Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict

Dr Seth Lazar gives a talk for the ELAC Hilary Term 2010 seminar series. This series is co-hosted by the ELAC and the University of Oxford Programme on the Changing Character of War (CCW). Dapo Akande is the discussant.

Professor Michael Doyle gives a talk for the ELAC Hilary Term 2010 seminar series. This series is co-hosted by the ELAC and the University of Oxford Programme on the Changing Character of War (CCW).

Seminar given by the Director of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Martin Griffiths on the role played by private mediators in securing peace between warring factions and states in areas such as Africa and the Middle East.

In this informal roundtable discussion McMahan presents his recent work on proportionality and noncombatant immunity, with responses by philosophers from both sides of the current debate.

The "Cultural Heritage of All Mankind": Metaphysics, Ethics, and the Positive Laws of War.

Over 60 years ago the USA agreed to give up its autonomy over the use of force by signing the UN Charter. Prof. Hurd uses this case study to better understand how states use international rules and how that use remakes both the rules and the states. Over 60 years ago the United States agreed to give up its autonomy over the use of force by signing the United Nations Charter, which includes a ban on war in Article 2(4). The willing self-limit by a Great Power of its sovereignty over war decisions contradicts the realist expectation that states, especially strong ones, will enhance and guard their autonomy. It also presents a puzzle for rationalists and constructivists and their competing models of the relationship between state interests and international norms. These models suggest that states either follow their interests or follow norms which they have internalized. The former makes all behavior 'strategic' and the latter makes it norm-compliant and unconcerned with interests. Neither side can account behavior where decision-makers apparently believe genuinely in the rule but continued to think and act strategically around it. The U.S. position toward Article 2(4) is an example of this broad category in foreign policy. To understand such cases we must bridge the divide between norms and interests, and between rationalism and constructivism, by focusing on how states use international rules and how that use remakes both the rules and the states.

Prof. Homer-Dixon looks at systems displaying high levels of uncertainty. Using the example of climate change, he asks whether standard "management" approaches used by policymakers are enough or if we must find new approaches in times of uncertainty. Global financial, climate, energy, and food challenges exhibit similar characteristics - all emerge from systems exhibiting high levels of uncertainty, countless unknown unknowns, time lags, threshold effects, occasional chaotic behavior, and sometimes synchronized systemic failure (as we're now seeing in the financial system). In such systemic environments, standard "management" approaches to public policy and governance are severely handicapped. Specifically, systems with lots of uncertainty and inertia are notoriously hard to control: manager cannot effectively predict the system's future behavior, and they cannot quickly correct behavior they do not like. In the case of climate change, by the time policymakers find out that the climate dice have rolled against humankind, inertia could make conventional responses like carbon taxes and wind power inadequate. Planning humankind's response around what scientists currently think is the most likely outcome is therefore reckless. While we can hope for the best, we must lay plans to navigate the worst.

Prof. Allen Buchanan looks at the role of belief in ethics and pays particular attention to its role in armed conflict.

Prof. Thomas Hurka, Prof. Henry Shue, and Dr. David Rodin debate conflicting interpretations of proportionality and their relation to the laws of war.

Prof. Nicholas Wheeler looks at issues of trust in nuclear relations, asking what obstacles still lie in the path of US-Iranian nuclear relations.