x
x
x
Hearts Hearts Hearts Hearts 7 7 7 7
Un pays peut-il utiliser n'importe quelles tactiques ou armes nécessaires, sous prétexte qu’il est sur le point d’être vaincu?
Qu’est-ce que vous en pensez? La fin peut-elle justifier les moyens? N’y a-t-il pas un risque d’escalade ? Jusqu’où cela peut-il aller ?

• More often than not, it is a political system/party trying to survive rather than a country. Preservation of a political interest is not an excuse for violating the laws of war.

• The Laws of War clearly state what tactics and weapons are banned.

 

‘…while the rise of a genuinely existential threat cannot be ruled out in the future, political rhetoric aside, it is the challenge of discretionary wars that we are routinely faced with today, where it is political interests rather than national survival that are at stake. It does not matter which side one is on: in this type of conflict, there is no conceivable excuse today for abandoning the rules and violating the ethical norms of war.’

See Jack of Spades

David Whetham, ‘My Country, Right or Wrong: If the Cause is Just, is Anything Allowed? in James Turner Johnson and Eric D. Patterson (eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Military Ethics, (Ashgate, Farnham, 2015), p291.

x
x