Presenter Information
Thomas Elias
Department of Theology
Abstract
Abstract
The Israel-Hamas war has ignited critical questions regarding the justification for violence, particularly the right to self-defense. Harm to Palestinian noncombatants and the conflict’s prolonged duration has contributed to critiques and doubts about Israel’s military operations and the Biden administration’s substantial military aid post-October 7th. The war’s extensive destruction and dehumanization creates a stark tension with the Biden administration’s invocation of just war theory. This paper critically analyzes the Biden administration’s use of just war theory in supporting the Israel-Hamas war, investigating how Christian theological ethics on just war and self-defense have been utilized and misapplied since October 2023. The administration’s arguments for self-defense are ethically problematic, failing to account for the standards of just war theory like proportionality and noncombatant immunity. The incompatibility of the Israel-Hamas war with Thomistic and Augustinian just war theory speaks to the current ‘just war’ paradigm in ethics. By examining Augustinian and Thomistic just war traditions alongside Christian nonviolence, the paper reveals the limitations and misapplications of these frameworks in the current conflict, arguing for a more consistent ethical discernment that prioritizes peace and human dignity over instrumentalized justifications for violence.
Keywords: Israel-Hamas war, just war theory, self-defense, ethics, Biden administration, proportionality, Aquinas, nonviolence
School
McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts
Advisor
Radu Bordeianu, James Bailey
Submission Type
Paper
Included in
Applied Ethics Commons, Ethics in Religion Commons, International Relations Commons, Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons
Beyond Self-Defense: A Critical Analysis of the Biden Administration’s Application of ‘Just War’ Theory in the Israel-Hamas War
Abstract
The Israel-Hamas war has ignited critical questions regarding the justification for violence, particularly the right to self-defense. Harm to Palestinian noncombatants and the conflict’s prolonged duration has contributed to critiques and doubts about Israel’s military operations and the Biden administration’s substantial military aid post-October 7th. The war’s extensive destruction and dehumanization creates a stark tension with the Biden administration’s invocation of just war theory. This paper critically analyzes the Biden administration’s use of just war theory in supporting the Israel-Hamas war, investigating how Christian theological ethics on just war and self-defense have been utilized and misapplied since October 2023. The administration’s arguments for self-defense are ethically problematic, failing to account for the standards of just war theory like proportionality and noncombatant immunity. The incompatibility of the Israel-Hamas war with Thomistic and Augustinian just war theory speaks to the current ‘just war’ paradigm in ethics. By examining Augustinian and Thomistic just war traditions alongside Christian nonviolence, the paper reveals the limitations and misapplications of these frameworks in the current conflict, arguing for a more consistent ethical discernment that prioritizes peace and human dignity over instrumentalized justifications for violence.
Keywords: Israel-Hamas war, just war theory, self-defense, ethics, Biden administration, proportionality, Aquinas, nonviolence