In August of 1992, President George Bush Sr. sent US soldiers into Somalia to provide humanitarian relief to those Somalis suffering from starvation. The major problems in Somalia started when President Mohammed Siad Barre was overthrown by a coalition of opposing clans. Although there were several opposing groups, the prominent one was led by Mohammed Farah Aidid. Following the overthrow of Barre, a massive power struggle ensued. These small scale civil wars led to the destruction of the agriculture in Somalia, which in turn led to the deprivation of food in large parts of the country. When the international community heard of this, large quantities of food were sent to ease Somali suffering. However, clan leaders like Aidid routinely hijacked food and exchanged it for weapons leaving thousands to starve to death. An estimated 300,000 Somalis died between 1991 and 1992 (Clancy 234-236). US soldiers were later sent into Somalia to capture Aidid, but when the operation got bloody, displeasing the American public, Clinton withdrew troops (Battersby 151). In The Morality of War, Brian Orend outlines ethical guidelines that should be followed in all three stages of war: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum. Orend states that a nation can be moral going into war, but immoral coming out of one. Did the US act justly in all facets of the Somali conflict? The United States espoused all the guiding principles of jus ad bellum but right intent, upheld the principals of jus in bello, and clearly failed to uphold several aspects of jus post bellum during the armed humanitarian intervention in Somalia. Jus ad bellum is defined as “justice of war” and is recognized as the ethics leading up to war (Orend 31). Orend contends that an... ... middle of paper ... ...ed to uphold to the standards of jus post bellum. It is evident when one looks at Somalia today. Somalia still lacks a strong central government and several thousands, if not millions, of Somalis are at risk of starvation due to drought. Again, the United States entered the conflict failing to adhere to all the principals of jus ad bellum, espousing the principles of jus in bello, and inadequately upholding those of jus post bellum. The US entered the war an unjust nation, and left the conflict in a rather unjust manner. As a result, Somalia faces hardship over two decades later with no signs of a hasty recovery. Even worse, with the problem lingering and the international debt crisis, few countries are willing to intervene in Africa to cut out a solution. How long will the world let Somali people starve and whose job is it to intervene if America is unwilling?
Throughout history, war has been the catalyst that has compelled otherwise-ordinary people to discard, at least for its duration, their longstanding beliefs about the immorality of killing their fellow human beings. In sum, during periods of war, people’s views about killing others are fundamentally transformed from abhorrence to glorification due in large part to the decisions that are made by their political leaders. In this regard, McMahan points out that, “As soon as conditions arise to which the word ‘war’ can be applied, our scruples vanish and killing people no longer seems a horrifying crime but becomes instead a glorious achievement” (vii). Therefore, McMahan argues that the transformation of mainstream views about the morality of killing during times of war are misguided and flawed since they have been based on the traditional view that different moral principles somehow apply in these circumstances. This traditional view about a just war presupposes the morality of the decision to go to war on the part of political leaders in the first place and the need to suspend traditional views about the morality of killing based on this
Civil War is another shared similarity between both Somalia and the United States. In 1991, following the overthrow of the dictator, Siad Barre, Somalia descended into anarchy. With no government presence to maintain some type of order, clan-based warlords began competing with each other, thus beginning civil unjust. While northern parts of Somalia, as well as the self-declared “Republic of Somaliland,” have remained somewhat peaceful, internal fighting flares up with little to no warning. Since 1991, it is estimated that 350, 000 to 1,000,000 Somalia’s have died due to the lack...
As seen from Gettleman´s text, “But Awil is not a rebel. He is working for Somalia's government. The U.S. and other Western nations support the fragile Somali regime, which is battling an Islamic insurgency, as part of the counterterrorism strategy for the region.” As apparent, the United States has put a counterterrorism strategy into place, to help bring down the power that Somalia
In order to understand the full scope of genocide in Somalia and how it will affect other countries, we must understand their culture. This way you can determine if any outside assistance, such as the United States giving aid, would be accepted or unwanted. Cultural knowledge can also give outside countries insight to “how” and “when” relationships can` be established.
McDonald. “Just War Theory.” Humanities. Boston University. College of General Studies, Boston. 24 February 2014. Lecture.
September 11th, 2001. An organization denoted as terrorists by the United States, Al-Qaeda, attacked the U.S on our own soil. In his “Letter to the American People”, the leader of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, takes a defensive stance regarding the attack, giving his justifications of why the attack on the U.S was warranted and acceptable in the terms of Just War Theory, citing examples of the Right to Self-Defense and reasons why he was justified in targeting American civilians. Just War Theory is comprised of ideas of values to determine when acts of aggression are morally justified or not, and it is primarily split into two categories, Jus Ad Bellum (Justice of War) and Jus In Bello (Justice in War) (Walzer 21). In this essay, I will be arguing against Bin Laden’s claims of the justification of Al-Qaeda’s attack, using the failure of Bin Laden’s attack to meet the requirements for a just war in terms of Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello.
“Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” As depicted in the quote by Ernest Hemingway war is a difficult situation in which the traditional boundaries of moral ethics are tested. History is filled with unjust wars and for centuries war was not though in terms of morality. Saint Augustine, however, offered a theory detailing when war is morally permissible. The theory offers moral justifications for war as expressed in jus ad bellum (conditions for going to war) and in jus in bello (conditions within warfare).The theory places restrictions on the causes of war as well as the actions permitted throughout. Within early Christianity, the theory was used to validate crusades as morally permissible avoiding conflict with religious views. Based on the qualifications of the Just War Theory few wars have been deemed as morally acceptable, but none have notably met all the requirements. Throughout the paper I will apply Just War Theory in terms of World War II as well as other wars that depict the ideals presented by Saint Augustine.
A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain ...
Augustine illustrated on the prevailing Roman doctrine of justum bellum and the Old Testament stories of wars fought on Israel’s behalf, as demanded by God. Augustine aimed that fighting on behalf of the Roman Empire was a Christian obligation since the empire was Christian. Augustine maintained that this was fighting on behalf of God against God’s enemies, just as Israel defended itself against God’s enemies in Old Testament times. Augustine’s thinking has backed greatly to the discussion of what makes warfare justifiable right up until the modern day.
The principles of Just War theory and different ethical frameworks have been used for many years to justify and reject plans for military interventions. These ideologies are useful tools for the leaders of governments and militaries to discuss and make decisions on the morality of different courses of action. If ISIS launched a series of terrorist attacks on American embassies as hypothesized, the given plan for military intervention would be morally justified due to several principles of Just War theory and various ethical frameworks. These include the ideas of jus ad bellum and jus post bellum from Just War theory and the ethical ideologies of utilitarianism and common good ethics.
In order to combat the Shabab, the US government has turned to Special Operations troops and private contractors to train Somalian and other African troops to conduct raids and fights back against the Shabab. Reentering the region does not come without its share of drawbacks, the United States has used air strikes which have killed civilians. This has created a riff among the US and Somalian government.
At that time in the early 1990’s, the U.S. was the only superpower country left in the world. The Soviet Union collapsed after the Cold War and the left the U.S. at the top. With the U.S. being the only superpower left, it meant that they were the only ones who could try to keep peace between other countries and hopefully end violence in the world. At the time, Somalia was a complete disaster and still is to this day. They have no structural government and warlords rule parts of the country.
Friedman, U. (2011, July 19). What It took for the U.N to declare famine in Somalia. Retrieved
The just war theory can be broken down into three components: jus ad bellum, jus en bello, and jus post bellum. Translated from Latin, these mean “justice before war, justice in war, and justice after war.” In this way, the Catholic Church is able to reconcile Jesus’s lofty teachings about loving your neighbor and causing no harm with protecting the innocent (Massaro 104).
The Somali were struggling and since there was no one to aid them with their struggle for a secure government, the United States and United Nations began aiding the Somali people. The U.S. and the U.N. sent out deliveries of necessities the Somali people need to live off of, but warlords attempted to cut off the deliveries for the people, which infuriated the U.N. and U.S., who began to fight back against the warlords, causing greater tension in the capital. Aideed, a warlord, shot down two Black Hawk Helicopters, leading to the death of eighteen U.S. soldiers and hundreds of Somali people. The fighting continued, leaving multitudes of deaths on both sides of the war. After years of endless fighting, the United Nations and United States tried to the best of their abilities to aid Somalia and its corrupt government, however in the end, they were unable to find a solution to assist