|
If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | ||||||||||||||
  Ethics & International AffairsVolume 20 Issue 4, Pages 439 - 454 Published Online: 13 Nov 2006 © 2009 Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs Published on behalf of the Carnegie Council
Abstract | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 81K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  Counterfactuals and the Proportionality Criterion Copyright 2006 Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs ABSTRACTIt is widely held that, in order for a resort to war or military force to be morally justified, it must, in addition to having a cause that is just, be proportionate. In this essay I argue for the need to use a counterfactual baseline when making the proportionality evaluation. Specifically, I argue that the relevant counterfactual baseline must contain a moral qualifier. In defending my proposal, I also contend that the relevant goods and harms that are weighed in the proportionality evaluation are not as open-ended as is sometimes presumed. Received: 08 September 2006; Accepted: 03 November 2006; | 
|
IT'S TIME TO RENEW
|
 | |||||||||||
