Two things this week have made the hellishness of military violence painfully clear. The first, WikiLeaks’ Afghanistan war logs, describes in detail the horror of civilian casualties and “friendly fire” incidents. The second, from the same theatre, is Sean Smith’s chilling video of American marines in southern Helmand. Faced with these portraits of war, empathy for the people caught up in it has been unavoidable.
But empathy alone is not enough. If you’re not a pacifist, you accept that war is vile, but at times an inevitable part of life on Earth. The question is when and how it can be morally justified. Hence the importance of the just war tradition. Thinkers like the theologian Thomas Aquinas sought a way of containing war, by thinking through the desperate feelings that combat does and should evoke. The aim is to keep a steady view on the demands of natural justice, even when the fog of war threatens to blur everything.
The war logs in particular afford us a steady view on this current conflict, and what’s as unsettling as the tragedy they reveal is the possibility that we lost sight of those demands, at least on occasion. The crucial issue is whether that’s happened. An answer can be found by thinking about the relationship between jus ad bellum and jus in bello ”“ the justification for the war itself, and the principles that should operate during the conduct of war. Both matter.