The article deals with the problem of moral justification of humanitarian intervention by modern just war theorists. At the beginning of the article, we discuss the evolution of the dominant paradigms of the moral justification of war and explain why the theory and practice of humanitarian intervention appears only at the present stage of the development of ethics and the law of war. It is noted that theorization of humanitarian intervention began in the last decades of the 20th century. This is due to a significant transformation, a retreat in the legal and ethical studies of war from the position of radical condemnation of aggressive actions and the recognition of the political subjectivity of non-state groups. Thus, there is a rethinking of the long tradition, the Westphalian system of international relations, according to which the state was recognized as the main participant of big politics, and its sovereign right to conduct domestic policy was considered indisputable. Further, we take the works of Michael Walzer as the main source of modern conceptualization of the ethics of humanitarian interventionism, since Walzer repeatedly addressed this topic and formulated a position on this issue that is representative of the entire modern Just War Theory. The arguments of Walzer and his supporters in favor of the moral justification of humanitarian intervention are considered. Among them are the following. First, the argument about the state as an organization which goal is to protect the rights of its own citizens. If this goal is not not achieved, the state shall loose its power over these people and in this territory. Second, Walzer calls for identifying governments and armed forces involved in mass murders as criminal and, therefore, deserving of punishment. Finally, there is, perhaps the most important, demonstrative argument: an appeal to the self-evident impossibility to stand aside in cases of mass violence in any state. This is followed by a critique of these arguments, as well as a demonstration of how the modern Just War Theory can respond to these criticisms.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.30727/0235-1188-2020-63-11-58-73
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,772
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Triumph of Just War Theory (and the Dangers of Success).Michael Walzer - 2002 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 69 (4):925-943.
Intervention: From Theories to Cases.J. Bryan Hehir - 1995 - Ethics and International Affairs 9:1–13.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Reconciling Just Causes for Armed Humanitarian Intervention.Eamon Aloyo - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):313-328.
Unauthorized Humanitarian Intervention.Mark S. Stein - 2004 - Social Philosophy and Policy 21 (1):14-38.


Added to PP index

Total views
1 ( #1,471,087 of 2,425,353 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #547,144 of 2,425,353 )

How can I increase my downloads?


Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes