War and Intervention
Having written on this subject a few months ago in my official capacity as a student, I was faced with the issue of whether or not both sides of a conflict could have a just cause. I found that to wage a war, at least in a (primarily) civilian controlled democracy, popular consent is required. In that case, a just cause is a pre-requisite for any military engagement, whatever the true motives for military action may be. In the case of a military controlled dictatorship, this is much easier, but the governing and by that extent, war-making class of the common or garden democracy must convince a sufficient amount of the people with promises that the adventure will be worth the price in blood and treasure. It will spread civilisation to far flung corners of the globe, free an oppressed populace, enrich the homeland, or counter an emerging and virulent threat to the sovereignty of the nation.
This means these motivations are often steeped in a confounding cultural relativism. Our ethics justified the expansion of the Empire because we believed we had a duty to spread “civilisation” and get very rich doing it. Simply put, we were quite racist. The wholesale slaughter of the battlefield bodes ill for anyone who believes in the sanctity of all human life, as the right to life of one is balanced on the scales against the life of another from the other side of a conflict.
As we believe that democracy is, fundamentally a good thing, we would say, for example, the Syrian rebels have a more just cause than the dictator and popularly titled Butcher of Damascus, Bashar Al-Assad. The problem with intervention though, is sovereignty; where does sovereignty stop? Every nation has the right to continue its existence unmolested by outside forces, but surely we don’t want to allow suffering to happen in countries like Syria. Do we?
Whenever we feel intervention maybe necessary, the case for or against really depends on something equally relative, our own moral authority. Helping to overthrow one unpalatable regime while standing aside while another continues to murder and pillage makes us seem, well, a little slimy; hypocritical, as well as undermining any future interventions we may undertake, however noble the intention. It does give pause for reflection about the nature of whether or not intervention is always necessary or merited, especially when this kind of issue is often presented in the very simplistic language good guys vs. bad guys, heroes vs. tyrants. The limits of what can even be achieved by intervention are painfully apparent when we think of it for what it is, and is trying to be, that is, killing with kindness; make a situation better for the people we agree with by killing those with whom we don’t. History is littered with military misadventures started by those who were surely, well meaning, but without understanding.
And this is why we so often don’t intervene. Trying to comprehend all the nuances of what’s going on in another person’s country, when the people we feel we should be supporting are often so fragmented and ineffectual, is as impossible as trying to understand what’s going on in someone else’s head. Getting right to the point, in the context of current events, it seems there’s little hope for a Libyan style outcome in Syria. In the former, the ruling power was losing its grip on a big country with an organised opposition taking shape and holding ground on the other side of the country. Syria does not conform to any part of this narrative.
I apologise for ending on such a downbeat note, especially during the time when, traditionally, combat between warring nations would cease in the interest of upholding the Olympic peace, but this is, as my dad would likely say, the Way the World is. The Syria affair will likely become a protracted struggle, and there will surely be others in the future. Especially when great powers exist and are willing to throw their weight around to secure their interests, peoples in all corners of the world are oppressed, and the business of war remains so profitable for so many. Because war…
…war never changes.
By Ed Hobson
The Philosophy Takeaway 'War' Issue 28
