Just War Theory and the Atomic Bomb

This assignment delves into the complexities of just war theory by examining the ethical implications of the United States' decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan during World War II. It analyzes Michael Walzer's principles of 'just ad bellum,' 'just in bello,' and 'just post bellum,' comparing them to the circumstances surrounding the bombings. The paper argues that while the US claimed self-defense and a desire to end the war swiftly, the atomic bombings ultimately failed to meet the criteria of just war due to the disproportionate civilian casualties and the apparent lack of necessity. It concludes by highlighting the ethical dilemmas inherent in applying just war theory to modern warfare.

Running head: ETHICS OF WAR
Ethics of war: just or unjust?
Student Name
University name
Author Name

ETHICS OF WAR
The western world has always been an active participant in the theory of just war. The
western scholars and politicians have always engaged in explaining, condoning and defending
the inevitability of war. American war theorist Michael Walzer discussed the concept of just war
and ethics of war in connection with certain war cases (Walzer, 1977). He analyzed ‘just ad
bellum’, ‘just in bello’ and ‘just post bellum’ principles in order to discuss that topic. By the first
principle of the theory the politicians are accountable for the starting of wars. He suggested that
six criteria to be fulfilled by the state or nation to make any war justified. The right reasons like
self defense or protection make the wars justified. According to Walzer, resistance of aggression
is one such just cause where war is needed in order to protect the basic rights from violation.
Iraq in Kuwait or Nazis in Poland invaded the territory by using armed forces (Trom, 2014). Or
the Al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attack was aggression against the basic rights of United States of America
and its citizens. The attack of America against Taliban terrorists of Afghanistan was justified.
The intention should be right, a competent author must wage the war, the success probability,
proportionality and it must be fought as the last resort. Walzer applies the theory of supreme
emergency to justify war. He insisted that such situations where a political community must have
to intentionally kill innocent people should be considered as supreme emergency (Neu, 2014).
America’s war against Taliban is also justified from this perspective. Al-Qaeda’s terrorist attack
can be compared with Japan’s Pearl Harbor attack. However America’s bombing on Japan’s
Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot be explained in such simple manner.
Walzer concludes that USA’s decision to attack Japan by dropping atomic bomb failed to
meet the supreme emergency criteria. USA claimed that they wanted quick end of the prolonged
war. Before the Japan bombing, the USA had already lost hundreds of thousands civilians and
militaries. So using the atomic bomb was their deliberate attempt to limit the number of death,

ETHICS OF WAR
which the army invasion in Japan might have caused. Because of such devastating power, Japan
surrendered. However by the execution it seemed that civilian casualties did not matter, they
were more interested in warning Russia. Japan’s navy was almost destroyed, no allies were to
help them and cities were suffering from air attacks (Aljazeera.com, 2016). This attack can be
seen as the psychological need of the leaders of the political community. The atomic attack was
more about causing the most amount of devastation than invasion preparation. The just war
philosophy cannot be applied in this case for various reasons. The approach was more inclined
towards utilitarianism. The direct attack was not intended to the enemy’s military, but on
innocent citizens. The war policy they adopted was not a necessity rather a choice. The six
criteria of just war were also failed by the USA. Directly attacking the non-combatants fails the
application of just war theory in this complicated case.

ETHICS OF WAR
Reference
Aljazeera.com. (2016). Hiroshima: Was the atomic bomb necessary?. Retrieved 15 August 2017,
from http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/upfront/2016/05/hiroshima-atomic-bomb-
160527065818628.html
Neu, M. (2014). The supreme emergency of war: a critique of Walzer. Journal of International
Political Theory, 10(1), 3-19.
Trom, D. (2014). The Iraq War 2003-A Just or Unjust War?.
Walzer, M. (1977). Just and unjust war. New York.