Justifications for the use of force

Answer

A framework for judging when going to war is justified (just cause, legitimate authority, last resort) and how it must be fought (proportionality, protecting civilians).

Answer

The right to go to war (whether a war is justified) and right conduct in war (how it is fought).

Answer

Just cause (e.g. self-defence), legitimate authority, last resort, and a reasonable chance of success.

Answer

Proportionality (force not excessive), discrimination (protect civilians, target combatants), and humane treatment of prisoners.

Answer

In self-defence, to stop genocide or mass atrocity (humanitarian intervention), and only as a genuine last resort after peaceful options fail.

Answer

The belief that violence is always wrong, even in self-defence.

Answer

Using force to stop a state committing atrocities against its own people — controversial because it clashes with sovereignty.

Answer

The force used must not exceed what the goal requires — no excessive or unnecessary destruction.

Answer

Combatants must be targeted, not civilians — civilians must be protected from deliberate attack.

Answer

It can be abused to make self-interested wars look 'just', its conditions are vague, and modern warfare makes proportionality and protecting civilians hard to honour.

Answer

Force can be justified in extreme cases — self-defence, stopping atrocities — as a last resort, but the moral bar must be very high and conduct constrained.