CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAREN BOWYER JUST WAR DOCTRINE

matter for realist determination, there can be few, today, who would seriously espouse
the bloodlust of Sherman (or even Harris) in the conduct of war. So, even if we adopt a
realist outlook, there is a need to consider a proper basis for determining what is
acceptable and what not in the conduct of war. And, intuitively, one feels, this is bound
to have a normative rather than purely pragmatic feel to it.
Finally, in insisting states should do what is necessary, realists are not necessarily
arguing against a role for ethics in war, or in international relations more widely. They
are arguing that the role of the state is the protection, and advancement of the interests,
of its citizens. Acting in the ‘national interest’, then, is not a matter of selfish
immorality, but one of duty, of obligation. Welch’s rejection of ‘national interest’ as a
useful term because of its lack of either authoritative meaning, or unambiguous foreign
policy guidance, was discussed above. However, the sense of the term is clear; the
realist argues that the first and foremost duty of the state is to its own. Such a view does
not deny normative value to fulfilment of that duty. A central line of realist thought,
though, even for realists who do not entirely deny ethics a role in foreign policy
deliberations, is that the moral spheres of the individual and the state are clearly distinct.
Coates offers a thought that usefully concludes this section: ‘Dualism can be avoided by
recognizing that even in private life moral action is complex and conflictual, and that an
individual may be required to sacrifice one value for the sake of another.’ 33
1.1.2 Liberalism.
There are a variety of labels that have been used to describe the tradition that is to be
used here as a foil to realism. As we have seen, Carr, in a consciously judgemental
manner terms it ‘utopianism’. ‘Idealism’, too, is widely used. This thesis will stick
with perhaps the commonest terminology, whilst readily acknowledging that this is a
broad school with many equally valid interpretations and understandings. Also striking
is Martin Wight’s characterization of it, already mentioned, as ‘Revolutionism,’ for a
common linking thread of liberal agendas throughout history has been a desire to
overturn the established order. Just as Kant’s ‘Perpetual Peace’ was a rejection of the
perceived wisdom of the Eighteenth Century that war and power struggle were the
12