International Law. A Treatise. Volume 2 (of 2): War and Neutrality. Second EditionOppenheim, L. (Lassa)
History
International Law. A Treatise. Volume 2 (of 2): War and Neutrality. Second Edition
Oppenheim, L. (Lassa)
International law
§ 63. However this may be, it often depends largely upon the standpoint
from which they are viewed whether or no causes of war are to be called
just causes. A war may be just or unjust from the standpoint of both
belligerents, or just from the standpoint of one and utterly unjust from
the standpoint of the other. The assertion that whereas all wars waged
for political causes are unjust, all wars waged for international
delinquencies are just, if there be no other way of getting reparation
and satisfaction, is certainly incorrect because too sweeping. The evils
of war are so great that, even when caused by an international
delinquency,[76] war cannot be justified if the delinquency be
comparatively unimportant and trifling. And, on the other hand, under
certain circumstances and conditions many political causes of war may
correctly be called just causes. Only such individuals as lack insight
into history and human nature can, for instance, defend the opinion that
a war is unjust which has been caused by the desire for national unity
or by the desire to maintain the balance of power which under the
present conditions and circumstances is the basis of all International
Law. Necessity for a war implies its justification, whatever may be the
cause. In the past many wars have undoubtedly been waged which were
unjust from whatever standpoint they may be viewed. Yet the number of
wars diminishes gradually every year, and the majority of the European
wars since the downfall of Napoleon I. were wars that were, from the
standpoint of at any rate one of the belligerents, necessary and
therefore just wars.
[Footnote 76: See above, vol. I. §§ 151-156.]
[Sidenote: Causes in contradistinction to Pretexts for War.]
§ 64. Be that as it may, causes of war must not be confounded with
pretexts for war. A State which makes war against another will never
confess that there is no just cause for war, and it will therefore, when
it has made up its mind to make war for political reasons, always look
out for a so-called just cause. Thus frequently the apparent reason of a
war is only a pretext behind which the real cause is concealed. If two
States are convinced that war between them is inevitable, and if
consequently they face each other armed to the teeth, they will find at
the suitable time many a so-called just cause plausible and calculated
to serve as a pretext for the outbreak of the war which was planned and
resolved upon long ago. The skill of politics and diplomacy are nowhere
more needed than on the occasion of a State's conviction that it must go
to war for one reason or another. Public opinion at home and abroad is
often not ripe to appreciate the reason and not prepared for the scheme
of the leading politicians, whose task it is to realise their plans with
the aid of pretexts which appear as the cause of war, whereas the real
cause does not become apparent for some time.
[Sidenote: Different kinds of War.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account