Jus Post Bellum: How useful is it for International Relations?
Main Article Content
Abstract
The following article analyzes the application of Jus Post Bellum, a concept stemming from the Just War Theory of Michael Walzer. First, a definition of the Just War Theory, based on the Williams and Caldwell statement, is granted. Second, Jus Post Bellum is explained, this includes the obligations that States have when intervening. Third, several instances are highlighted during which the United States did adhere to Jus Post Bellum principles, and then instances in which did not. Finally, these examples are used to explain how the state morality has changed over time.
Article Details
References
Casado, Rafael. Derecho Internacional. Madrid: Editorial Tecnos, 2017
Dumke, Rolf. “Reassessing The Wirtschaftswunder: Reconstruction And Postwar Growth In West Germany In An International Context 1.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1990.
Hogan, Michael. “The Marshall Plan: America, Britain and the Reconstruction of Western Europe.” Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Iasiello, Louis. “Jus post bellum: The moral responsibilities of victors in war.” Naval War College Review. 2004.
Marín, Jefferson. “Las teorías de la guerra justa. Implicaciones y limitaciones.” Revista Guillermo de Ockham. 2005.
United States Department of State. “Occupation and Reconstruction of Japan, 1945–52”. Consultado el 20 de enero, 2020. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/japan-reconstruction
Villafañe, Víctor López. “La nueva era del capitalismo: Japón y Estados Unidos en la cuenca del Pacífico.” Siglo XXI. 1994.
Walzer, Michael. “The aftermath of war: Reflections on jus post bellum”. Belgrade Philosophical Annual 23. 2010.
Williams, Robert y Dan Caldwell. "Jus Post Bellum: Just war theory and the principles of just peace." International studies perspectives. 2006.