His books include ll’s fair in love and war,” so the saying goes. For we commonly judge and sometimes punish individuals, in the arena of love, for infidelity, deceit, and crimes of passion; and we commonly judge and sometimes punish individuals, in the arena of combat, for acts of aggression, rape and pillage in war, and crimes against humanity.
The intense pressure of competition, in both affairs of the heart and the crucible of war, can help explain why unfair, even inhumane, behavior is common, but it does not excuse it.
Professional military lawyers play an increasingly important role in reviewing targeting policies and rules of engagement, at least in the United States, to ensure that military plans and operations are compliant with the laws of armed conflict.
War crimes tribunals have grown in use, but raise new questions about whether they encourage ruthless leaders to fight to the finish rather than accept resignation and exile.
Indeed, there are lively and ongoing debates concerning just war doctrine in a number of academic disciplines and also among policy-makers and policy analysts.
But these groups rarely speak to each other and there is a growing gap between strong scholarship regarding ethics and war and policy-relevant work that can influence government decisions and public debates.Horowitz asks whether human accountability and responsibility will be possible with autonomous weapons and reviews the emerging debate about this potential revolution in military technology. And military technology development does not always lead to more destructive weaponry.David Fidler’s essay focuses on cyber warfare, cyber espionage, and cyber coercion. Strategic Command, provides an insider’s look at nuclear targeting, the requirements of deterrence, and the ethical and legal considerations that can influence military planning and implementation. Lewis and I then examine the consequences of a potential change in the existing presidential guidance given to the U. One of the most important global political developments in recent years has been the rise of and the challenges to the responsibility to protect (R2P) doctrine.Drones provide the opportunity for more discriminate use of military force against targets, but can also provide a temptation to use military force more often or in more places than would otherwise be the case. commitment to a new war planning requirement–that U. nuclear weapons only be aimed against legitimate military targets that cannot be destroyed with reasonable prospect of success by conventional weapons–reduce civilian fatalities in a nuclear conflict, produce stronger adherence to the laws of armed conflict, and impact the credibility of deterrence?Walzer explores both the benefits and the dangers of drones from a just war theory perspective. Military technology is not developed in a political vacuum.Other technologies could better provide early warning of conflict and promote more effective peacekeeping, but pose new questions on ethical norms of the use of military force and intervention.This essay surveys this landscape and introduces the principles of just war and the international law of war, upon which the issue’s contributors draw to discuss new and emerging dilemmas in the evolving warfare of the twenty-first century. SAGAN, a Fellow of the American Academy since 2008, is the Caroline S. Munro Professor of Political Science, the Mimi and Peter Haas University Fellow in Undergraduate Education, and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University.Lloyd Axworthy, the former foreign minister of Canada, and A.Walter Dorn then explore the potential positive effects of technological developments–such as improved algorithmic forensic data analysis and autonomous surveillance vehicles–on peacekeeping operations, humanitarian crisis prevention, and post-conflict reconstruction.Technological innovations, the growth of terrorism by nonstate actors, and new legal and ethical approaches are changing the nature of modern warfare.Cutting-edge technologies—drones, cyber weapons, autonomous weapons—could reduce collateral damage, but their ease of use could also breed more conflict by lowering the political costs of engagement.