The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War

This article confronts two philosophical positions that define the nature of international order in matters concerning state legitimacy and the justifications for the recourse to war. The first position, set forth by Francisco de Vitoria in the sixteenth century, frames legitimacy and the use of for...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	VALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia Política 2012
Materias:	Normative international theory John Rawls Francisco de Vitoria international politics international law
Acceso en línea:	http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-090X2012000200006
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:scielo:S0718-090X2012000200006
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:scielo:S0718-090X20120002000062012-11-07The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to WarVALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS Normative international theory John Rawls Francisco de Vitoria international politics international law This article confronts two philosophical positions that define the nature of international order in matters concerning state legitimacy and the justifications for the recourse to war. The first position, set forth by Francisco de Vitoria in the sixteenth century, frames legitimacy and the use of force within the traditional, Christian natural law conception of justice. Legitimate are those states that uphold universal principles of justice, not the political principles of a particular regime form, while the recourse to war is likewise justified by the constitutive tenets of the ius ad bellum and the ius in bello. By contrast, Rawls' Law of Peoples, which compares itself to the Christian natural law tradition, articulates nonetheless a particular liberal conception of justice that defines legitimacy in wholly political terms. In addition, in its appeal to the so-called 'supreme emergency exemption' the Rawlsian Law of Peoples dispenses with a crucial aspect of the traditional ius in bello that prohibits the targeting of civilian populations, as an exceptional means for defending and promoting a liberal international order. It is argued that such an ideologically based view of order posits a non-inclusive conception of justice in a culturally and politically diverse world and, hence, encourages conflict, resistance and strife between liberal and non-liberal states, and even strengthens autocratic government beyond the liberal zone of peace. A more tolerant and sound view, held by Terry Nardin's conception of 'common morality', is similar to Vitoria's traditional conception of a more politically tolerant justice-based order and expresses in contemporary ethical language the principal tenets of the tradition of the laws of war set forth by Vitoria himself.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia PolíticaRevista de ciencia política (Santiago) v.32 n.2 20122012-01-01text/htmlhttp://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-090X2012000200006en10.4067/S0718-090X2012000200006
institution	Scielo Chile
collection	Scielo Chile
language	English
topic	Normative international theory John Rawls Francisco de Vitoria international politics international law
spellingShingle	Normative international theory John Rawls Francisco de Vitoria international politics international law VALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
description	This article confronts two philosophical positions that define the nature of international order in matters concerning state legitimacy and the justifications for the recourse to war. The first position, set forth by Francisco de Vitoria in the sixteenth century, frames legitimacy and the use of force within the traditional, Christian natural law conception of justice. Legitimate are those states that uphold universal principles of justice, not the political principles of a particular regime form, while the recourse to war is likewise justified by the constitutive tenets of the ius ad bellum and the ius in bello. By contrast, Rawls' Law of Peoples, which compares itself to the Christian natural law tradition, articulates nonetheless a particular liberal conception of justice that defines legitimacy in wholly political terms. In addition, in its appeal to the so-called 'supreme emergency exemption' the Rawlsian Law of Peoples dispenses with a crucial aspect of the traditional ius in bello that prohibits the targeting of civilian populations, as an exceptional means for defending and promoting a liberal international order. It is argued that such an ideologically based view of order posits a non-inclusive conception of justice in a culturally and politically diverse world and, hence, encourages conflict, resistance and strife between liberal and non-liberal states, and even strengthens autocratic government beyond the liberal zone of peace. A more tolerant and sound view, held by Terry Nardin's conception of 'common morality', is similar to Vitoria's traditional conception of a more politically tolerant justice-based order and expresses in contemporary ethical language the principal tenets of the tradition of the laws of war set forth by Vitoria himself.
author	VALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS
author_facet	VALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS
author_sort	VALENZUELA-VERMEHREN,LUIS
title	The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
title_short	The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
title_full	The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
title_fullStr	The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
title_full_unstemmed	The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War
title_sort	politics of legitimacy and force in international relations: vitoria and rawls on the 'law of peoples' and the recourse to war
publisher	Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Instituto de Ciencia Política
publishDate	2012
url	http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-090X2012000200006
work_keys_str_mv	AT valenzuelavermehrenluis thepoliticsoflegitimacyandforceininternationalrelationsvitoriaandrawlsonthelawofpeoplesandtherecoursetowar AT valenzuelavermehrenluis politicsoflegitimacyandforceininternationalrelationsvitoriaandrawlsonthelawofpeoplesandtherecoursetowar
_version_	1714201728043188224

The Politics of Legitimacy and Force in International Relations: Vitoria and Rawls on the 'Law of Peoples' and the Recourse to War

Ejemplares similares