JUSTICE OR PEACE? THE COLLISION OF THE CONCEPTS OF PEACE AND WAR IN CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION PRACTICES

Abstract

The article explores the reasons and the outcomes of the displacement of the concept of just war inherent in Catholic Christian ethics, which are correlated with the approaches of international security organizations based on the a priori possibility of agreement, dialogue and non-violent conflict resolution. Among the causes of negative consequences, the false opinion that the time of wars between states has passed and the interpretation of armed conflicts as exclusively internal regional disputes are singled out. These factors lead to a delayed reaction of the international community to wars or to the absence of an effective reaction at all. An undesirable consequence is also the devaluation of the vocation of the military and deficiencies in the preparation of moral and psychological support for the performance of their duties.

Criticism of the theory and practice of just peace in its Catholic version and in the algorithms of UN actions is proposed on the basis of the arguments of M. Potappel, who reveals the failure of this concept against the background of the Russian Federation's war in Ukraine from February 24, 2022. Critical remarks refer, in particular, to the orientation of this concept only to the protection and provision of individual human rights and the absence of legal and security mechanisms to protect the sovereignty of states and the right of nations to exist in the event of armed aggression from other states. An important theoretical problem is the overly optimistic anthropology of the theory of just peace, which relies on human morality and underestimates the propensity for evil and disagreement. Instead, attention is drawn to the fact that in the very Christian theology of Augustine, Aquinas, and in subsequent Catholic thought, the need to restore and protect justice by force is justified. It is concluded that the development of the just war concept is relevant, that its implicit goal is to achieve a just peace, and that it should be supplemented by developments in the field of jus post bellum.

The study continues reasoning on the topic of achieving peace in Ukraine, in particular, in the context of questions about the possibility and limits of compromise, proposed by S. Yosypenko (Philosophical thought, 2024, no. 4). Attention is focused on the combination of conviction and responsibility in politics (M. Weber) and the role of foreign aid to Ukraine to ensure the prospects of a just peace, which involves the justified use of force and the elimination of war criminals as a party to the negotiations.