Can War Be Just in the 21st Century? Ethicists Engage the Tradition ed. by Tobias Winright, Laurie Johnston (review)

One of the most common complaints surrounding the just war tradition is, ironically, the antiquity of many of its arguments. The tradition has largely been built over the last millennium and a half on a number of interlocking assumptions, such as national sovereignty and the inherent limits of weapons, which have been called into question by the presence of nonstate actors, weapons that cannot be easily limited, and sovereigns whose power is dubious. Beyond this, recent scholarship has pointed out the ways in which just war reflections ignore issues of gender, race, and political inequity. In the face of so many challenges, are the categories of just war even workable, much less desirable? In this erudite and broad-ranging collection, the authors argue for a qualified “yes”: there are many new challenges to be addressed, but the tradition is up for the challenge.

Some chapters cover the expected political territory for a volume centered around the question of the just war tradition’s political viability. Contributions from luminaries such as Lisa Cahill (the development of the just war tradition) and Kenneth Himes (humanitarian intervention) serve to bring the reader up to speed on basic, albeit well-worn, issues surrounding just war. The volume’s focus, however, centers more on surveying and addressing emerging edges of the just war tradition. Whereas past conversations surrounding just war have been rooted in political theory, the contributions here gratefully bring the tradition into more interdisciplinary spaces that have been sorely lacking in conversations of the ethics of war. Of particular note are excellent chapters on just war and environmental degradation (Laurie Johnston), on nuclear testing (Rachel Hart Winter), and on the relationship between women in combat and civilian immunity (Christina Richie). By bringing other disciplines such as environmental studies, ethnography, and gender studies to bear on a question traditionally dominated by political theory, the chapters of this volume shed fresh light on a perennial topic.

Unlike some edited volumes, there is no single concern that binds the essays together. But in this case, the lack of a single topical thread (apart from a contemporary evaluation of just war thinking) proves to be a strength for the volume. Because the challenges to morally prosecuting war are so manifold, the myriad directions the chapters take allow for a rich set of starting points that will hopefully be taken by future works. As one who finds the rigor and clarity of just war arguments compelling (though not convinced by their application), I found myself indebted to the editors for their desire to bracingly face some of the most vexing moral questions surrounding war. As such, the editors and contributors should be commended for their trenchant evaluation of the many aspects of this topic that have often not (but should) be considered theologically.