Just war theory after colonialism and the war on terror: reexamining non-combatant immunity

IF 2.2 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Theory Pub Date : 2020-10-07 DOI:10.1017/S1752971920000482

Gabriel Mares

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract I challenge a recent trend in just war theory – that civilians might be complicit with terrorists and lose non-combatant immunity – by reversing the gun sights and asking whether colonizing populations complicit with empire might compromise their non-combatant status. Employing colonial settlers as a thought experiment, I demonstrate the logic of expanded civilian culpability that has been proposed in the wake of the War on Terror would be unacceptable in other scenarios, and that these revisionist proposals are in service of ends incompatible with just war. In the process, I identify an important ambiguity regarding the performativity of non-combatant status, and show how this is used to aggressively expand civilian culpability for violence.

查看原文本刊更多论文

殖民主义和反恐战争后的正义战争理论：重新审视非战斗豁免

摘要我挑战了正义战争理论中最近的一种趋势，即平民可能与恐怖分子串通一气，并失去了非战斗人员的豁免权。我扭转了枪口，并询问与帝国串通一气的殖民人口是否会损害他们的非战斗人员地位。利用殖民定居者作为一种思想实验，我证明了反恐战争后提出的扩大平民罪责的逻辑在其他情况下是不可接受的，这些修正主义建议是为了达到与正义战争不相容的目的。在这个过程中，我发现了关于非战斗人员身份的表现的一个重要的模糊性，并展示了这是如何被用来积极扩大平民对暴力的罪责的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Theory Multiple-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.