Getting Started With the Terms

After reading the 10 resources, I have decided that it is possible to write a 10-15 page paper out of it. The more I read, the more questions arise, the deeper the rabbit hole becomes. My group was looking for definitions of War, Militarism, and Terrorism. So that is what I tried to do, except terrorism, which shall take some convergence, as there are over 100 definitions.

War occurs only between political communities (entities which are states or are going to be states). The Stanford Philosophical Encyclopedia (SPE) makes a differentiation of statehood and nation. A nation is a group that thinks of itself as a people (common culture, language, historical background) A State, more narrowly, is the machinery of government which organizes life within a given limitation. The issue of statehood is central to the essence of warfare, since it seems that warfare is ultimately about governance. If there can be no peaceful resolutions to issues such as who gets power, who gets wealth and resources, whose ideas triumph, etc. then war is the definitive means for deciding these issues. War is defined by the SPE as an actual, widespread, and deliberate armed conflict between political communities, motivated by a sharp disagreement over governance.

War has two somewhat paradoxical facts however, 1. It remains central to human history and 2. It remains central to social change. (It might also be central to the character of human beings by showing our drive for dominance over others)

The Ethics of War and Peace have basically 3 traditions. I’ll give just a brief summary of each; however, this does not in any way give fairness to these facets of the discussion.

1. Realism: Moral concepts should not be employed when dealing with international relations. Realists emphasize power and security issues, self-interest as the maxim of the state, and the will to power over international issues.
2. Pacifism: A pacifist objects to killing (not just violence) in general and, in particular, objects to the mass killing, for political reasons. A pacifist rejects war and believes that there are no moral grounds which can justify resorting to war.
3. Just War Theory: Claims that states can have certain moral justification for war. JWT must follow six criteria: just cause, right intention, proper authority and public declaration, last resort, probability of success, proportionality. Many of the rules developed by the just war tradition have since been codified into contemporary international laws governing armed conflict, such as The United Nations Charter and The Hague and Geneva Conventions

Terrorism is hard to define because, according to a U.S. Army survey, there are over 100 definitions for terrorism.

Militarism, according to Wikipedia, is an ideology which claims that the military is the foundation of a society's security, and thereby claims to be its most important aspect. The militarization of society is defined in relative relation to others, and hence views the society as a material entity which exerts its influence and power over others. As I read Jim Wallis’ evaluation of The Project for the New America I was not surprised to see that previous government administrations (Reagan to the current Bush Administration) had implemented plans to continue the dominance of the U.S.. What this article points out is that America is readily becoming the example of militarism. There have been various phases of this militarization within the past 25-30 years. Right now, it is the real or exaggerated fear of terrorism that is being used to drive the militarization of U.S. foreign policy. There are now U.S. troops in 130 countries around the world, permanent bases in 40, and a growing number of others providing basing rights. People are now referring to the United States as World Police.

The question we must ask ourselves is “where do we draw the line between being a peaceful agent around the world and policing the world for our global enrichment?