Critique of just war theory: revision of traditional dichotomy & its implications for justified violence
Kalkavan, Kerim Can
The aim of this paper is to ascertain the limits of the violence a person waging a just war can conduct. To decide where the limits are set, or rather should be set, a discussion of just war theory is required to decide on the people that are viable targets for violence. Within traditional just war theory the viability of targets are based upon the combatant vs. non-combatant dichotomy, which in turn is based upon categorizations of people in either one of the sides. After a brief introduction into the general outlines of traditional just war theory, the traditional dichotomy will be presented through Michael Walzer. Walzer, in turn will be critically analyzed through Igor Primoratz. After the critical analysis a revised dichotomy based on revised categorizations will be presented. The proposed revision will be shown to withstand criticism through the refutation of the objections that Robert Sparrow sets forth. Finally, the implications for terrorism that the revised dichotomy and categorization hold will be discussed.