The Paradox of ‘Jus Ad Bellum’ and ‘Jus in Bello’ in Modern World: Justifications of Just War vs. Forced Intervention

'Jus ad bellum' is a concept of international Law which gives permission to resort to war in extraordinary circumstances. Use of force is never appreciated in International Law but ‘jus ad bellum’ is an exception to that. The legality to use force is only permitted if a sovereign state fears of severe attack by other state .In 21st century, the term ‘war’ in jus ad bellum concept is replaced by words like ‘military intervention’ or ‘armed conflict’. Whatever may be the word, the devastating effects of war is much more serious than ever before. In modern warfare, weapons and warfare technology are more powerful in destroying human lives ,infrastructures and environment and thus create a long term damage. Though ‘jus ad bellum’ should be the ‘last resort’ but now it is seen to be used for ‘justifying the warfare’ in any case. The war can be only justified if it is done for the sake of self-defense or when one state already in warfare asks another to send help or it is legitimate under Article 51 of UN Charter. However, jus ad bello, on the other hand, is the law of war which determines the conduct among conflicting parties during the war. Jus ad bello emerges from the start of war and remain till the end of war. War may be just or unjust, legitimate or illegitimate but jus ad bello requires the war parties to follow the law of war to minimize destruction for humanitarian reasons. However, recent conflicts like Russia-Ukraine war, Iraq War, Afghanistan War, Syrian war, Lybia intervention, Yemeni civil war reflect the requirement of revisiting the concept of jus ad bellum to stop such inhuman destruction in the guise of ‘just war’. This paper is going to explore modern day warfare in relation with jus ad bellum and jus ad bello and focus on reconstructing the concepts to minimize abuse.

• jus ad bellum
• jus ad bello
• just war
• human rights
• conflict

• Mr. Richimoni Proma, Lecturer (Law), Bangladesh Open University, Bangladesh

Proma. (December, 2023). The Paradox of ‘Jus Ad Bellum’ and ‘Jus in Bello’ in Modern World: Justifications of Just War vs. Forced Intervention. IPEM LAW JOURNAL, 7, 1-5.

1. 1.Chivers, C. and Schmitt, E. (2011). Scores of Unintended Casualties in NATO War in Libya. [online] Nytimes.com.
2. 2.Johnson, J. T. (2023, April 7). just war. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/just-war.
3. 3.Justenhoven, H. (2012). Francisco de Vitoria: Just War as Defense of International Law. In H. Justenhoven& W. Barbieri, Jr. (Ed.), From Just War to Modern Peace Ethics (pp. 121-136). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110291926.121.
4. 4.Maroonian, A. Contextualization of the Principle of Proportionality in Ihl-Criteria and Examples. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/contextualization-principle-proportionality-ihl-criteria-examples.
5. 5.Martinez, L. (2015, March 27). "US Rescues 2 Saudi Pilots from Gulf of Aden". ABC News.
6. 6.Ray, M. (2023, April 18). 8 Deadliest Wars of the 21st Century. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/list/8-deadliest-wars-of-the-21st-century.
7. 7.Williamson, H. (2023, February 24). Ukraine-human-cost-brutal-Russian-invasion. Church Times. https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/24/ukraine-human-cost-brutal-russian-invasion.