In October 2002, as Congress debated H.J. Resolution 114, the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq,” I was writing a newspaper article delineating the reasons an invasion of Iraq would fail to meet the criteria for a just war, as set out by Christian thinkers like Augustine, Aquinas, Grotius, and others. Sadly, the joint resolution passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support.

Here I am, more than twenty years later, writing the same kind of article about a conflict in the same part of the world. In 2002, I was trying to persuade readers that a war against Iraq was a mistake, even while acknowledging that President Saddam Hussein was the source of much evil. Today, I am trying to persuade readers that a war against Iran is unjustified, even though her leaders have had thousands of innocent people killed in their own country and abroad.

I despised Saddam’s brutal leadership in Iraq and had no sympathy for the previous Supreme Leader of Iran. But that is not the point. Sixteen hundred years of Christian thought have gone into shaping an understanding of what constitutes a just war. Some of the church’s greatest minds and most saintly leaders have contributed to it. And by its standards, the war against Iran does not qualify as a just war.

Just War Theory is supported by three pillars: Jus ad bellum (justice prior to war); Jus in bello (justice in the conduct of war); and Jus post bellum (justice in the aftermath of war). For a war to be just, all three of these pillars, and the criteria they embody, must be in place.

Jus ad bellum criteria include the following. The war must be a response to certain, momentous, and enduring harm. It can only be entered into by the decision of properly constituted authorities. It must be a last resort, when other options have been exhausted. And it must have the intention of securing a just peace, not to exact revenge or to gain financial benefit.

Jus in bello criteria include the following. The use of force must be proportionate to the military objective. Non-combatants cannot be targeted and must be spared if possible. Rape, torture, and other evils must be completely banned.

Jus post bellum requires that a fair and stable peace follow military operations. This peace must be more stable than the peace that preceded the war. Reprisals or vengeance are disallowed. The injustices that led to the war must be addressed, so that another war does not follow.

I did not think that the Iraq War satisfied these terms. That is the case once again with the war in Iran. As far as we know, there was not a certain, momentous, and lasting harm hanging over the world if we did not take immediate action against Iran. Even more clearly, not all other options had been exhausted. (We were currently in negotiation with Iran when the first missiles struck Tehran.) There is not any certainty that going to war against Iran will secure a just and lasting peace. The administration has not even suggested that is possible.

As to sparing non-combatants from death and suffering, the U.S. apparently bombed a legitimate military target that was next door to a girls’ school. Did authorities know the school was next door? Was any effort made to avoid collateral damage or to adjust the time of the bombing to limit such damage? The deaths of 170 young girls scream that this is not a just war.

Regarding the stipulation that the peace be more stable following the war than prior to it, there does not even seem to be a plan for peace. No exit strategy has been articulated. It looks like we have stumbled into an Iraq-like morass.

Didn’t we learn anything? Are we destined to make the same mistake over and over? Has nothing changed?

One thing has changed, but not for the better. Prior to going to war in Iraq, Congress debated H.J. Resolution 114 for more than a week. The country watched and listened to the debate. Though I believe Congress came to the wrong conclusion, they at least talked about it. This time, there was no national discussion and no congressional vote prior to engagement.

I know that this kind of article will not change many minds. It did not in 2002, and it will not now. Nevertheless, I write because most Americans are completely unaware of the rich history of Christian thinking regarding what constitutes a just war. And that nearly guarantees that we will keep finding ourselves back in the same unhappy place.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.