Research Papers on Jus in Bello
Jus in Bello research paper due and don’t know how to start it? How about like this?
To a large degree, the treaties, conventions and other agreements that compose the body of international law explicitly and implicitly reflect the principles of the just war theory that is generally accepted by all nations. The legal theory of a just war is reasonably clear and forms part of the underlying assumptions that govern international relations and policies. The jus ad bellum component of the theory determines when it is right to use military force. It indicates that the resort to force must have a just cause, be authorized by a competent authority, and be motivated by a just intention. In addition, it should have a reasonable chance of success and be expected to establish peace. The jus in bello component of the theory establishes the actions that are permissible in the conduct of military operations. Many aspects of the jus in bello have been codified in the Geneva Conventions and other protocols that establish international norms for the conduct of belligerents during military action. In the event of conflict between the two principles of just war theory, the jus ad bellum concept takes priority.
Based on these principles of just war that form the underlying norms for international law, the United States is justified in taking military action against terrorists and states that sponsor and harbor terrorists. The United States has a just cause to use military force. It was attacked without provocation and civilian populations not only in the United States, but also in other nations remain at risk of substantial harm. A competent authority in the United States authorized the use of military force. In addition, competent authorities in other lands and from regional coalitions also authorized the use of military force. The intention of the use of military force is to reestablish global peace and has a very high chance of probable success.
Need Topic Suggestions for a Paper on Jus in Bello
- To what extent (if at all) was the use of atomic weapons against Hiroshima & Nagasaki justified/legitimate in light of just war principles known as "jus in bello"?
- To what extent (if at all)were the just war principles taken into consideration during the decision making process - ending in the decision to drop the bombs?
Suggested Paper Structure for Jus in Bello Research Paper:
Chapter 1: Introduction The purpose of this paper, the research question, the assumptions and the paper methodology which would also include, but not only, that this is not an empirical study but rather a content analysis based on quality sources, literature summary: search words used to find sources, databases etc.
Chapter 2: Theoretical background: Describes "jus in bello" the principles of "jus in bello" - proportionality, discrimination and non-combatant immunity, the doctrine of double effect, international law Geneva convention.
Chapter 3: Historical background
Chapter 4: The "heart" of the paper - the analysis of the events (this part should rely heavily (but not only) on "truman" papers, diaries, letters, memoirs etc.
Chapter 5: Conclusion: Taken from chapter 4 - basically answering the research questions and validating or refuting each of the two assumptions, also why weren't the targets military only, and of course, the conclusions may be different for each city, hiroshima & nagasaki, pertaining to whether or not the bombing was justifiable or not.
Chapter 6: Bibliography