Wikia

Campaigns Wikia

Peace in the Middle East

1,300pages on
this wiki
Talk0

The Morality of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon Conflict Edit

Significant and major facts that are morally relevant Edit

For the straight facts Wikipedia: 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Here, in this Wikia entry, not the Wikipedia entry, we can debate the significance of the facts. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Aggressor/Responder Edit

Who is the aggressor? Who is the responder? John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Proportionality Edit

Is using "Proportionality" always wrong when justifying military action? John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the International Criminal Court Chief Prosecutor, wrote a letter, a public response with his conclusions about allegations of war crimes during the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. [1] John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

When talking about what consitutes a war crime, of the civilian attack type, he writes: John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) Article 8(2)(b)(iv). Moreno-Ocampo, Iraq Letter John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

So "proportional" is thrown about even by law-talking-guys of the first order. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

From the primary source, the Rome Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(iv):

(iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

"Proportional", for civilian attacks, is not written in this primary legal docs. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

He continues ... John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Article 8(2)(b)(iv) draws on the principles in Article 51(5)(b) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, but restricts the criminal prohibition to cases that are "clearly" excessive. The application of Article 8(2)(b)(iv) requires, inter alia, an assessment of: (a) the anticipated civilian damage or injury; (b) the anticipated military advantage; and (c) whether (a) was “clearly excessive” in relation to (b). - Moreno-Ocampo, Iraq Letter, Feb 2006. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

He might be suggesting that the "proportion", the relevant ratio, is:

X. anticipated military advantage relative to anticipated civilian injury. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

But he is not suggesting:

Y. the extent of bad things we'll do to your tribe relative to the bad things you've done to ours. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

These are very different things. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

For the moment let's not question that Y is a proper moral concept at times. Even without that question we ought question the use of the word "proportional" for Y, as when foreign ministers employ the term. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Proportional is one of those words with meanings that slide easily. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

From Maq. Dict 2001, taking three relevant of the twelve meanings:

proportion ...

  noun
      1. comparative relation between things or magnitudes as to size, quantity, number, etc.; ratio: a house tall in proportion to its width.
      2. proper relation between things or parts.

....

      7. symmetry; harmony; balanced relationship. - Maquarie Dictionary, 2001 John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Def 7. in terms of military attack, could be taken to mean equality. Tit for tat. Def 1 together with 2, could be taken to mean any ratio you like. 10 to 1 is such a proportional relationship. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

What can be done to create peace and stability in the middle east? Edit

Are Justice and Peace irreconcilable? Edit

Everyone can claim peace as an objective. Even George W. Bush. While there should be some objectives that most people share "Peace" has lost it usefulness to differentiate objectives. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

If peace is the absence of the use or threat of physical force then let us not seek peace. The police force, in a domestic context, is taken to be necessary for justice. The police constitute an ever present threat of the use of physical force and, at times, the use of physical force, to maintain justice. We do, then, seek justice not peace. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Let us drop, therefore, peace as an objective. Let us seek justice and on the global level, global justice. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

The Solution Edit

To give a democratised United Nations Security Council its own independent military force that is larger than that of the United States. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

A democratised United Nations Security Council means, at least, removing the veto power and permanency of membership. John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Is this not necessary for Global Justice? John Bentley 11:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki