The Melian War
According to Aquinas, in order to justify the just war, the war has to meet various principles of jus ad bellum.(Aquinas,p.240) In this paper, I will go through those principles and determine whether the war in The Melian Dialogue is just or not on the Melian’s side. Although some people may argue that the war in The Melian Dialogue meets various principles in the just war framework, I will introduce those arguments and rebut those arguments to justify that it was an unjust war.
The Melian Dialogue described a pre-contextual situation of a war between Athenians and Melians. The Athenian historian Thucydides depicted the negotiations between the emissaries from Athenians invaders and the leaders of Melos in “History of the Peloponnesian War”. …show more content…
According to Aquinas, “Just cause”, meets when the enemy violates the rights of one’s people or community and “Right Intention” must purpose to promote goodness or avoid evilness.(Aquinas,p.241) Both principles focus on the justification in order to bring and accompany the just peace.(Aquinas,p.241) “The principle of Last Resort” suggested by Erasmus is that the good authority should start a war after considering all possible …show more content…
Even though they are the legitimate authority, the principle lacks the considerations of the common people and the common good. The decision may fulfill the condition “Legitimate Authority”, but it does not reflect the war as the just war. For instance, considering that Athenians already pinpointed that the Melians had the negotiations within the closed room without people, the legitimate authorities may lose their positions as the leaders of the society.(Thucydides,p.1) According to Aquinas, “legitimate authority” is not the private people to declare war because of their superior status.(Aquinas,p.240) Therefore the protection of the public can be the only justification for the use of violence.(Aquinas,p.240) However, in this case, the Melos decided to have a war that does not accompany the protection of the public and the city. They may argue that once the city is insecure with sovereignty, the protection of the people is not guaranteed. However, the concealment of the conversation eventually brought the consequence of people killed and enslaved. The principle definitely would not meet in this case because of the circumstances and
The Melian Dialogue described a pre-contextual situation of a war between Athenians and Melians. The Athenian historian Thucydides depicted the negotiations between the emissaries from Athenians invaders and the leaders of Melos in “History of the Peloponnesian War”. …show more content…
According to Aquinas, “Just cause”, meets when the enemy violates the rights of one’s people or community and “Right Intention” must purpose to promote goodness or avoid evilness.(Aquinas,p.241) Both principles focus on the justification in order to bring and accompany the just peace.(Aquinas,p.241) “The principle of Last Resort” suggested by Erasmus is that the good authority should start a war after considering all possible …show more content…
Even though they are the legitimate authority, the principle lacks the considerations of the common people and the common good. The decision may fulfill the condition “Legitimate Authority”, but it does not reflect the war as the just war. For instance, considering that Athenians already pinpointed that the Melians had the negotiations within the closed room without people, the legitimate authorities may lose their positions as the leaders of the society.(Thucydides,p.1) According to Aquinas, “legitimate authority” is not the private people to declare war because of their superior status.(Aquinas,p.240) Therefore the protection of the public can be the only justification for the use of violence.(Aquinas,p.240) However, in this case, the Melos decided to have a war that does not accompany the protection of the public and the city. They may argue that once the city is insecure with sovereignty, the protection of the people is not guaranteed. However, the concealment of the conversation eventually brought the consequence of people killed and enslaved. The principle definitely would not meet in this case because of the circumstances and