Was the U.S. War in Afghanistan a Just War?

The Afghanistan War, which lasted about 13 years, is known to be the longest war in United States history. As the United States claims, the reason for this war was to combat terrorism in response to the 9/11 attacks organized by the broad based militant group, Al Qaeda, led by a man named Osama bin Laden. Since Al Qaeda managed training camps in Afghanistan to instruct members on how to use weapons and the planning of 9/11, bin Laden was known to be there as well. Because of this, following the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President George W. Bush of the United States responded nine days later by announcing that the U.S. had the right to invade Afghanistan. No matter how right this act might seem on the surface, it is inevitable to wonder if this was a just war or another arbitrary war. With further reflection upon the just war theory, the question is whether or not the United States’ actions in Afghanistan met all of the requirements. Given specific examples of the United States not following the just ad bellum principles (last resort, just cause, legitimate authority) and jus in bello principles (civilian causalities and proportionality), it is clear that the Afghanistan War was not just.

The Just War Theory is a doctrine of military principles studied and created by theologians, policy makers, ethicists, and military leaders. More specifically, its origins come from theological and classical philosophy where extraordinary specialists such as Hugo Grotius, Saint Augustine, Aquinas, and Vitoria combined their beliefs. The purpose of this theory is to certify whether a war is morally and ethically justifiable through an arrangement of principles that must be met in order to be classified as just (Fitzsimmons, 2015). The criteria remains traditionally divided into two categories, the first being jus ad bellum. Jus ad bellum is Latin for “ right to go to war” and is to be consulted before initiating in war to determine the morality of going to war and if it is permissible. The second is jus in bello, which is Latin for “right conduct in war”, concerns of the moral conduct of the war. Jus in bello establishes whether the war is conducted justly since it is occasionally considered a part of the laws of war. A third category has recently been added, jus post bellum, Latin for “justice after war.” This category deals with the finishing phase of the war to suggest the necessity of policies for an ending that is complete and fair.

Given the fact that American civilians were attacked and murdered on their soil, it is easy to insinuate that the Afghanistan war was just. Although, given reasons following the jus ad bellum guidelines, this war was not just. One of them is being the last resort principle, which states that the use of force should be the last option after all other diplomatic attempts have failed to resolve the conflict. However, the only diplomatic measure the United States government took was to ask the Taliban to turn bin Laden over to America. As a result of bin Laden’s continuous denial with the attacks, the Taliban responded by demanding the United States with evidence of bin Laden’s accountability before giving him up to the U.S. Instead of the Bush administration providing evidence, they declared war on September 21, 2001. In Bush’s speech declaring war, he is confident that bin Laden is the one responsible. He gives no proof and states, “I give the United States full access to terrorist training camps so we can make sure they are no longer operating and these demands are not open to negotiation or discussion” (ABC News, 2001). Then, on October 7, 2001 the U.S. military with British support, began the bombing against the Taliban forces and the Operation Enduring Freedom officially commenced. Only 7 days later, the Taliban offered a deal to the U.S. of handing bin Laden over to a neutral country as long as the U.S. stopped bombing their country and provided evidence. Bush rejected by saying this offer was nonnegotiable by stating, “There is no need to discuss innocence or guilt, we know he is guilty” (The Guardian, 2001). Either way, America should have released proof of bin Laden’s involvement in the attacks, but Bush refused giving his reason that the disclosure of top-secret information would jeopardize the work of the intelligence agency (Muhammad, 2002, p. 135). Despite the willingness of the Taliban to find a fair compromise, the United States declined and decided that war would be the only way to destroy terrorism as well as bin Laden.

Just cause is another principle from the jus ad bellum group that suggests the perspective that the Afghanistan war was not just. The just cause principle indicates that war can only be instigated for two reasons. One reason is self-defense as a response to an attack and another being a call for intervention to assist foreigners who are experiencing violence. Although neither of these reasons were motives for the United States to start the Afghanistan war. The United States continued to use the excuse of self-defense to protect themselves from terrorism and a second attack. But, whether the 9/11 attacks had occurred or not, the United States had already made the choice to invade Afghanistan two months prior the attacks. In reality, the UNOCAL pipeline that ran through the countries of Afghanistan and Iraq played a major role in this decision. In the mid 1990’s, the United States government had supported the Taliban with faith that they would restore the country as well as its government to protect the pipeline. Since this did not happen by the late 1990’s, the Clinton administration gave up on the Taliban, but when the Bush administration came to power, it gave the Taliban one final chance. Then, in July 2001 Bush representatives insisted the Taliban needed to construct a government of national unity that would share power with the U.S. When the Taliban refused this offer, U.S. officials suggested they bury Afghanistan in bombs no later than mid October (Durham, 2004, p. 20–22). Except, the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon occurred, which led U.S. invasions to occur earlier on October 7, 2001.

Following the just cause principle, legitimate authority is another principle to be focused on regarding jus ad bellum. As it sounds, a just war must be waged by a legitimate authority and not by groups or individuals that do not constitute the legal government. The U.S. government instigated war against Afghanistan even in the lack of a formal declaration of war and merely proposed it was a just war because the U.S. had suffered from a terrorist invasion. In reality, if the United States formally declared war, the Constitution states that Congress has the only power to declare war. Article 51 of the UN Charter identifies the right of self-defense, but also recognizes that the Security Council is the only power to approve the force. In the absence of this consent, any attack versus another country is considered illegal. More specifically, article 51 states that there are two exceptions for legal force to be used without consent of the Security Council (United Nations). One exception of acting militarily in self-defense is if a country foresees the possibility of an armed attack by another country. Yet, the country of Afghanistan did not attack the United States, Al Qaeda did. The second exception occurs when a country obtains specific information about a forthcoming attack from another country that is too imminent to waste time and bring forth to the Security Council first. However, the United States attacking Afghanistan was obviously not urgent since the American invasion occurred almost a month after September 11. Therefor, neither of these exceptions were the case of 9/11 let alone to instigate war against Afghanistan. Not only that, but the United Nations Security Council never authorized the U.S. to go forward with any kind of military action on Afghanistan.

On the other hand, the jus in bello civilian causalities principle also explains that this war was not just. Civilian causalities are basically a rule that innocent civilians from the opposing country must never be the targets in a just war. Soldiers should always avoid killing civilians and military force needs to distinguish between the militia and civilians. However, civilian casualties during the Afghanistan War are at an all time high in all of history. The war in Afghanistan destroyed many innocent civilians’ families and took away their lives. As of August 2016, more than 31,000 civilians are estimated to have died violent deaths as a result of the war. Many of these killings occur due to crossfires, assassinations, bombings, night raids, improvised explosive devices, and suspected insurgents (Watson Institute, 2016). In total, about 104,000 people have been killed in the war since it began in 2001 and about 31,000 of those have been innocent civilians and 41,000 of those people have gotten injured one war or another. Because of all these occurrences, Afghan society is always extremely vulnerable to the indirects the Afghanistan War has caused. Those indirect causes include environmental deprivation, malnutrition, poor sanitation, poverty, lack of clean water, and reduced access to health care. Clearly, the civilian causalities principle was not taken seriously since the United States did never did anything stop the war even after knowing all of these things were occurring.

Another jus in bello principle would be proportionality. Proportionality explains that the benefits derived from the war have to outweigh the troubles that it inflicts. While also including that the countries involved in the just war must avoid disproportionate military use. There should be a use of military force only when absolutely necessary as also minimizing the duration and intensity of the war. In order to have met this requirement, the United States should have had a much greater focus on the benefits the Afghanistan war could have resulted from rather than the effects the war would cause. Instead, what the Bush administration wanted was revenge from the September 11 attacks by destroying Al Qaeda completely no matter what. In this speech Bush mentions, “Our war on terror begins with Al Qaeda, but does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated” (ABC News, 2001). It was obvious that Bush’s administration wanted to find and destroy every single Al Qaeda cell in existence even if that meant striking Afghanistan with high intensity, since Bush also states that they will use any weapon and tactic needed. Second, the United States should have also reduced the duration of this war. Also in the speech made by Bush, he indicates that Americans should not just expect one short battle against Afghanistan, but a lengthy one with dramatic strikes. It is obvious that the United States did not take this into account considering that it has been the longest war in U.S. history.

The United States did not follow the principles of the Just War Theory because of the way the U.S. initiated and handled the Afghanistan War. The United States had no right in instigating war in Afghanistan because neither the UN Security Council nor Congress accepted the action of war. Also, the United States did not take into consideration the principles of just cause by invading because of Afghanistan’s uncooperativeness, and last resort because they did not try to negotiate with Afghanistan or provide evidence of Osama bin Laden being responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Not only that, but the U.S. also did not propose an attack of small intensity or brief duration because the war lasted 13 years with many civilians and soldiers killed. Additionally, what wars should try to accomplish is security and stability rather than suffering and insecurity. In the future, governments should actually try to follow the principles of a just war to avoid innocent deaths, violence, and unwanted enemies.

References

ABC News. (2001, September 20). Bush Declares War on Terror. ABC News.

Durham, M. (2004). The American Right and the Framing of 9/11. Political Quarterly, 75(1), 17–25.

Fitzsimmons, S. (2015). Just war theory and private security companies. International Affairs, 91(5), 1069–1084.

Guardian News. (2001, October 14). Bush rejects Taliban Offer to Hand Bin Laden Over. Guardian News and Media.

Muhammad, A. (2002). Beyond the anti-American sentiment. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 3(1), 135–137.

United Nations. Chapter VII | United Nations. United Nations.

Watson Institute. (2016, August). Afghan Civilians. Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs.