The Burden of Autonomy: Non-combatant Immunity and Humanitarian Intervention more

Ethical Perspectives 12.3 (September 2005): 341-355

Michael Walzer argues that except in cases involving genocide or mass slaughter, humanitarian intervention is unjustified because "citizens get the government they deserve, or, at least, the government for which they are 'fit.'" Yet, if people are autonomous and deserve the government that rules over them, then it would seem that they are responsible for the government's actions, including their nations' wars of aggression. That line of thought undermines the doctrine of non-combatant immunity, which is perhaps the most important of Walzer's jus in bello principles. In this way, the concept of self-determination frustrates Walzer's attempts to keep jus ad bellum and jus in bello considerations separate.
x

Log In

or reset password

Reset Password

Enter the email address you signed up with, and we'll send a reset password email to that address

Academia © 2012