Examining World War I on the Lenses of Just War Theory

Student Name

Student Number

Course Name

Course Number

Due Date

Introduction

The Just War Theory provides a framework to examine the morality of war, with two main principles as its foundation: jus ad bellum (justice of war) and jus in bello (justice during warfare). The Jus ad Bellum principle examines justifications for entering the conflict, while Jus in Bello evaluates its conduct. Both principles have been used for centuries to assess whether an invasion is morally justifiable. World War I (or "the Great War") was one of the deadliest conflicts ever fought, lasting from 1914-18 and pitting major powers like Germany, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empire against France, Britain and Russia on either side. World War One caused millions of deaths and immensely affected Europe. Many consider it a turning point in history, signifying an end to old-world order and the beginning of a modern era. This essay assesses whether World War I met the just war criteria according to the Just War Theory. This essay will assess whether this conflict met all just war criteria by exploring principles such as jus ad bellum and jus in bello. By studying its causes and intentions among the major powers involved and its conduct throughout, this assessment will attempt to determine whether World War I could have been morally justified as per Just War Theory.

Jus ad Bellum of World War I

Just Cause

First and foremost, in just cause is the notion of justification in war. According to Just War Theory, conflict can only be morally justifiable if it is waged for justification - such as self-defense, protection of innocent lives or restoration of justice. World War One witnessed major powers with various reasons justifying their involvement. One of the primary justifications for going to war was Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, being murdered in Sarajevo in June 1914.[1] Austria-Hungary blamed the Serbian government and demanded that they accept responsibility. When Serbia refused, Austria-Hungary declared war against them, which set off a series of alliances and other major powers joining in on the conflict.

Though Archduke Franz Ferdinand's assassination was the immediate catalyst of World War I, longstanding tensions and issues simmering below the surface contributed to it. Imperialism, nationalism, and militarism all played their parts in creating a precarious balance of power in Europe that many believed necessitated conflict; indeed, some felt its inevitability made war inevitable. Therefore, one could argue that its causes were unfair rather than justified due to greed, power lust or nationalistic ambitions rather than legitimate causes for war.[2]

Another justification for entering World War One was defending democracy and freedom, particularly from authoritarianism in Germany and its allies such as France. Though this may have been a moral justification, its impact was inauspicious at best; noting the atrocities committed by both sides raises serious moral questions regarding their means for this end goal. While war may have had some justifiable reasons for breaking out,...