Fallujah violated our own values.
If the Iraq war was fought by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld with the right intentions, they have done a poor job of using the best public relations machine in the world to convince anyone but the right wing base. To be honest, I don't know what their intentions were since Bush and his advisers have given many reasons and excuses that have turned out to be empty words.
We hardly exhausted all diplomacy when we launched the war. In fact, the case for war seemed to be falling apart in March 2003 and many people believe we rushed to war so that the administration would not have its case undermined as the evidence was so obviously falling apart.
As for the probability of success, Bush made any number of obstinate errors; and a number of politically motivated moves undermined the probabililty of success. The lack of sufficient troops in the beginning is still the single biggest blunder; we needed to establish stability quickly and we never got that job done largely due to the lack of planning by the White House and the civilians who head the Pentagon. It appears at this point that the best case scenario in Iraq is likely to be an Islamic Republic that hopefully will not be as hardline as Iran though ties with Iran may be unavoidable. This is not a goal that the Bush administration was seeking when the war began. It's also highly unlikely that the experiment in Iraq will inspire democracy in other Middle Eastern countries which was another Bush administration goal.
And finally, whatever we gain, which doesn't look to be much, is hardly justified by the cost we have endured and will continue to endure because of the lack of an exit policy. Our adventure in Iraq has not made us more secure. The clear gain for Iraqis is far from certain. And the damage that has happened to our leadership position in the world will take years to repair.
As a just war, defined in the second paragraph above, our war in Iraq fails on nearly every count.
posted by Poechewe at 12:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home