War & Justice
PLIT10021
Course organiser:
Dr Elizabeth Cripps ecripps@staffmail.ed.ac.uk
1
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE COURSE
1. Aims and Objectives
Under what conditions, if any, is a country morally entitled to go to war? Only to defend itself
against aggression by others, or to further some of the legitimate goals of a nationally selfdetermining country? Is humanitarian intervention merely permissible or, in some cases,
mandatory as well? Once a country is engaged in a just war, can its leaders do whatever it takes
to shorten the war, or are they constrained by moral rules, most notably pertaining to the killing
of civilians? If it is sometimes permissible to kill civilians, is it permissible to do so however one
wishes, or is the use of certain kinds of weapons, i.e. weapons of mass destruction, morally ruled
out? Is it indeed the case that there can be no possible justification for terrorism? Finally, once
the war is over, how should the parties behave towards each other?
We constantly have to reflect upon these questions: as citizens of countries which are engaged in
wars we deem just, and as witnesses of wars waged by other countries. This course will enable
students to examine them from the standpoint of moral and political philosophy.
This course aims to:
* introduce students to key ethical debates in international politics;
* provide a working knowledge of theoretical approaches to the study of war.
Upon successful completion of this course students should be able to:
* critically engage with contemporary debates about international justice;
* identify future directions and challenges in the theory of the just war.
2. Teaching arrangements
The course will be taught by way of a lecture and tutorial. The lectures will take place on Tuesdays
at 11.10am till 12noon in Forrest Hill D.02
50-minute tutorials will take place as follows:
Thursdays 11.10am at 24 Buccleuch Place 1.10
Thursday 12.10pm at 22 Buccleuch Place 3.3
Friday 4.10pm at 22 Buccleuch Place 3.3
Friday 5.10pm at 22 Buccleuch Place 3.3
Tutorials start in Week 1 for this course. There is no tutorial in Week 11.
Please sign up for a group ASAP via Learn.
The course will be taught by a team of three lecturers:
Dr Elizabeth Cripps (course convenor)
Room 3.30, Chrystal Macmillan Building
Email : ecripps@staffmail.ed.ac.uk
Office hours : Tuesday 14-16:00pm
Dr Claire Duncanson
Room 3.02, Chrystal Macmillan Building
Email: c.p.duncanson@ed.ac.uk
2
Office hours: Wednesday 11.00am-1.00pm
Dr Mathias Thaler
Dr Thaler is joining the department at the start of October and his contact details and office hours
will be available through Learn.
Tutorials will be conducted by Dr Elizabeth Cripps, Dr Mathias Thaler, and Dr Matteo Bonotti
(M.Bonotti@sms.ed.ac.uk).
Lecture Schedule
Week 1: Introduction (EC)
Case Study: Ticking Bomb Scenario
Week 2: Pacifism (EC)
Case Study: Gandhi
Week 3: Jus ad bellum I: Prevention, pre-emption, self-defence (EC)
Case Study: Gulf War II
Week 4: Jus ad bellum II: Humanitarian intervention (EC)
Case Study: Kosovo, Libya
Week 5: Jus in bello I: Non-combatant immunity (CPD)
Case Study: Hiroshima & Nagasaki, German cities
Week 6: Jus in bello II: Terrorism (CPD)
Case Study: ANC
Week 7: Jus in bello III: Targeted killings (EC)
Case Study: Killing of Osama Bin Laden
Week 8: Jus in bello IV: Prisoners of War (EC)
Case Study: Guantanamo Bay, Recap on Ticking Bomb Scenario
Week 9: Jus post bellum (MT)
Case Study: Nuremberg, South African TRC
Week 10: A Feminist Approach to Just War Theory (CPD)
Week 11: Revision lecture (EC)
Tutorials
This course is very much focused on student participation. Your preparation for and
participation in tutorials will count towards your final mark. The tutorials are intended to
complement the lectures by giving you the opportunity actively and critically to engage with the
ideas introduced in the lectures in the context of ‘hard cases’. In preparation for each tutorial,
you are expected to read background material on the case being explored, complete a list of
definitions (on the key philosophical concepts in the ethics of war), and prepare provisional
answers to questions that relate to the core readings for the tutorial. This will require
independent research on your behalf, using the internet and library to go beyond the sources
listed below. A short worksheet will be posted on Learn a week in advance, which you should
3
print off, complete and bring along to tutorials. Your tutor will collect these sheets and, although
the sheets will not be given a grade, satisfactory completion each week counts towards the
participation component of your mark. Every unexplained or unexcused absence and/or
uncompleted worksheet will result in five marks being deducted from your tutorial mark.
3. Texts
(NB: books marked OL are available online via Oxford Scholarship Online)
a. Core texts in just war theory
Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, (New York: Basic Books, 2006, 4th edition).
This book is essential for the course and it is strongly suggested you buy it.
Mark Evans, Just War Theory: A Reappraisal (Edinburgh: EUP, 2005).
A.J. Coates, The Ethics of War (Manchester University Press, 1997).
b. Just War in Classical Political Thought
R. Tuck, Rights of War and Peace: Political Thought and the International Order from Grotius to Kant
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.)
K. Nabulsi, Traditions of War: Occupation, Resistance and the Law (Oxford: OUP, 1999.) [OL]
c. Book-lengths treatments of the ethics of war
There is a voluminous literature on the ethics of war. The following are good, useful booklength treatments, which cover some or most of the relevant issues. You might want to
read/browse through them as we go along in the course.
A. Bellamy, Just Wars (Polity Press, 2006)
I. Clark Waging War: A Philosophical Introduction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990)
J.T. Johnson, Morality and Contemporary Warfare (Yale University Press, 1999)
R. Norman, Ethics, Killing and War (Cambridge University Press, 1995)
D. Rodin¸ War and Self-Defense (Oxford University Press, 2002) [OL]
M. Walzer, Arguing about War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004)
d. Key concepts and issues in political philosophy (with a focus on international issues):
C. Brown, Sovereignty, rights, and justice: international political theory today (Cambridge: Polity, 2002).
C. Fabre, Justice in a Changing World (Cambridge: Polity, 2007).
K. Hutchings, International Political Theory (London: Sage, 1999).
4
4. Journals
Students are expected to be familiar with the electronic journals available through the library
catalogue. Ethics and International Affairs, the journal of the Carnegie Council for Ethics and
International Affairs, is an extremely important journal for a course like this. The BISA Journal,
The Review of International Studies (and its predecessor the British Journal of International Studies) also
regularly publishes articles relevant to the area. Political Theory, Ethics, Journal of Peace Research,
International Studies Quarterly, International Organization, Journal of Political Philosophy and Philosophy and
Public Affairs, are also worth consulting. You will find Ingenta, WileyScience, and JSTOR
particularly useful for this course. These can be accessed after you have logged onto Athens
(access to Athens is available via EASE). Unless otherwise stated, all articles listed here are
available online via those resources.
5. Understanding war
Although we will be attempting to think rationally about the kinds of normative arguments that
might justify war and the use of violence in politics, it is important always to bear in mind the
nature of our subject matter. It is therefore recommended that you supplement your reading
with some non-theoretical accounts of war, such as accounts by journalists of recent conflicts,
diaries, films, documentaries, novels or poetry. These sources will aid your understanding of the
‘hard cases’ used in tutorials.
Imperial War Museum & Carnegie Council Websites
You can gain access to archival footage from the Imperial War Museum via Athens. After
logging into Athens choose the Education Media OnLine link. You will be able to watch and
listen to archival material covering major wars throughout the 20th century. This can also be
accessed from http://www.emol.ac.uk/ if you are logged onto a campus PC. Another useful
website is http://www.carnegiecouncil.org
6. Assessment
The course will be assessed by essay (40%), exam (50%) and tutorial participation (10%).
Essay: You must choose a question from the list provided below. The assessed essay should be
typed, in a decent size font (minimum 11pt), and with decent spacing (at least 1.5.) You should
include a properly referenced list of works cited at the end.
The essay is due on Friday, 9th of November, 12pm. The word limit is 2,000 words and essays
which go over this length will be penalised to the tune of 5% for every 100 words.
Essay Questions
1. ‘Pacifism is untenable, because nonviolent resistance is doomed to failure in the face of
an enemy prepared to disregard the war convention.’ Discuss.
2. Can a pre-emptive war ever be justified?
3. Do you agree with Walzer that humanitarian intervention is justified in ‘response (with
reasonable expectations of success) to acts “that shock the moral conscience of
mankind”’? Why?
5
4. What is the Doctrine of Double Effect? Is it defensible?
5. Is terrorism ‘distinctively wrong’?
6. ‘This is a resounding triumph for justice, freedom and the values shared by all
democratic nations fighting shoulder-to-shoulder in determination against terrorism.’
(Benjamin Netanyahu, on the killing of Osama Bin Laden.) Discuss, in the context of the
ethics of targeted killing.
7. Are there any circumstances in which it would be permissible to torture a prisoner of
war?
Please see the ‘Honours Handbook’ for further information on submission of
coursework; ‘Late Penalty Waivers’; plagiarism; learning disabilities, special
circumstances; common marking descriptors, re-marking procedures and appeals.
TOPICS AND REQUIRED READINGS
Week 1: General introduction to the course. Fundamental principles of just war theory.
(EC)
Tutorial: Ticking Bomb Scenario
Week 2: Pacifism (EC)
Is pacifism a tenable position? If not, why not? How can pacifists conclude that non-violent
resistance is preferable to war and organised, collective violence?
Tutorial: Gandhi
A.J. Coates, The Ethics of War, ch. 3
J. Narveson, ‘Pacifism: A Philosophical Analysis’, Ethics 75 (1965): 259-271
C. Ryan, ‘Self-Defense, Pacifism and the Possibility of Killing’, Ethics 93 (1983):
508-524.
J. Thomson, ‘Self-Defense’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (1991): 283-310.
Further reading:
C.K. Ihara, ‘In Defense of a Version of Pacifism’ Ethics, Vol. 88, No. 4. (Jul., 1978): 369-374.
M. Otsuka, ‘Killing the Innocent in Self-Defense’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 23, No. 1
(Winter, 1994): 74-94.
J. McMahan, ‘Self-Defense and the Problem of the Innocent Attacker’ Ethics, Vol. 104, No. 2.
(Jan., 1994): 252-290.
Week 3: Just ad bellum I: Prevention, pre-emption, self-defence (EC)
Under what conditions, if any, is a country/group entitled to wage a war of self-defence? Does it
make sense to think about self-defence in war in the same way as we tend to think about self-
6
defence between individuals? Under what conditions, if any, is preventive war morally
permissible? Is there a meaningful distinction between a pre-emptive war and a preventive war?
Tutorial: Iraq 2003
D. Luban, ‘Preventive War’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (2004): 207-248
D. Rodin War and Self-Defence, ch. 6-7. [OL]
M. Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, chs 4-5
Further reading:
J. Gow, ‘Principles of pre-emption’, in A. Hehir, N. Kuhrt and A. Mumford (eds). International
Law, Security and Ethics (Routledge, 2011), 111-128.
D. Luban, ‘Just War and Human Rights’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 9 (1980): 160-81.
J. McMahan ‘Aggression and Punishment’ pp. 67-84 in L. May (ed.) War: Essays in Political
Philosophy (CUP 2008)
J. McMahan, ‘Preventive War and the Killing of the Innocent’ in R. Sorajbi and
D.Rodin, (eds) The Ethics of War – Shared Problems in Different Traditions (Aldershot:
Ashgate, 2006)
J. McMahan, ‘Innocence, Self-Defense and Killing in War’ The Journal of Political Philosophy:
Volume 2, Number 3 (1994): 193-221
L. May Aggression and Crimes Against Peace (CUP 2008) pp. 207-228 ‘Defining State Aggression’
D. Rodin and H. Shue (eds) Preemption: Military Action and Moral Justification, (Oxford University
Press, 2007), [OL]
J. J. Thomson, ‘Self-Defense’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (1991): 283-310.
N. Zohar, ‘Collective War and Individualistic Ethics: Against the Conscription of Self Defence’,
Political Theory 21 (1993): 606-622.
Week 4: Jus ad bellum II: Humanitarian intervention (EC)
On what grounds, if any, is a country entitled to wage a war of intervention? Could humanitarian
intervention ever be morally mandatory?
Tutorial: Kosovo (and Libya)
C. R. Beitz, ‘Nonintervention and Communal Integrity,’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9 (1980):385391.
J. Davidovic, ‘Are Humanitarian Military Interventions Obligatory?’ Journal of Applied Philosophy,
25 (2008): 134-144.
M. Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, ch 6.
7
Further reading:
A. Buchanan, ‘Justifying Preventive War’, in D. Rodin and H. Shue (eds.) Preemption: Military
Action and Moral Justification (OUP, 2007) [OL]
C. Brown ‘Selective humanitarianism: in defense of inconsistency’ in D.K. Chatterjee and D.E.
Scheid (eds.) Ethics and Foreign Intervention (CUP 2003) pp. 31-50
H. Bull (ed) Intervention in World Politics (OUP, 1984)
S. Caney, Justice Beyond Borders, ch 7. [OL]
C. Fabre, ‘Mandatory Rescue Killings’ The Journal of Political Philosophy, vol. 15, Number 4 (2007):
363–384
C. Holder ‘Responding to Humanitarian Crises’ in L. May (ed.) War: Essays in Political Philosophy
(CUP 2008) pp. 85-104
J. L. Holzgrefe and R. O. Keohane (eds) Humanitarian Intervention (CUP, 2003)
A.J. Kuperman, ‘The Moral Hazard of Humanitarian Intervention: Lessons from the Balkans’
International Studies Quarterly, 52 (2008): 49-80.
A. Lang (ed) Just Intervention (Georgetown U. P, 2003)
J. McMahan, J. ‘Intervention and Collective Self-Determination. Ethics & International Affairs
(1996): 1-24.
T. Nardin and M. Williams (eds) Humanitarian Intervention - NOMOS XLVII (NYUP, 2006)
James Pattison , Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility To Protect — Who Should
Intervene? OUP 2010 [OL]
D. Rodin, ‘The Problem with Prevention’, in D. Rodin and H. Shue (eds.) Preemption: Military
Action and Moral Justification (OUP 2007) [OL]
F. Teson, Humanitarian intervention: an inquiry into law and morality (Irvington-on- Hudson:
Transnational Publishing, 1997, 2nd ed.)
T. G. Weiss Humanitarian Intervention (Polity 2007)
J. Welsh (ed) Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations (OUP 2004)
Week 5: Jus in bello I: Non-Combatant Immunity (CPD)
Non-combatant immunity is one of the fundamental principles of just conduct within wars. This
week introduces the concept, along with several other philosophical concepts which will
underpin our discussions over the next four weeks: the Doctrine of Double Effect, Supreme
Emergencies and Dirty Hands. This week focuses on the following questions. On what grounds
is the intentional killing of non-combatants impermissible? Does the prohibition hold in
8
situations of supreme emergency? Are there non-combatants who can be killed in situations of
non-emergency? Can non-combatants be killed unintentionally?
Case Studies: Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the bombing of German cities during World
War 2
D. Statman ‘Supreme Emergencies Revisited’, Ethics 117 (2006): 58-79
M. Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, chs. 8 and 10
I Primoratz, ‘Civilian Immunity, Supreme Emergency, and Moral
Disaster,’ Ethics (2011) 15:371–386
Further reading:
A. J. Bellamy, ‘Supreme emergencies and the protection of non-combatants in war’, International
Affairs, 80 (2004): 829-850.
A. J. Coady, ‘The Problem of Collateral Damage,’ Morality and Political Violence (Cambridge: CUP,
2007), ch. 7
J. Glover, Causing Death and Saving Lives (Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 1977).
A. McIntyre, ‘Doing Away with Double Effect’, Ethics, Vol. 111, No. 2. (Jan., 2001): 219-255.
T. Nagel ‘War and Massacre’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1971): 123-144
M. Otsuka, ‘Scepticism about saving the greatest number’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 32 (2004):
413-426
B Orend, Morality and War, Broadview Press, 2006
I. Primoratz (ed) Civilian Immunity in War (OUP, 2007).
W.S. Quinn, ‘Actions, Intentions, and Consequences: The Doctrine of Double Effect’,
Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Autumn, 1989): 334-351
C. Toner, ‘Just War and the supreme emergency exemption’, The Philosophical Quarterly, 55 (2005):
545- 561.
M. Walzer, ‘Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 2:2 (1973):
160-180.
Week 6: Jus in Bello II: Terrorism (CPD)
What is terrorism? Can it ever be justified? Suppose that resorting to terrorism, in breach of the
principle of non-combatant immunity, is the only way to further a just cause. Is that a
permissible course of action? Is there something morally distinctive about terrorism?
Case Study: the ANC
S. Smilansky, ‘Terrorism, Justification, and Illusion’, Ethics 114 (2004): 790-805.
9
M. Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, ch. 12
F.M. Kamm, ‘Terrorism and Intending Evil’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 36 (2008): 157-186
Further reading:
C. A. J. Coady ‘Terrorism, Morality and Supreme Emergency’ Ethics, 114 (2004): 772-789.
R. G. Frey and C. W. Morris (eds), Violence, Terrorism and Justice (Cambridge: CUP, 1991), esp. chs
4 and 6.
R.E. Goodin, What’s Wrong with Terrorism? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006)
Ted Honderich, After the terror (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2002).
F.M. Kamm, ‘Failures of Just War Theory: Terror, Harm, and Justice’, Ethics 114 (July 2004):
650–692
L. McPherson, ‘Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong’, Ethics 17 (2007): 524-46.
I. Primoratz (ed) Terrorism, the Philosophical Issues (London: Palgrave, 2004)
V. Held, ‘Terrorism, Rights and Political Goals’, in R. G. Frey and C. W. Morris (eds.), Violence,
Terrorism and Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)
S. Scheffler, ‘Is Terrorism Morally Distinctive?‘, Journal of Political Philosophy 14 (2006): 1-17
B. T. Wilkins, Terrorism and Collective Responsibility (London: Routledge, 1992)
N.J. Zohar, ‘Innocence and Complex Threats: Upholding the War Ethic and the Condemnation
of Terrorism’, Ethics 114 (July 2004): 734–751
Week 7: Jus in bello III: Targeted killings (EC)
If one accepts the moral legitimacy of large scale killing of combatants, can one object – on
moral grounds – to the targeted killing of combatants? What about the targeted killing of
terrorist in wars against terrors? Or are targeted killings particularly disturbing from a moral
point of view? This lecture also introduces Walzer’s concept of Dirty Hands.
Case Study: Killing of Osama Bin Laden
S David, ‘Israel’s Policy of Targeted Killing’ Ethics and International Affairs (2003) 17: 1
M L Gross, ‘Assassination and Targeted Killing: Law Enforcement, Execution or Self-Defence?’
Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2006
D. Statman ‘Targeted Killing’, Theoretical Inquiries in Law (2004) 5(1)
Further reading:
P. Alston, Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary
10
or arbitrary executions, UN Human Rights Council (2010) available online at
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/14session/A.HRC.14.24.Add6.p
df
T. Meisels, ‘Combatants – Lawful And Unlawful’, Law and Philosophy (2007) 26: 31–65
N. Melzer, Targeted Killing in International Law, OUP 2008
S. de Wijz ‘Targeted killing: a ‘dirty hands’ analysis", Contemporary Politics, Vol. 15, No. 3,
September 2009, 305–320
http://wiki.victorybriefs.com/images/0/00/Targeted_Killing%3B_a_dirty_hands_analysi
s_by_Stephen_de_Wijze.pdf
Week 8: Jus in bello IV: Prisoners of War (EC)
What – if any – principles of restraint apply to intelligence gathering during war? What moral
constraints are there on the treatment of prisoners of war?
Case Studies: Guantanamo Bay, Recap on Ticking Bomb Scenario
M. Ignatieff, ‘Human Rights, the Laws of War, and Terrorism’. Social Research. 69(4) (2002):
1137-1158.
E.A. Posner, ‘Do States Have a Moral Obligation to Obey International Law?’ Stanford Law
Review 55 (2003):1901-19.
J. Steyn, ‘Guantanamo Bay: The Legal Black Hole’. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 53
(2004):1-15.
Further reading
J. Bravin, ‘Guantanamo’. In Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know: (W. W. Norton, 2007).
http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/guantanamo/
A. Dershowitz, Why Terrorism Works (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2002), ch. 4
K.J Greenberg, What the Torture Memos Tell Us’. Survival. 51(3) (2009), pp. 5-12.
M. Ignatieff: The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 2004)
L. May, ‘Prosecuting Military Leaders for War Crimes’ in his War Crimes and Just War (Cambridge
University Press, 2007)
J. Mertus and T. Sajjad, ‘Human Rights and Human Insecurity: The Contributions of US
Counterterrorism’. Journal of Human Rights. 7(1) (2008): 1-23.
K.L. Scheppele, ‘Law in a time of emergency: states of exception and the temptations of 9/11’,
Journal of Constitutional Law, 6(5) (2004), pp. 1001-1083.
H. Shue, ‘Torture’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 7 (1978): 124-143.
11
D. Sussman, ‘What’s Wrong with Torture?’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2005): 1-33.
J. Waldron, ‘Torture and Positive Law: Jurisprudence for the White House’ Columbia Law Review
105 (2005): 1681-1750
Week 9: Jus post bellum (MT)
How can justice best be achieved after the fighting has stopped? Can/should soldiers be held
morally responsible for crimes committed during war? Or is it more appropriate to hold their
leaders to account? Do justifications for a ‘just’ war extend to the aftermath of such a war?
Should the pursuit of justice be emphasised over achieving peace?
Cases studies: Nuremberg/South African TRC
Readings:
Bass, Gary J. 2004. “Jus Post Bellum.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 32(4): 384–412.
Osiel, Mark. “Introduction & Chapter 1: The Challenge of Prosecuting Mass Atrocity.” In
Making Sense of Mass Atrocity, 1–30. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
May, Larry. “Chapter 15: Defending International Criminal Trials for Aggression.” In Aggression
and Crimes Against Peace, 319–341. Philosophical and Legal Aspects of War and Conflict Series.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Walzer, Michael. “Chapter 19: War Crimes: Soldiers and Their Officers.” In Just and Unjust Wars:
A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations, 304–327. 4th ed. New York: Basic Books, 2006.
Further readings:
Douglas, Lawrence. 2001. The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of the
Holocaust. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2002. “Between Impunity and Show Trials.” Max Planck Yearbook of United
Nations Law 6: 1–35.
http://www.mpil.de/shared/data/pdf/pdfmpunyb/koskenniemi_6.pdf
Mamdani, Mahmood. 2002. “Amnesty or Impunity? A Preliminary Critique of the Report of the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (TRC).” Diacritics 32(3/4): 33–59
Osiel, Mark. Making Sense of Mass Atrocity, 1–30. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Chapters 2 and 3.
Week 10: A Feminist Approach to Just War Theory (CPD)
Is Just War Theory based on a gender bias? This final lecture assesses the feminist critique of the
whole Just War tradition and serves as an opportunity to critically reflect on the course as a
whole. There will be no specific case study to prepare for this week.
Sjoberg, Laura (2006) “Gendered Realities of the Immunity Principle: Why Gender Analysis
Needs Feminism” International Studies Quarterly, 50
12
Sjoberg, Laura; Peet, Jessica (2011) “A(nother) Dark Side of the Protection Racket” International
Feminist Journal of Politics, Volume 13, Number 2, June 2011 , pp. 163-182(20)
Further Reading
Eide, Marian (2008), “The Stigma of Nation” Feminist Just War, Privilege and Responsibility,”
Hypatia 23:2
Elsthtain, Jean Bethke (1985) “Reflections on War and Political Discourse: Realism, Just War,
and Feminism in a Nuclear Age,” Political Theory, 13:1, 39-57
Hutchings, Kimberly (2007) ‘Feminist ethics and political violence’ International politics, 44 (1) pp.
90-106.
Sjoberg, Laura (2006), Gender, Justice and the Wars in Iraq: a Feminist Reformulation of Just War Theory,
Lexington Books
Young, Iris Marion (2003) “Feminist Reactions to the Contemporary Security Regime” Hypatia
18:1
Maja Zehfuss ‘Targeting: Precision and the production of ethics’ European Journal of International
Relations (2011) 17: 543
Week 11: Revision Lecture (EC)
13