Justifying National Defence
The 2010 Oxford War Group addressed a number of topics all related to the issue of just causes for war. In this volume, we propose to revisit, and focus on, wars of national defence. Whilst defence of national sovereignty is standardly, and often unthinkingly, regarded as the paradigmatic just cause for war, it needs closer scrutiny than it has received recently, particularly (though not only) in the light of two important theoretical developments in the field: the rise of an individualist account of war on the one hand, and strong defences of cosmopolitan theories of justice on the other – neither of which seems a particularly appropriate framework for thinking about such wars. In fact, one might argue that David Rodin’s challenge in War and Self-Defense has yet to be met: 8 years later, we still neither have a plausible reductive individualist argument for national defence, nor a viable alternative to the individualist approach.
Cecile Fabre is co-editing the collection with me, and we have a very exciting roster of contributors, offering a range of different perspectives on the justification of national defence. The basic problem will be set up by papers by myself (derived from this one) and Patrick Emerton and Toby Handfield, while David Rodin will explore the legacy of and response to War and Self-Defense. Defences of the individualist view will come from Jeff McMahan and Cecile Fabre. Alternative approaches will be represented by Chris Kutz (looking at democracy and just cause), Yitzhak Benbaji (offering a contractarian alternative), Annie Stilz (focusing on national defence through the lens of territorial rights), and Margaret Moore (writing from a liberal nationalist perspective). This is an extremely exciting project, and we’re very much looking forward to taking it to fruition. We anticipate submitting a manuscript for consideration in mid-February 2012.