The Just-War Doctrine: A Warrant for Resistance

THE JUST-WAR DOCTRINE: A WARRANT FOR RESISTANCE I INTRODUCTION IN THE COURSE of its history the just-war theory, with its va.rious criteria, h~s seeme~ ~esign~d to fulfill different funct10ns. Although it was origmally mtended as a means of securing and maintaining peace through the imposition of limits upon recourse to war and the establishment of restrictions in its conduct, nations at times have turned to the doctrine of the just war to legitimize the use of military force as a Christian institution. It has further been suggested that another function of the just-war theory is to aid individual citizens in reaching a decision regarding their personal participation in war. It is this last suggested function of the just-war doctrine that is the focus of this essay. During the late sixties and early seventies many Americans refused cooperation with the nation's involvement in Southeast Asia; a good number of Americans were even drawn into active resistance against the government's efforts to secure people's participation in the military enterprise. To the extent that the activity of the resisters was a matter of conscience, it was testimony to the fact that the responsibility of individual citizens who are ordered by civil authorities to participate in war cannot simply be abdicated. The activity of resistance was a living protest that each person must concern himself with the question of a war's justice before he allows himself to become engaged in it. Implied in this protest, it seems, is the belief that the justice or injustice of any war can in fact be discerned by the individual, and thus that it is not sufficient to expect a person's commitment to a war solely because the competent authorities call for participation. This essay at503 504 VINCENT J. GENOVESI, S. J. tempts to relate this line of argumentation and its implications to the tradition of Christian reflection on war as it developed through the centuries. How are these ideas rooted in the tradition , and to what extent are they the result of new experiences and insights? The key question, as suggested by Paul Ramsey and also by Ralph Potter, is how seriously should we take the fact that the guidelines of the just-war doctrine are intended not only for the consideration of public authorities in their decisions concerning resort to war and the manner of its conduct, but are meant also as criteria to be applied by individual citizens as a means of determining the legitimacy of their own participation in a war.1 What makes this question so important is the fact that the history of the just-war theory seems never to affirm explicitly that the doctrine includes private citizens within its intended audience. II SCRIPTURAL BACKGROUND The Old Testament offers little information which would enable us to draw definite conclusions concerning the individual 's right to refuse participation in war, but it seems possible to indicate two patterns of thought which, if expanded, might have some bearing on the question at issue. First of all, at least until the time of the monarchy, war was viewed by the Israelite tribes as a holy war, a war of Yahweh, and participation in that war was seen as the execution of his anger (Ex. 17: 16; Nm. 21: 14; 1 Sm. 25: 28) . The call to war was made by a charismatic leader upon whom the spirit of Yahweh had come and it is clear that emphasis is put on the fact that the initiative lay wholly with Yahweh. Prior to engagement in battle, inquiry was made concerning Yahweh's will and whatever he commanded was considered just. Within this framework involving the authority of Yahweh and his direct command to 1 Paul Ramsey, War and the Christian Conscience, (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1961), p. ms; also Ralph Potter, "Conscientious Objection To Particular Wars," in Religion and the Public Order, 4, 1966 ed. by Donald A. Giannella (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1968), 44-99 at 69. THE JUST-WAR DOCTRINE AND RESISTANCE 505 fight, there would appear to be no room for individual resistance to participation in the war. But it seems likely...