Introduction security.” (“Chapter VII”) The just war theory

Introduction I chose this topic because I thought it would be interesting to research about.  Before writing this essay, my opinion on this question was that the use of military force is justified only as a last resort when other options have failed or aren’t available.  After doing some research, I learnt that there were many other situations where military force was justified.  My perspective on use of military force widened, as I learnt various advantages and disadvantages of military intervention.  The topic I chose relates to humans and other species.    Global PerspectiveIn some cases, the use of military force to prevent violation of human rights leads to the deaths and dangers of countless civilians.  Even though the outcome of a military intervention should be deemed successful if it has saved lives, the fact that it might not be able to provide long-term stability or prevent deaths can’t be forgotten.  (“Morton”)  There are various justifications for the use of military force.  Military intervention overseas is legally justified in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter.  The article states that “The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”  (“Chapter VII”)  The just war theory has two main principles, Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello.  Jus ad Bellum is in latin, meaning “the right to go to war”.  Firstly, the reason for going to war must be unprejudiced and rational.  If the cause is illogical and has ill intentions that leads to situations that calls for desperate measures, then military intervention can be made to prevent innocent lives from being lost.  Secondly, the decision must be made by a competent authority.  Thirdly, military force shouldn’t be used in hopeless circumstances where any attempts to help will be made in vain.  Fourthly, military intervention should only be used as a last resort, when all possible courses of actions have been tried and failed.  Fifthly, the measures taken in retaliation or anticipation must be appropriate and proportional.  Sixthly, the suffering and injustice inflicted upon a party must be significant in contrast to another.  (“Just War Theory”)  The just war theory is a guide that helps individuals or states and it clarifies a set of guidelines and morals that are to be followed within war.  (“Great Philosophers: Augustine on War”)  Firstly, the significance of the harm caused.  Stalin’s regime in the USSR caused the death of more than 60 million civilians.  Secondly, can the military intervention be an instant solution?  An example of immediate success is the United States’ intervention in Bosnia 1995.  However, the interventions in Iraq 2003-11 and Afghanistan in 2003-14 proved that not all interventions work out as planned.  Thirdly, will the long-run impact have a positive outcome?  A number of potential problems that could arise are destruction of civilization, inadequate and corrupt political leaders, reconstruction difficulties, economic disruption, the effect on neighbouring countries etc.  But the outcome of everything is unpredictable, as every case is different.  Lastly, are the consequences of the intervention bearable for the interfering country?  These are the some examples of the number of dead or injured american soldiers from the U.S’s military interventions.  World War I, 1917-18, there were over 17 million deaths and 20 wounded.  World War II, 1941-45, over 60 million people were killed.  (“Kenworthy”)    Personal ResponseI believe that there are both advantages and disadvantages of military intervention.  The use of military force can lead to long-term stability positive outcomes for everyone; however, there is also a risk of the situation worsening and leading to deaths and casualties.  An example of a positive outcome from using military force is the 1999 East Timorese crisis, when the vote for independence from Indonesia lead to mass violence with attacks by the Indonesian army and militants on civilians.  A UN-authorized force lead by the Australian Defence Force personnel called InterFET successfully suppressed the rising, protected the civilians and established peace.  However ,an example of the negative consequences is NATO’s intervention in the Kosovo War, which caused civilian casualties, aroused ethnic conflicts, and increased violence.  UTC NATO started its aerial attacks against Yugoslavia on 24 March, 1999 at 19:00.  The duration of the bombing lasted from 24 March to 11 June, involving over 1000 aircrafts operating from bases and aircraft carriers in Italy and the Adriatic.  The military intervention in the East Timorese crisis showcased the good side of use of military power, as the violence was put to a stop, many lives were saved, and conflicts were resolved.  If I was in this situation I would first try to negotiate or discuss with the parties concerned and try to resolve the conflict without violence or use of military force. (“Morton”) This source was really useful, because it not only had a lot of information, but also spoke from both perspectives.  “E-International Relations (E-IR) is the world’s leading open access website for students and scholars of international politics, featuring high quality scholarly content and student-facing resources.”  The website is recommended by top academics and practitioners world wide.  The website is also used by approximately 3 million readers per year.  Future Scenarios and Courses of ActionI think if a country wants to intervene to help another country in times of need, maybe they should plan it out with detail and take into consideration all the consequences and the impact it will cause.  The UN could impose economic sanctions upon countries that abuse the use of military force.   Local / National PerspectiveThe Pentagon works hard to guarantee that the U.S. military only uses a necessary amount of force to find solutions in violent conflicts that may lead to deaths and casualties.   A war should only be fought as a last resort with its main goal being the establishment of peace and safety of civilians.  It has to be conducted by government authorities, and should aim to protect innocent people against unjust assault.  (“Linker”)  President Bashar al-Assad’s forces have killed 400,000 civilians and injured 12 million others.  Many Major western countries such as Canada, the UK, and Australia provide financial, political and military support to the Syrian Opposition.  For the past century, since World War 1 in 1917, the United States has militarily intervened in other countries.  The most common reasons they have given for military intervention are national interest, and pre-emptive self defense.  But in 1989-1991, the United States and other countries began thinking of other motives for military intervention: humanitarian and democracy.  Humanitarian intervention refers to a means to prevent or stop a violations of human rights in a state that might lead to a crisis when the country is incapable or unwilling to protect it’s people.  An example is the Armenian Genocide in 1915.  (“Kenworthy”)  The Armenian Genocide was the mass extermination of all Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire.  (“Suny”)  I think a lot of people don’t understand the justifications for use of military force, because they abuse it all the time.       Personal ResponseI think the President of the United States should first try to negotiate and compromise to resolve a conflict.  If that doesn’t work then maybe he could try to seek assistance from allies or neighbouring countries.  If the USA is going to use their military force to intervene in other countries’ issues, they should use it to help every country in need.  (“Kissinger and Baker”)      This source was really helpful, because it was precise and detailed with everything listed clearly.  Future Scenarios and Courses of ActionI think the United States should wait for international coalition instead of acting unilaterally.  (“Gonchar”)  They could discuss with other countries and try to find a solution together.  Before, when Barack Obama was the president, many military interventions were made in countries (mainly syria).  Now that Donald Trump is the President of the United States, I think lots of things will be different.               Personal PerspectiveA war is only fought for a legitimized and morally sufficient reason. The country that feels the need to use military force has to show that there is a rational cause to do so.  Self defense is one of the main just causes, e.g. assassinations, invasions, attacks on allies or neighbours etc.  Another sufficient reason is the protection of human rights.  (“What Is a ‘just Cause’?”)  I think the issue is that many countries often break the rules and abuse military power.  There are some main considerations of use of military power.  I think if there was a war going on in my country and my family and friends were being killed, I would be grateful if anyone came to help.     Personal Response  I believe that lots of countries abuse the use of military power for their own advantages, and because of that, it has lead to many negative consequences.  If I was a civilian living in Syria, I think I would want someone to save the country and rescue everyone to bring them to a safer place to live.  I would want to live in a safe environment without any dangerous threats.  Future Scenarios and Courses of Action   People should consider the consequences of their actions.  The abuse of military power results in casualties, leading to people getting injured and disabled, and children being orphaned.  The United Nations said that “Thousands of children have been left to survive alone as refugees, after being orphaned or separated by their parents in the Syrian conflict.”  In Lebanon and Jordan, approximately 70,000 syrian refugee children live without fathers. 3,700 children’s parents have been killed, imprisoned, or separated from them during the war.  (“Sherlock”)   Conclusion and ReflectionI think researching and taking notes was easy, but writing paragraphs and paraphrasing was difficult.  I learnt how to make citations and references in my work.  I also learnt that you have to be careful with which sources you choose, because not all information online is written by credible authors, so you have to make sure your data is reliable before using it.  I found this topic really interesting to research about, because I learnt lots of new things, and my perspective on military force changed.  I enjoyed researching and writing an essay about this subject, because it made me more open-minded about everything.  Even though this topic was really interesting, it was also kind of confusing, so next time I think I would choose a less complicated topic.  Next time, maybe I would find some documentaries about my topic to watch, or some books to read so I could absorb more information and deepen my understanding.  The sources I used were really useful and helped me understand the topic a lot more.