Revitalised Early Christian Just War Thinking and International Law: Some Observations on Nigel Biggar’s In Defence of War
In light of the well-established international legal principle of non-use of force in international relations, Nigel Biggar’s In Defence of War may give rise to concern in the academy of international lawyers. But the gap between the book’s conclusions and the current international law on the use of...
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
|---|---|
| Beteiligte: | |
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Review |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Sage
2015
|
| In: |
Studies in Christian ethics
Jahr: 2015, Band: 28, Heft: 3, Seiten: 305-315 |
| Rezension von: | In defence of war (Oxford [u.a.] : Oxford University Press, 2013) (Kreß, Claus)
|
| RelBib Classification: | CG Christentum und Politik KAJ Kirchengeschichte 1914-; neueste Zeit NCD Politische Ethik XA Recht |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
Christian just war thinking
B international law on the use of force B Rezension B Humanitarian Intervention B just war as punishment B legal status of the unjust warrior |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Zusammenfassung: | In light of the well-established international legal principle of non-use of force in international relations, Nigel Biggar’s In Defence of War may give rise to concern in the academy of international lawyers. But the gap between the book’s conclusions and the current international law on the use of force turns out to be less significant upon closer inspection than at first sight. This essay reviews Biggar’s concept of ‘just war as punishment’, his view on the legal status of the ‘unjust warrior’, and his position on ‘humanitarian intervention’ from the perspective of international law. The essay is critical of the relevant passages in several more specific respects. At the same time, the essay reads the book as an elaborate general word of caution against an overarching presumption in favour of a maximalist interpretation of the principle of non-use of force in international relations—and it finds merit in that cautionary approach. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0953-9468 |
| Bezug: | Kritik in "In Response (2015)"
|
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0953946814565316 |