Advanced

The tenability gap: A study of Just War Theory and intervention justifications in Syria.

Wennberg, Sofia LU (2017) FKVK02 20171
Department of Political Science
Abstract
Moral and ethical considerations have always been important in discussions about warfare and the development of the international community and body of international humanitarian law, laws whose fundamental ethics that can be attributed to Just War Theory. With the changing nature of conflicts and due to the lack of internationally declared principles of just and unjust wars, this thesis argues that there is a gap which creates difficulties in the justifications of contemporary conflicts.

The aim of this study is to describe, explain and analyze the flawed tenability between the classic Just War Theory and its implementation in actual conflict justifications. In order to do so, the study conducts an argumentation analysis on France, the... (More)
Moral and ethical considerations have always been important in discussions about warfare and the development of the international community and body of international humanitarian law, laws whose fundamental ethics that can be attributed to Just War Theory. With the changing nature of conflicts and due to the lack of internationally declared principles of just and unjust wars, this thesis argues that there is a gap which creates difficulties in the justifications of contemporary conflicts.

The aim of this study is to describe, explain and analyze the flawed tenability between the classic Just War Theory and its implementation in actual conflict justifications. In order to do so, the study conducts an argumentation analysis on France, the USA, and Russia's justifications for their involvement in the Syrian conflict to identify the argued data, warrants, claim, qualifiers, rebuttals, and backing. Afterward, the premisses of the justifications are related to the theoretical background to identify what it is that creates the lacking conformity.

The key finding of the study is that it is the different designs of the justifications that create the gap. Hence, the difference of basing ones’ justification on generally accepted warrants or allowing the warrants to establish themselves by the logic link between the data and claim. Due to this difference in the argumentations, the thesis argues that there needs to be a separation between legitimate justifications and lawful justification. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Wennberg, Sofia LU
supervisor
organization
course
FKVK02 20171
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Just War Theory, Syria, military intervention, justification, jus ad bellum, jus in bello
language
English
id
8909244
date added to LUP
2017-07-11 18:03:41
date last changed
2017-07-11 18:03:41
@misc{8909244,
  abstract     = {Moral and ethical considerations have always been important in discussions about warfare and the development of the international community and body of international humanitarian law, laws whose fundamental ethics that can be attributed to Just War Theory. With the changing nature of conflicts and due to the lack of internationally declared principles of just and unjust wars, this thesis argues that there is a gap which creates difficulties in the justifications of contemporary conflicts.

The aim of this study is to describe, explain and analyze the flawed tenability between the classic Just War Theory and its implementation in actual conflict justifications. In order to do so, the study conducts an argumentation analysis on France, the USA, and Russia's justifications for their involvement in the Syrian conflict to identify the argued data, warrants, claim, qualifiers, rebuttals, and backing. Afterward, the premisses of the justifications are related to the theoretical background to identify what it is that creates the lacking conformity. 

The key finding of the study is that it is the different designs of the justifications that create the gap. Hence, the difference of basing ones’ justification on generally accepted warrants or allowing the warrants to establish themselves by the logic link between the data and claim. Due to this difference in the argumentations, the thesis argues that there needs to be a separation between legitimate justifications and lawful justification.},
  author       = {Wennberg, Sofia},
  keyword      = {Just War Theory,Syria,military intervention,justification,jus ad bellum,jus in bello},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {The tenability gap: A study of Just War Theory and intervention justifications in Syria.},
  year         = {2017},
}