Air Power, Insurgency and the “War on Terror” - Prof. Joel Hayward's ...

<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Power</strong> <strong>and</strong> Ethics in <strong>the</strong> Age of <strong>the</strong> Global Salafi Jihad
The Church’s Position
Even before <strong>the</strong> beginning of <strong>the</strong> World War II some religious leaders wanted <strong>the</strong> Church
to speak out against <strong>the</strong> “killing of helpless civilians by terror bombing” 416 They did not
succeed. One of <strong>the</strong> most effective attacks on <strong>the</strong> ethics of bombing was conducted by
<strong>the</strong> Reverend John Collins of <strong>the</strong> RAF Volunteer Reserve. He created a group containing
Servicemen called <strong>the</strong> “Fellowship of <strong>the</strong> Transfiguration of Our Lord”. The Fellowship
worked subtly to campaign against <strong>the</strong> indiscriminate <strong>and</strong> immoral nature of aerial
bombing. Yet it failed to convince <strong>the</strong> majority of <strong>the</strong> Church of Engl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r
Christians who generally supported <strong>the</strong> methodology of <strong>the</strong> war. One justification offered
by <strong>the</strong> Church was <strong>the</strong> “lesser of two evils” argument:
Often in life <strong>the</strong>re is no clear choice between absolute right <strong>and</strong>
wrong; frequently <strong>the</strong> choice had to be made of <strong>the</strong> lesser of two
evils, <strong>and</strong> it is <strong>the</strong> lesser evil to bomb a war-loving Germany than to
sacrifice <strong>the</strong> lives of thous<strong>and</strong>s of our own fellow countrymen.
Ano<strong>the</strong>r argument <strong>the</strong> Churches employed was to endorse <strong>the</strong> apparent effectiveness of
<strong>the</strong> bombing strategy. Responding to a letter from a critic, <strong>the</strong> Archbishop of Canterbury
wrote:
In my mind we have no business to be at war at all unless by fighting
we can, or believe we can, serve <strong>the</strong> purpose of God. If believing that
we enter upon war it becomes a primary duty to fight effectively.
Indeed, this consideration <strong>the</strong>n takes precedence of nearly all o<strong>the</strong>rs.
The worst of all things is to fight <strong>and</strong> do it ineffectively. Therefore
while I agree with you that <strong>the</strong> strategic consideration cannot st<strong>and</strong>
alone it becomes very nearly decisive for our conduct. 417
The Church’s position was that <strong>the</strong> conduct of <strong>the</strong> war must be dictated by <strong>the</strong> “effectiveness”
criterion which in turn is directed by strategic necessity. Strategic considerations <strong>the</strong>refore
framed ethical arguments ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r way around. This implication was that
<strong>the</strong> targeting of civilians was a regrettable necessity. The Church’s argument reflected <strong>the</strong>
prevailing mood within <strong>the</strong> Government, <strong>the</strong> services <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> public in <strong>the</strong> UK <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>
US. The primacy of strategic goals <strong>and</strong> arguments for <strong>the</strong> effectiveness of warfighting
were also articulated by Bomber Harris’s personal moral philosopher, Wing Comm<strong>and</strong>er
T D Weldon. Weldon argued that <strong>the</strong> bombing offensives against German cities effectively
reduced <strong>the</strong> county’s potential to make war. The bombing fur<strong>the</strong>r diverted significant
resources to defence, repair <strong>and</strong> manufacturing which would o<strong>the</strong>rwise have been used
168
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Power</strong>, <strong>Insurgency</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> “War on Terror”