Abstract
Frequently, the just war principle of noncombatant immunity is interpreted as morally prohibiting the intentional targeting of noncombatants. Apparently, many just war theorists assume that to target means to (intend to) kill. Now that effective nonlethal weapons have been envisaged, it should be evident that there is no conceptual connection between intentionally targeting and intentionally killing. For, using nonlethal weapons, there could be intentional targeting without intentional killing. This paper explores the question of whether the noncombatant immunity principle should be revised, so as to allow uses of nonlethal weapons. Preliminary to answering this question, some other questions are explored, among which are the following. Why should a noncombatant immunity principle be accepted? Why is it morally permissible to intentionally target enemy combatants? Are noncombatants grievously harmed when they are incapacitated by nonlethal weapons? Is it morally permissible to intentionally incapacitate enemy combatants with nonlethal weapons, while knowingly but not intentionally incapacitating noncombatants? In order to focus on moral questions involving nonlethal weapons, questions about their effectiveness or legality are set aside. Instead of the idea of noncombatant immunity as expressed above, a delimited principle of noncombatant immunity is proposed—namely, that, in the conduct of war, the intentional grave injuring or killing of noncombatants is morally prohibited. Also proposed is a principle of noncombatant targeting, which would allow some uses of nonlethal weapons to intentionally incapacitate noncombatants.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Available at www.jnlwp.com/.
Concerning the idea of specification, see Beauchamp and Childress 2009: 16–19.
Cf. W. D. Ross’s (1988) conception of prima facie duties.
This claim is controversial. James Turner Johnson claims that proportionality “suggests using the least force necessary” (1984: 145).
Originally, this paper was written as the basis for a talk at the conference ‘Emerging military technologies, ethics and leadership: Moral Implications for command, control and communication’, The Netherlands Defence Academy, Amsterdam, 6 November 2008. Subsequently, a talk based on it was delivered at a conference of the International Society for Military Ethics (ISME 2009), University of San Diego, 30 January 2009. I want to thank members of the audiences for their stimulating and insightful comments. I also want to thank the anonymous referees for very pertinent remarks that helped me to improve this paper.
References
American Law Institute (1962). Model penal code (Philadelphia).
Amnesty International (2004). United States of America: Excessive and lethal force? Amnesty International’s concerns about deaths and ill-treatment involving police use of tasers (30 November 2004). Available at http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/139/2004.
Beauchamp, T. & Childress, J. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Childress, J. F. (1982). Just-war criteria. In Moral responsibility in conflicts: essays on nonviolence, war, and conscience. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
Coady, C. A. J. (2008). Morality and political violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coates, A. J. (1997). The ethics of war. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
COIN FM. (2007). The U.S. army/marine corps counterinsurgency field manual. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dubik, J. M. (1982). Human rights, command responsibility, and Walzer’s just war theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs 11(4), 354-371.
Fidler, D. P. (2002). Non-Lethal’ weapons and international law: three perspectives on the future. In N. Lewer (Ed.), The future of non-lethal weapons: technologies, operations, ethics and law. London: Frank Cass.
Frankena, W. K. (1973). Ethics (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Graham, G. (1997). Ethics and international relations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Gross, M. L. (2008). The Second Lebanon War: the question of proportionality and the prospect of non-lethal warfare. Journal of Military Ethics, 7(1), 1–22.
Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral thinking: its levels, method and point. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hare, R. M. (1996). Foundationalism and coherentism in ethics. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong & M. Timmons (Eds.), Moral knowledge?: new readings in moral epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.
High-level Panel (2004). A more secure world: our shared responsibility. Report of the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. New York: United Nations. Available at http://www.un.org/secureworld/. Also available in print form.
ICRC. (1977). Protocols additional to the geneva conventions of 12 August 1949. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.
Johnson, J. T. (1984). Can modern war be just? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kant, I. (1991). The metaphysics of morals, translated by Mary J. Gregor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Kasher, A. (2007). The principle of distinction. Journal of Military Ethics, 6(2), 152–167.
Kaurin, P. M. (2008). With fear and trembling: a qualified defense of ‘non-lethal’ weapons. Talk delivered to International Society on Military Ethics (ISME). Available at http://www.usafa.edu/isme/ISME08/Kaurin08.html.
Kenny, A. (1978). Freewill and responsibility. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Koplow, D. A. (2006). Nonlethal weapons: the law and policy of revolutionary technologies for the military and law enforcement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lackey, D. P. (1989). The ethics of war and peace. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs.
Lango, J. W. (2007). Generalizing and temporalizing just war principles: illustrated by the principle of just cause. In M. Brough, J. W. Lango, & H. van der Linden (Eds.), Rethinking the just war tradition. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
Lango, J. W. (2009). Military operations by armed UN peacekeeping missions: an application of generalized just war principles. In T. van Baarda and D. Verweij (Eds.), The moral dimension of asymmetrical warfare: counter-terrorism, western values, military ethics. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
Liddell Hart, B. H. (1967). Strategy, Second Revised Edition (New York: Praeger).
Mayer, C. (2007). Nonlethal weapons and noncombatant immunity: is it permissible to target noncombatants? Journal of Military Ethics, 6(3), 221–231.
McMahan, J. (2009). Killing in war. Oxford: Clarendon.
Nagel, T. (1986). The view from nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
O’Brien, W. V. (1981). The conduct of just and limited war. New York: Praeger.
Orend, B. (2000). Michael Walzer on war and justice. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Pearson, A. (2006). Incapacitating biochemical weapons: science, technology, and policy for the 21st Century. Nonproliferation Review, 13(2), 151–188.
Ramsey, P. (1983 [1968]). The just war: force and political responsibility. Lanham Maryland: University Press of America).
Regan, R. J. (1996). Just war: principles and cases. Washington: Catholic University of America Press.
Ross, W. D. (1988). The right and the good. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Walzer, M. (1977). Just and unjust wars. New York: Basic Books.
Walzer, M. (2006). Terrorism and just war. Philosophia, 34(1), 3–12.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lango, J.W. Nonlethal Weapons, Noncombatant Immunity, and Combatant Nonimmunity: A Study of Just War Theory. Philosophia 38, 475–497 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-009-9231-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-009-9231-3