Winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. 2009. 1989. ‘Evil does exist in the world’. ‘There will be times when nations - acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified .’. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Winners of the Nobel Peace Prize1
19892009Evil does exist in the worldThere will be times when nations - acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince Al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms.
2Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, 10 December 2009
2The just warThe concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional, and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.
Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, 10 December 2009Religion, Peace and Conflict4Early formulationsSt. Augustine (d.430)Religion and Politics intertwinedEarly pacifist position modifiedRome sacked by Visigoths 410
4Religion, Peace and Conflict5St Thomas Aquinas (d.1274)In order for a war to be just, three things are necessary The Summa Theologica Part II, Question 40
5Religion, Peace and Conflict61. Rightful authorityFirst, the authority of the sovereign by whose command the war is to be waged. And as the care of the common weal is committed to those who are in authority, it is their business to watch over the common weal of the city, kingdom or province subject to them. And just as it is lawful for them to have recourse to the sword in defending that common weal against internal disturbances, when they punish evil-doers so too, it is their business to have recourse to the sword of war in defending the common weal against external enemies. 6Religion, Peace and Conflict72. A Just CauseSecondly, a just cause is required, namely that those who are attacked, should be attacked because they deserve it on account of some fault. Wherefore Augustine says (Questions. in Hept., qu. x, super Jos.): "A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly." 7Religion, Peace and Conflict83. Right IntentThirdly, it is necessary that the belligerents should have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evilFor it may happen that the war is declared by the legitimate authority, and for a just cause, and yet be rendered unlawful through a wicked intention. Hence Augustine says (Contra Faust. xxii, 74): "The passion for inflicting harm, the cruel thirst for vengeance, an unpacific and relentless spirit, the fever of revolt, the lust of power, and such like things, all these are rightly condemned in war." 8Religion, Peace and Conflict9Further development9Religion, Peace and Conflict10Jus ad bellumSIX CONDITIONSA just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defence against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient in itself). A just war can only be fought with right intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury. A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable. The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought. 10Religion, Peace and Conflict11Jus in belloThree Principles11Religion, Peace and Conflict12TerrorismTerm first used by French revolutionaries in the 1790sAdopted by C.19th revolutionary groups practising political assassination (e.g. in 1914)Widely used today to describe activities such as bombing of public places, car bombs, hostage taking, plane hijacking, suicide bombings, etc.
London, July 200512Buddhist temple bombing13
Sunday July 7 2013
Religion, Peace and Conflict14UN General Assemblyreiterates that criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstances unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be used to justify themUN Legal Committee, 2001
14Religion, Peace and Conflict15Terrorism v Just WarTerrorism typically infringes:Jus ad bellum condition of legitimate authority Jus in bello principle of discrimination
15Humanitarian interventionI believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths - that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human feelings. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions.
Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, 10 December 2009Buddhist viewsAung San Suu KyiYou know, I am a Buddhist. As a Buddhist, the answer is very simple and clear. That is compassion and mercy is the real panacea. I am sure that, when we have compassion and mercy in our heart, we can overcome not only terrorism but also many other evil things that are plaguing the worldNawang Gehlek RinpocheSometimes love and light alone won't work. We must protect the terrorists from bad karma. To let them keep killing is to guarantee them many, many lifetimes of suffering. Going after them is not about revenge. It is not even about justice. We are protecting them and us.
17Buddhism and Just WarProto Just War principlesLast resortProportionalityDiscriminationRight Intention
Common JustificationsCompassionEmptiness /AntinomianismDefence of the Dharma
18Need further developmentConclusionUnresolved tension in the Buddhist ethical position on war. Need to either: Practise pacifism consistently or Develop a defensible just war theory for the CakravartinJust war theory a deterrent to the use of force. Will tend to rule out the use of force (e.g. in disputes over uninhabited islands).19The Middle Way?