CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAREN BOWYER JUST WAR DOCTRINE

(T)here assuredly are cases in which it is allowable to go to war, without having
been ourselves attacked, or threatened with attack: and it is very important that
nations should make up their minds in time, as to what these cases are. ……
with a view to establish some rule or criterion whereby the justifiableness of
intervening in the internal affairs of other countries, and (what is sometimes
fully as questionable) the justifiableness of refraining from intervention ….. 107
In other words Mill is hinting that, as picked up in the work of Gareth Evans et al (see
p182), there may be occasions when intervention is not only permissible but obligatory.
Lucas argues that Walzer’s narrow interpretation of Mill, and the legal paradigm as a
whole, much as has been argued above, has proved wanting. Explicitly recognizing the
just war foundation of his thesis, he sets out an alternative set of principles for jus ad
pacem or jus ad interventionem, drawing on work by Stanley Hoffman, Brian Hehir,
Paul Christopher and James Turner Johnson. Lucas’s initial draft proposals are shown
at Table 3-1.
1. Humanitarian Intervention is justified whenever a nation-state’s behaviour
results in grave and massive violations of human rights.
2. (A) Sovereignty may be overridden whenever the protection of the rights of that
state’s own citizens can be assured only from the outside.
(B) The decision to override sovereignty and intervene must be made by an
appropriate collective international body.
3. The intention in using force must be restricted without exception to purely
humanitarian concerns, such as the restoration of law and order in the face of natural
disaster, or to the protection of the rights and liberties of vulnerable peoples (as defined
in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
4. Military Intervention may be resorted to for humanitarian purposes only when
all other options have been exhausted.
5. Military force may be utilized for humanitarian purposes only when there is a
reasonable likelihood that the application of force will meet with success in averting
humanitarian tragedy.
6. The lives, welfare, rights and liberties to be protected must bear some reasonable
proportion to the risks of harm incurred, and the damage one might reasonably expect to
inflict in pursuit of humanitarian ends.
7. Humanitarian intervention can never be pursued via military means that
themselves are deemed illegal or immoral.
Table 3-1 Draft Proposals by George Lucas (and others) for Principles of Jus ad Interventionem 108
The Catholic Bishops of the US are even more explicit in drawing on traditional just
war doctrine for justification of intervention. This from The Harvest of Justice is Sown
in Peace:
First, whether lethal force may be used is governed by the following criteria:
196