A Case for ‘Selective’ Isolationism and The Just War

It appears as though the crisis in Syria, while not averted yet, may soon be defused thanks to the intervention of…Russia? Yes, the reality is that Putin, the former KGB agent is acting like a Nobel Peace Prize winner while the actual Peace Prize winner is acting like a warmonger. However, the die-hard supporters of this administration need not fear. Their hero, our savior Barry, could still manage to gin up a war and save his pride. After all, we wouldn’t want him to actually admit he was wrong with his Middle East policy, especially since we have so many of our young men and women left to sacrifice in order to “save face.”

In response to this aggressive foreign policy there has been an increase in the popularity of “Isolationism”; the political philosophy basically stating our nation should mind our own business. We should stay out of “foreign entanglements” as our founders wrote about over two centuries ago. There are many attractive features of such a philosophy, especially when faced with our current troubles. But before we as a nation make any type of decision regarding our involvement in the current crisis, we should first understand what isolationism is.

Isolationism does not mean we as a nation are not to trade, make treaties with, or have alliances with other nations. Our founders from President Washington on did all of those things under the rubric of minding our own business. The policy of minding our own business was never intended to cut us off from the world. In fact, it might be better to call the political philosophy of the founders a kind of “selective” isolationism. That simply means we evaluated all encounters with other nations on the basis of what was best for our nation. We practiced “enlightened self interest.”

When it comes to conflict with other nations or hostile groups today, our policy seems to be anything but enlightened. In particular, this latest threat of military involvement in the Syrian civil war is not only unenlightened, it fails to even have the appeal of our own self-interest. If this administration believes that toppling Assad will stabilize the situation in Syria, they should do some serious thinking about the current situation in Egypt.

In fact the whole subject of war has been fraught with a critical lack of serious reflection in the current administration. It appears that we were ready to launch into bloody civil war without really knowing where it would lead. With that in mind, I suggest our leadership not only think about selective isolationism, but also examine closely an ancient piece of moral reflection drawn from the Bible known as the “Just War Theory.”

According to JustWarTheory.com, “Vincent Ferraro’s introductory statement of the conventional Principles of the Just War is exemplary.”

Principles of the Just War

1. A 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.
2. 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 (such) an authority…
3. A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause … Further, a just war can only be fought with “right” intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

7. The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians…

If we as a people are going to launch into any conflict, no matter the planning and scale, would it not be wise to consider these principles before we send our forces into harms way? Because no matter what we think will happen in a war, even with a small involvement, one thing is certain; we can never be sure just how it is going to develop and just how our brave warriors, their families, and our nation will suffer as a result. Let’s be as sure as possible we are fighting for what is just and honorable before we commit to the terrible carnage of war.

Related articles

• Vladimir Putin nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for efforts to ‘maintain peace and tranquility’
• They Seriously Just Nominated Putin for a Nobel Peace Prize?
• Isolationism Has Never Served America
• Isolationism…a GOOD idea whose time has come !