Nigel Biggar's In Defense Of War

In In Defense of War, Nigel Biggar argues that war can be a just means to correct acts of injustice taken by many countries, and that it is the duty of other countries to defend those who cannot defend themselves; just war, therefore, must be a humanitarian, defensive action. Biggar supports this thesis by first explaining the two basic principles of just war: jus ad bellum-- regarding the justice of going to war in the first place-- and in bello-- regarding justice in the course of fighting while in war.
Within these two categories are multiple subtopics. In order for a war to be considered just with regards to its initiation-- jus ad bellum-- the war must first have just cause. A just war’s cause must be a reaction to a grave injustice committed against a community or person; if there is no grave injustice, “the invasion of borders is not necessary” (Biggar 137). The war must also be initiated by a legitimate authority; laws in countries are put in place to secure society, protect its members, and keep people from civil unrest (Biggar 109); therefore, legitimate authorities must take action in order to make sure the reason for starting a war benefits and protects the general public, “not private animosity” …show more content…
As for in bello, there are only two criterions: proportionality and discrimination. In the course of fighting, the operational and tactical levels’ military, forceful means must be proportionate to the military objectives; the violence used should be as efficient as possible, only killing and damaging as little as militarily necessary (Biggar 253). As for discrimination on the battlefield, soldiers should not intentionally kill or harm non-combatants, “and strive to avoid killing them accidentally” (Biggar 104). Soldiers should not want to kill anyone, but rather accept that they will have to kill or injure the opposing side as a consequence of