Yesterday was definitely the day for shocking incidents. Israel has attacked Iranian nuclear development sites. Iran has responded with a barrage of drones. I doubt this is the end of the exchange of hostilities.
Israel’s attack on Iran was not just. For a war (which is what it is) to be just there are three components: just means, just ends, just authority. Israel is a signatory to the United Nations charter. As such the war is not being conducted under a just authority. Israel should have taken its grievances to the UN Security Council.
I sympathize with Israel’s situation. It wouldn’t take much more than a single nuclear weapon to completely destroy Israel. The country is about the size of New Jersey and much of its population is concentrated in a small number of cities. It is very vulnerable. That doesn’t excuse Israel.
All of this should suggest why I have long questioned the efficacy of the United Nations for any purpose other than spending money. The U. S. invasion of Iraq was a violation of our obligations under the UN Charter. Russia’s attack on Ukraine was a violation of its obligations under the UN Charter. It should have taken its grievances to the Security Council.
That no permanent member of the UN Security Council thinks twice before violating its obligations and even flyspecks like Israel violate those obligations ad libitum without meaningful consequences are indications of the futility of the United Nations.
By your definition, the number of “just wars” throughout history is minuscule.
War is justified by the ability of the strong to win. A win is justified by the winner being able to win. The only unjust wars those without a clear winner. Meaning that is the attacker loses, it means that they were strong enough to win. In that case, it establishes that the attacked is stronger, and the war is unjust because the weak attacked the strong.
A few points – the strong are not required to initiate wars. Strength includes the ability to project power by convincing potential adversaries that one is physically stronger than they actually are. The UN is only as strong as its ability to win or stop wars. The inability indicates weakness, and, thus, their actions are unjust.
NOTE: The weak banding together may become strong. and hence, their actions are just. The lilliputians are justified in tying down by Gulliver because they are able.
Like history, morality is determined by the winners.
(If had the physical ability and time, I would flesh-out this, but it would become a dissertation.)
Just a reminder that most nukes use plutonium. Something happened in 2015 that lead to Iran giving up all of its plutonium (and enriched uranium). Something happened in 2018 that let them start producing again. It’s old tech, not that hard to do. They were closer to having nukes in 2015 than now so why attack now and not then? Maybe partially because Iran is weak right now but what about Israel internal politics?
There arent many building left to destroy in Gaza. The Palestinians arent showing any signs of leaving. At some point Netanyahu had to face consequences for his incompetence in letting 10/7 happen but sure wont happen while he is at war with Iran. Maybe never if he “wins”.
Steve
It’s not my definition. Augustine was the first to enunciate the definition of a just war that I’ve summarized above. That was a bit more than 1,500 years ago. And, yes, the number of just wars is minimal.
Our entry into World War II after being attacked by Japan was a just war. World War I is iffier. The Vietnam War was unjust. Our initial invasion of Afghanistan was just but became less just with every passing day of our occupation of the country.
How do you know that? Because the Iranians said so? Because the Obama Administration agreed with them?
I don’t think we know whether they gave up everything or whether they were intent on producing a nuclear weapon. To have that kind of knowledge we would need to have had complete, unannounced access which has never been part of any agreement.
Dave Schuler: How do you know that? Because the Iranians said so?
The export of uranium was directly verified. The production was also subject to inspection, which was considered sufficient by experts in the field to verify compliance. Notably, we know Iran is enriching uranium to near 90% purity because it is detectable. Iran has acknowledged enriching uranium to 60%.
Frankly, if Iran wants a nuclear weapon, there’s nothing short of occupation that can stop them. Of course, being directly attacked will politically strengthen the Iranian hawks who want a nuclear deterrent.
That the United States reneged on the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action)—even after Iran surrendered 11 tonnes of low-enriched uranium—only demonstrated to the Iranians that the Americans can’t be trusted. The JCPOA resulted in an increase in Iran’s breakout time to 9-12 months. Reneging on JCPOA resulted in a decrease in Iran’s breakout time to just a couple of weeks, which precipitated Israel’s attack.
Nonsense. We don’t know what we don’t know. We took their word for it.
Uhh, it was also verified by the Russians that 25,000 pounds of enriched uranium was sent to them. (It takes about 50 lbs to make a small nuke.) (My source on the plutonium now says they are not sure about plutonium.)
Regardless, if they were intent upon producing nukes they should have them by now. They might be intent now since they keep getting bombed.
Steve
Dave Schuler: Nonsense.
And the moon landing was faked.
I hope that Israel didn’t miss the factory producing Shahed drones for Russia.
Great opportunity.