Thread by @vmorkevicius

The argument (from both the left & the right, & from both secular & religious perspectives) that the ethical thing to do is to pressure Ukraine to make peace sooner rather than later, and to eschew military aid for humanitarian aid has been getting a lot of attention lately. /1

I believe most people making this argument do so in good faith, reflecting strongly held commitments to pacifism or nonviolence. But as someone who works within the just war tradition, I think many iterations of this argument get a few things wrong. /2

First, some variants of this argument simplify the ethical dilemma at stake here, boiling it down to “war is evil.” /3

Just war thinkers might partially agree. War involves evil. A just war seeks to combat evil-doing to restore order. But anyone involved with war also risks committing evil by falling prey to passions that lead to excessive or wrongly-directed violence. /4
wp.cune.edu/matthewphillip…

#Russia’s invasion of #Ukraine is patently unjust & #Ukraine’s war of self-defense is justified. To call the war “evil” without taking this moral distinction into account is an error that leads to very problematic conclusions. /5

https://twitter.com/vmorkevicius/status/1495198184037138440?s=20&t=a_iqEA14bLGKM9x9_U31zw

A just war is a response to evil. Another's wrongdoing forces it on us. The fundamental assumption of just war thinking is that there are times when, tragically, force has to be used lest injustice prevail. /6
(Below: Pope Francis' Fratelli Tutti, 2020)
vatican.va/content/france…

Lately, the Catholic Pax Christi movement & the just peace movement in several Protestant denominations have pushed against this logic. So does John Howard Yoder's thoughtful pacifism. /7

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChristianBraun/status/1499305285495762945

https://twitter.com/ChristianBraun/status/1521092540241530881?s=20&t=khl-Ce-1z9-dT_Nk0ZKgPw

religion-online.org/article/just-w…

I think it is essential for just war thinkers to take the critiques raised by just peace thinkers and committed pacifists seriously. In order for just war thought to be something other than a moral form of realism or a tool to justify state policy... /8

...we must think more broadly about what makes for a just foreign policy, about how we might challenge our states and international institutions to behave in ways that build a just order without the need for the recourse to war. In this sense, war is indeed a sign of failure. /9

To fight a war justly means fighting with the aim of peace. We must consider ask whether our strategies, even our words, are directed at bringinging about a just peace (one that addresses the underlying justice claims, not a ceasefire or capitulation.) /10

https://twitter.com/Pontifex/status/1520737754660937728?s=20&t=iUkgDbt8ot4XOIq6-9Hn8g

On this point, I think US Secretary of Defense Austin's recent comments were unhelpful. Hoping #Russia won’t be able to engage in aggression again in the near future is reasonable & just, but saying so publicly may harden the Kremlin’s position. /11
washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/…

Fighting with the aim of peace means seeing our opponents as human, as theologian Reinhold Niebuhr pointed out. We must tell the truth, but avoid inflammatory rhetoric. We must hold those who commit evil responsible, but we must address our own wrongs. /12
thebulletin.org/sites/default/…

Is #Ukraine fighting with peace in mind? #Ukraine’s strategic decision to strike military targets on Russian soil only very sparingly, and with no public celebration avoids further inflaming passions that might make peace-making harder. /13

nytimes.com/2022/04/30/wor…

Similarly, continuing to work to be sure that its forces uphold international humanitarian law and respect the rights of POWS is another sign of #Ukraine’s commitment to peace. /14

washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/…

We must also ask if continuing to fight is still proportional to the good we hope to achieve. In other words, is the just cause Ukraine is fighting for (self-defense against aggression) worth the additional deaths and suffering fighting will cause? /15

St. Augustine was emphatic that death in itself is not the real evil in war. After all, death awaits us all in the end. But nonetheless each death – even the deaths of soldiers fighting for an unjust cause – is a tragedy. /16

wp.cune.edu/matthewphillip…

Thus, just as it is essential to weigh proportionality before resorting to war, it is important to keep thinking about proportionality throughout the duration of the conflict. Is the good for which we are fighting worth all the harm that fighting for it entails? /17

Weighing proportionality isn’t easy. It isn’t comfortable. Nor should it be. When faced with the horrors of war – mass atrocities, dead children, destroyed cities – we should ask serious questions about whether continuing to fight is worth it, whether it is morally defensible./18

But, as the famous just war thinker Michael Walzer points out, to simply say that the fact of civilian deaths make fighting wrong oversimplifies things. /19
bit.ly/38UUDiU

The simplistic claim that the scale of destruction means Ukraine should stop fighting (& its allies should pressure it to do so) is pretty common these days. Let’s take a brief interlude and explore a few of these: the appeals against militarism, imperialism, and proxy wars. /20

Sometimes, the call to end the war now, without any reference to Ukraine’s right to justice, takes the form of an appeal against militarism. /21

Sometimes, particularly on the left, this is framed with a reference not only to the general wrong of militarism, but to misleading analogies that focus on the wrongs of Western imperialism while ignoring Ukrainians’ right to fight for self-determination. /22

This Jacobin piece, for example, invokes anti-imperialist, anti-interventionist rhetoric to argue against aiding Ukraine militarily, conveniently ignoring both the imperialist, interventionist behavior of Moscow & Ukraine's stated desire for such aid. /23
jacobinmag.com/2022/03/left-a…

(Jacobin's overall troubling response to the war against Ukraine is discussed at length in this excellent thread by @ahatanhel here. /23a)

https://twitter.com/ahatanhel/status/1517440088879284224?s=20&t=iUkgDbt8ot4XOIq6-9Hn8g

The demand that #Ukraine end the war now is often framed in ways that deny Ukrainians agency. This article, for example, doesn’t seem interested in whether anyone other than #Russia should get to decide where borders should be “in that part of Europe.”/24

theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

(Aside for those interested in history &/or international law: the argument misunderstands both. The internal borders of the USSR were shaped by Lenin’s belief that national identity was a necessary step on the way to Communism, not to subdue nations./24a)
jstor.org/stable/2501300…

& the logic of basing new int'l borders on former internal borders is a customary law principle, uti possidetis, invoked to stabilize the borders of newly independent states from South America in the early 19th c. to Africa and Asia in the 20th.) /24b)
oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/…

Another variant of this problematic framing that ignores ethical concerns while denying Ukrainians agency is the claim that the war has become (or perhaps always was) a proxy war between #NATO and #Russia. /25

There are two problems with this “proxy war” framing. First is whether outside powers supporting one side in a war automatically turns it into a proxy war; second is how this framing denies Ukrainian agency. /26

With 141 countries supporting a UN resolution condemning #Russia’s invasion of #Ukraine (& a similar Security Council resolution garnering 11 votes in favor, only Russia voting against), it’s disingenuous to frame this as a war of NATO/US versus Russia./27
axios.com/2022/03/02/uni…

The proxy war frame also downplays Ukraine’s agency, in favor of presumptions about US aims, & problematically implies Ukraine should be recognized as naturally in Russia’s sphere of influence. All sovereign states have equal rights, per the UN Charter./28
responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/04/27/the…

Ultimately, contrary to the recent German intellectuals' letter, it is a moral imperative that Ukrainians be allowed to determine for themselves whether the continuing cost in terms of their lives is worth it. /29

https://twitter.com/vonderburchard/status/1520740522725363713?s=20&t=iUkgDbt8ot4XOIq6-9Hn8g

emma.de/artikel/offene…

What does respecting Ukrainians' agency look like in practice? Following Zelensky's lead, as their democratically elected leader, is a start. So is recognizing that Ukrainians’ individual daily decisions to engage in resistance against occupation are a form of plebiscite. /30

So it follows that Ukrainian voices should be front and center in answering the question of whether continuing to fight is a price worth paying. /31

A just war thinker would also ask specifically whether these costs are proportionate to the good the fighting aims to achieve? Would stopping fighting now be better from the point of view of justice than continuing? /31

What kind of peace could #Ukraine secure if it stopped fighting now? Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty isn't assured. There's little hope that Russian forces would withdraw from territories they’ve taken since February (nor those occupied since 2014). /32
aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/4/…

Why such pessimism? Actions speak loudly. Russian forces & their “local” DPR/LPR partners raise Russian (occasionally Soviet) flags over the cities they occupy. The symbolism is clear: they mean to stay. /33

https://twitter.com/elindependiente/status/1515357092734976001?s=20&t=RRdQR26euHfabfhDsWHtmg

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1507761462793715717?s=20&t=RRdQR26euHfabfhDsWHtmg

https://twitter.com/olgatokariuk/status/1514860566464151552?s=20&t=RRdQR26euHfabfhDsWHtmg

Likewise, the decision to introduce the ruble in occupied areas is a clear signal of an intent to stay for a long while. /34

washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/…

Furthermore, the Kremlin's rhetoric makes it quite clear that Moscow isn’t imagining this war as a sort of coercive diplomacy, aimed at bludgeoning concessions from Ukraine, but rather a long-term occupation. /35

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1507408034120990720

And #Putin & other officials have long claimed Ukraine is not a country, Ukrainians are not a nation, Ukraine has no right to sovereignty. This doesn't bode well for a fair peace if Ukraine simply "quits."/36
washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/…
blogs.lse.ac.uk/lseih/2020/07/…
atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainea…

The safety of people in territory occupied by Russia also cannot be assured, given the documented war crimes & human rights violations Ukrainian civilians have suffered so far in Russian controlled areas…/37
hrw.org/news/2022/04/2…
amnesty.org/en/latest/news…
ohchr.org/en/countries/u…

…and there is a pattern of serious human rights abuses in the parts of Luhansk & Donetsk under effective Russian control since 2014, the so-called “Luhansk & Donetsk People’s Republics.”/38
vostok-sos.org/en/review-of-h…
khpg.org/en/889
ohchr.org/en/documents/c…

This history makes it reasonable to assume that many more Ukrainians would suffer serious abuses if Russia is permitted to permanently occupy more parts of Ukraine. /39

Finally, the #Kremlin's rhetoric, repeated breathlessly on state-controlled TV, has taken on an ever more genocidal tone. And we know from social scientific research that such language is a serious warning of genocidal actions. /40

https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1521802979619311618?s=20&t=RRdQR26euHfabfhDsWHtmg

digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewconten…

In sum, I believe it is proportionate for #Ukraine to continue to fight, for sovereignty & territorial integrity, and for the quality of common life its people could likely build in an independent Ukraine than in a state officially or de facto under Russian control. /41

And because this is so, I still believe that assisting Ukraine in that battle – if it should desire such aid, and if its people still wish to fight – remains just. This certainly involves continuing to provide arms to Ukraine, along with humanitarian assistance. /42

Whether more than that is prudent – given the risk of escalation – is a question for another day, and another thread, so for now, I’ll leave you with this excellent article. /fin
ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2022/a-no-fly-…