A Critique of Valls’ Interpretation of Just War Theory

Valls defines terrorism as political violence done to persons or property committed by nonstate actors. It must be politically motivated for any other form of violence is considered crime and subject to domestic laws. He adds violence against property to include attacks that would be considered terrorism even though they do not harm people. An example of this would be the bombing of an abortion clinic. When he limits the violence to nonstate actors, he doesn’t deny the existence of state sponsored terrorism. He states that this type of violence is a matter of domestic justice, and in cases outside its borders, just war theory can

. . .
As an excellent example of terrorists being discriminate, Valls cites the bombing of the marine barracks in Beirut. They would have to be acts that are proportionate and done for a just cause by a group that represents a people, and they must be very precise in their targeting. Valls helps to clarify this issue by using the work of Holmes. He does not prejudge the issue by characterizing terrorism as something intrinsically wrong, which is what Walzer seems to do. However it must be stated that the overwhelming majority of acts committed by nonstate groups fail to meet the stringent requirements of just war theory, especially discrimination. If states are malevolent enough, then in principle, violence cannot be ruled out as a necessary means of ending injustice. The guerillas in Cambodia may meet all the requirements of just war theory just as the Vietcong arguably did when fighting the French colonialists and later the U. This requires that those waging war distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate targets.

I would argue that Valls’ definition is too broad with respect to his contention that it is nonessential to include fear or intimidation as a deliberate strategy of terrorism. One can think of combatants being more or less discriminate in their targeting. The morality of the principle of double effect comes into question, and rightly so if we use just war theory as a standard. The Kurds of Southern Turkey and Northern Iraq are a good modern example of a people fighting two extremely repressive regimes.

Common topics in this essay:
Valls Held, Andrew Valls, Northern Iraq, , war theory, South Africa, nonstate actors, principle double effect, requirements war theory, requirements war, double effect, principle double, meet requirements war, morality principle double, definition valls, terrorism justified, attempts avoid, meet requirements, protect rights,

Approximate Word count = 1166
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)

Already a member? Click here