Prawowitość państwa jako warunek pokojowej koegzystencji
Abstract
Magdalena M. Baran
Legitimacy of state as a challenge to the idea and practice of bellum iustum
Abstract
Contemporary thinking about just war is evolving, and next to traditionally accepted conditions, appears new challenges and questions. Some of them arises as a result of technological development, next come from the field of practical ethics and international law, while others are result of political decisions and requirements of war strategy. But since we ask about just war using terms such as police action, humanitarian intervention, preventive war and preventive democracy, we are somehow at a crossroads. On the one hand, there is a requirement to rescue people, and war becomes necessary in face of so-called greatest danger, when our highest values and our collective survival are exposed to immediate danger. On the other hand, we have to remember to intervene judiciously, especially when consideration of the legitimacy of each intervention becomes more and more difficult. Possible answer could be found in David Luban proposal, which postulated a modification of the UN definition of the crime of aggressive war. Perhaps it is reasonably to base justification of intervention on legitimacy of the state, asking whether it takes into account opinion of their own people, if the state does not transform into tyranny. In my paper I will ask how this postulate influences contemporary thinking about just war. I want to ask whether justice or criminality of a given intervention should be evaluated through the prism of relationship between the state and citizens. And, if bad situation of citizens, entailing their opposition and, consequently, invalidity of government, can authorize/justify international intervention.
Keywords: humanitarian intervention, just war, legitimacy of state, nation, society.
Legitimacy of state as a challenge to the idea and practice of bellum iustum
Abstract
Contemporary thinking about just war is evolving, and next to traditionally accepted conditions, appears new challenges and questions. Some of them arises as a result of technological development, next come from the field of practical ethics and international law, while others are result of political decisions and requirements of war strategy. But since we ask about just war using terms such as police action, humanitarian intervention, preventive war and preventive democracy, we are somehow at a crossroads. On the one hand, there is a requirement to rescue people, and war becomes necessary in face of so-called greatest danger, when our highest values and our collective survival are exposed to immediate danger. On the other hand, we have to remember to intervene judiciously, especially when consideration of the legitimacy of each intervention becomes more and more difficult. Possible answer could be found in David Luban proposal, which postulated a modification of the UN definition of the crime of aggressive war. Perhaps it is reasonably to base justification of intervention on legitimacy of the state, asking whether it takes into account opinion of their own people, if the state does not transform into tyranny. In my paper I will ask how this postulate influences contemporary thinking about just war. I want to ask whether justice or criminality of a given intervention should be evaluated through the prism of relationship between the state and citizens. And, if bad situation of citizens, entailing their opposition and, consequently, invalidity of government, can authorize/justify international intervention.
Keywords: humanitarian intervention, just war, legitimacy of state, nation, society.
Pełny tekst:
PDFAdministracja Cytowania | Strony czasopism