Does a declaration of war justify behaviour that would be unacceptable in peacetime?

Authors Avatar

Anna Grinevich ©

Does a declaration of war justify behaviour that would be unacceptable in peacetime?

Whether or not the declaration of Just War justifies behaviour that is morally or legally unacceptable in peacetime depends firstly on the sort of behaviour we are talking about. There are a number of behaviours that are legally permitted in peacetime that many people would and do reject as morally unacceptable. This includes abortion, euthanasia and animal rights. The legal acceptability of these issues depends on the government, and varies from state to state. In this country, during peacetime it is acceptable to kill in self defence – for instance, if one’s house is being robbed and the burglar threatens the owner, the owner would not be penalized for shooting and killing the burglar. Pacifists object to all kinds of killing in both war and peacetime, whereas just war supporters try to draw parallels between civil justice and international justice in the attempt to justify certain behaviour. There are also behaviors such as propaganda, espionage and deliberate infringement of human rights that are more doubtful and are usually seen as unacceptable in peacetime.

Join now!

Certain examples of violent behaviour in peacetime in hindsight appear unacceptable, yet at the time those guilty were not prosecuted. There have been a number of incidents when armed Police officers have shot dead suspects who were not carrying a weapon. None of the police officers who killed those people were convicted. This is because killing in defence of innocent life is acceptable in peacetime, and the boundaries and conditions can be bended to suit the individual. Pacifists believe that therefore no killing can be acceptable on deontological grounds. Some religious people argue for the absolute sanctity of human ...

This is a preview of the whole essay