Menu
Home
Log in / Register
 
Home arrow Management arrow Achieving ethical excellence

CONCLUSION

This chapter has argued that the idea of sacrifice, so commonly held as a key element of the warrior's craft, can be best explained through an approach that draws on both deontological and aretaic notions. Deontological models of Just War Theory can explain why soldiers are duty-bound to accept a certain level at risk in most situations, but this explanation is more problematic in cases of humanitarian intervention. At this point, aretaic ideas such as the image of martyrdom can help explain supererogatory sacrifices, and emphasis of nonmoral excellences can show that warriors might be inclined to accept levels of risk as a necessary means of proving their excellence as warriors.

I also argued that forgiveness should be understood as a form of sacri- fice because it often involves the forfeiture of a claim-right. This notion of forgiveness can be brought to bear on international relations and Just War Theory as a measure of the proportionality principle of jus ad bellum, which requires that the world be left in a better state through the war than would be if the war was not fought. This type of forgiveness has more similarity to the forgiveness of national debt than to models of interpersonal forgive- ness; it entails a political leader abstaining from the prosecution of war or the seeking of remunerations even when he believes his community is entitled to it. In situations where two sides both claim to have just cause, this type of forgiveness becomes all the more salient. However, it requires the operation of prudence on the part of political leaders to ensure that for- giveness is not being employed in situations where the just and prudent decision would be to go to war.

NOTE

Throughout this discussion I will use the masculine pronoun in cases such as this. My reasons for doing so are twofold: first, because repeatedly using 'his or her' will prove clumsy and logistically problematic due to word restrictions, and sec- ondly because although things are changing in the West, the overwhelming majority of military practitioners today still tend to be men. However, I recognise that this is not a perfect solution to a problem that is much contested within academic practice. I hope, however, that it will not be taken to be offensive by any reader. I would wel- come any suggestions for a better approach to use in future.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This chapter will form a substantial section of a chapter of my doctoral thesis. I am grateful for feedback from my supervisors, Christian Enemark and Hayden Ramsay, who have greatly improved the quality of this chapter. I originally tested these ideas at the AAPAE conference in Fremantle, 2013. I am also hugely grateful for the insights I received there, which have significantly improved the quality of my thought and argument.

REFERENCES

Anscombe, G. E. M. (1961). War and murder. In W. Stein (Ed.), Nuclear weapons: A Catholic response. New York, NY: Sheed & Ward Inc. (Reprinted in Wasserstrom, R. A. (1970). War and morality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co).

Aquinas, St. T. (2008 [1920]). In Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Trans.), Summa

theologica (2nd ed.). [Online edition]. Kevin Knight. Retrieved from new advent.org/summa/index.html Australian Defense Force. (2006). Law of armed conflict. ADDP. Retrieved from defence.gov.au/adfwc/Documents/DoctrineLibrary/ADDP/ADDP06.4-LawofArmed Conflict.pdf

Cook, M. (2004). The moral warrior. New York, NY: SUNY Press.

Digesar, P. E. (2004). Forgiveness, the unforgiveable, and international relations. International Relations, 18(4), 480-497.

Feinberg, J. (2006). The nature and value of rights. In S. M. Cahn & P. Markie (Eds.), Ethics: History, theory and contemporary issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ficarrotta, J. C. (1997). Are military professionals bound by a higher moral standard? Armed Forces & Society, 24(59), 59-75.

Fotion, N. (2008). War and ethics: A new just war theory. London: Continuum.

Hough, A. (2009, December 12). Hero British soldier 'honoured 65 years after saving child's life from live grenade'. The Telegraph. Retrieved from telegraph.co.uk/ history/world-war-two/6788101/Dead-British-soldier-to-be-honoured-65-years-after-saving- childs-life-from-live-grenade.html

Johnson, W. J., & Gillman, A. D. (Eds.). (2012). Law of armed conflict deskbook. Charlottesville, VA: The United States Army Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School. Retrieved from loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/LOAC-Deskbook-2012.pdf

Konstan, D. (2005). Clemency as a virtue. Classical Philology, 100(4), 337-346.

MacIntyre, A. (2008 [1981]). After virtue (3rd ed.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Morrow, D. (2011). After antagonism? The British-Irish ethnic frontier after the agreement.

Irish Political Studies, 26(3), 301-312.

Nagel, T. (1979). War and massacre. In T. Nagel (Ed.), Mortal questions. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

Rahimi, B. (2005). Sacrifice, transcendence and the soldier. Peace Review, 17(1), 1-8.

Reichberg, G. (2010). Aquinas on battlefield courage. The Thomist, 74, 338-368.

Reichberg, G. (2011). Aquinas' moral typology of peace and war. The Review of Metaphysics, (3), 467-487.

Szablowinski, Z. (2012). Self-forgiveness and forgiveness. The Heythrop Journal, 53(4), -689.

Toner, C. (2006). Military service as practice: Integrating the sword and shield approaches to military ethics. Journal of Military Ethics, 5(3), 183-200.

United States Department of Army. (2006). FM3-24 'Counterinsurgency'. Retrieved from

fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf

Walzer, M. (2004). Arguing about war. London: Yale University Press.

Walzer, M. (2006 [1977]). Just and unjust wars (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books. Zaibert, L. (2009). The paradox of forgiveness. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 6(3), 365-393.


 
Found a mistake? Please highlight the word and press Shift + Enter  
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >
 
Subjects
Accounting
Business & Finance
Communication
Computer Science
Economics
Education
Engineering
Environment
Geography
Health
History
Language & Literature
Law
Management
Marketing
Mathematics
Political science
Philosophy
Psychology
Religion
Sociology
Travel