Preemption Against Terror: Just War Pacifist Approach

A sober reflection upon the tragedy of September 11,
2001 attacks on the United States and the latter''s
war on terrorism raises some moral and ethical
concerns about war. The questions, how and when pre-
emptive strikes against terrorism can be justified
and to what extent is the war against terror
different from terrorism itself remain crucial in
this book.
The reviewed literature shows that terrorism is
explained by the excessive use of self-defense wars
evoked by powerful nations mis/applying
International law and the Just war theory.
Confronting terrorism, therefore, requires a pro-
pacifist ethical framework that could narrow the
legitimacy of self-defense wars. Thus this book
proposes Moral Consistency as a required condition
for launching pre-emptive strikes with the aim of
reducing violent conflicts and to draw a substantial
distinction between reason and justification, and
between crime and criminal
justice.

Autorentext
Daniel Sem is an interdisciplinary scholar with deep passion for social and international justice. He has won several awards and continues to make significant contribution to peace and justice. He specializes in teaching, research, counselling, community organization, empowerment and advocacy for marginalized groups in human society.

Klappentext
A sober reflection upon the tragedy of September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States and the latter's war on terrorism raises some moral and ethical concerns about war. The questions, how and when pre- emptive strikes against terrorism can be justified and to what extent is the war against terror different from terrorism itself remain crucial in this book. The reviewed literature shows that terrorism is explained by the excessive use of self-defense wars evoked by powerful nations mis/applying International law and the Just war theory. Confronting terrorism, therefore, requires a pro- pacifist ethical framework that could narrow the legitimacy of self-defense wars. Thus this book proposes 'Moral Consistency' as a required condition for launching pre-emptive strikes with the aim of reducing violent conflicts and to draw a substantial distinction between reason and justification, and between crime and criminal justice.