{{Short description|"Justice after war"}} {{italic title}} {{war}} '''''Jus post bellum''''' ({{IPAc-en|j|u:|s}} {{respell|YOOS}}; [[Latin]] for "Justice after war") is a concept that deals with the morality of the termination phase of war, including the responsibility to rebuild. The idea has some historical pedigree as a concept in just war theory.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Orend|first=Brian|date=2000-01-01|title=Jus Post Bellum|journal=Journal of Social Philosophy|language=en|volume=31|issue=1|pages=117–137|doi=10.1111/0047-2786.00034|issn=1467-9833}}</ref> In modern times, it has been developed by a number of [[Just war theory|just war]] theorists and international lawyers.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Jus Post BellumMapping the Normative Foundations - Oxford Scholarship|url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685899.001.0001/acprof-9780199685899|language=en|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685899.001.0001|year=2014|isbn=9780199685899|publisher=Oxford University Press|editor1-last=Stahn|editor1-first=Carsten|editor2-last=Easterday|editor2-first=Jennifer S|editor3-last=Iverson|editor3-first=Jens}}</ref> However, the concept means different things to the contributors in each field. For lawyers, the concept is much less clearly defined, and many have rejected the usefulness of the concept altogether.<ref>{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/morality-jus-post-bellum-and-international-law/law-and-thejus-post-bellum/2DC1A66C84460B5F9D9B064467472BDF|title=Law and the Jus Post Bellum: (Chapter 10) - Morality, Jus Post Bellum, and International Law|pages=223–249|website=Cambridge Core|language=en|access-date=2017-08-16|doi=10.1017/CBO9781139161916.011|chapter=Law and the Jus Post Bellum|year=2012|last1=Cryer|first1=Robert|editor2-first=Andrew|editor2-last=Forcehimes|editor1-first=Larry|editor1-last=May|isbn=9781139161916}}</ref> The concept continues to attract scholarly interest in the field of [[international humanitarian law]].<ref>{{Citation|title=The Ethics of Stabilisation and Security: Principles for Jus Post Bellum – United Kingdom Seminar Proceedings|date=2020-03-06|work=Jus Post Bellum|pages=407–445|editor-last=Mileham|editor-first=Patrick|publisher=Brill {{!}} Nijhoff|doi=10.1163/9789004411043_018|isbn=978-90-04-41103-6|s2cid=243090920}}</ref> A famous example of ''Jus post bellum'' is the [[reconstruction of Germany]] by the Allies post World War 2.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-08-24 |title=Marshall Plan {{!}} Summary & Significance {{!}} Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/event/Marshall-Plan |access-date=2024-09-20 |website=www.britannica.com |language=en}}</ref>
==Background== [[Brian Orend]] cites [[Immanuel Kant]] as the first to consider a three-pronged approach to the morality of armed conflict<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Orend|first=Brian|date=2004|title=Kant's Ethics of War and Peace|url=https://philpapers.org/rec/BRIKEO|journal=Journal of Military Ethics|volume=3|issue=2|pages=161–177|doi=10.1080/15027570410006507|s2cid=143741953|url-access=subscription}}</ref> and concluded that a third branch of just war theory, the morality of the termination phase of war, had been overlooked.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last=Orend, Brian.|title=Jus Post Bellum : the Perspective of a Just War Theorist|date=2007|oclc=774926537}}</ref> Part of this morality, according to Michael Walzer, is that we have a moral obligation to not leave the regimes intact that caused the war in the first place.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Ceulemans |first=Carl |date=2014-05-20 |title=After the Dust Settles: Reflections on Postwar Justice |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0305829814528740 |journal=Millennium: Journal of International Studies |volume=42 |issue=3 |pages=909 |doi=10.1177/0305829814528740 |issn=0305-8298|url-access=subscription }}</ref> However, the actual duty of the role of ''jus post bellum'' remains unclear. To achieve a lasting peace, the goal is to find a balance between transitional justice and order.<ref name=":2" /> A related concept to the ''jus post bellum'' is the ''[[lex pacificatoria]]'', the law of peacemaking by treaty<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Bell|first1=Christine|url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226832.001.0001/acprof-9780199226832|title=On the Law of PeacePeace Agreements and the Lex Pacificatoria - Oxford Scholarship|year=2008|isbn=9780199226832|language=en|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226832.001.0001}}</ref> to introduce the ''jus post bellum'' phase.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bell|first=Christine|title=Peace settlements and international law: from lex pacificatoria to jus post bellum|journal=Research Handbook on International Conflict and Security Law|year=2013|pages=499–546|doi=10.4337/9781849808576.00020|isbn=9781849808576|url=https://www.pure.ed.ac.uk/ws/files/14539618/Bell_Peace_Settlements_and_International_Law.pdf}}</ref>
==Purpose== The purpose of the concept and its usefulness depends on whether it is considered as a moral or a legal concept. As a concept in [[just war theory]], the ''jus post bellum'' debate considers a number of issues:<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Orend|first=Brian|date=2000|title=Jus Post Bellum|journal=Journal of Social Philosophy|language=en|volume=31|issue=1|pages=117–137|doi=10.1111/0047-2786.00034|issn=1467-9833}}</ref>
* Provide terms for the end of war; once the rights of a political community have been vindicated, further continuation of war becomes an act of aggression. * Provide guidelines for the construction of peace treaties. * Provide guidelines for the political reconstruction of defeated states. * Prevent draconian and vengeful peace terms; the rights a just state fights for in a war provide the constraints on what can be demanded from the defeated belligerent.
Thus, the areas within which ''jus post bellum'' applies can include restraining conquest; political reconstruction, especially in the case of [[genocide]] and [[war crime]]s; and economic reconstruction, including restoration and [[Reparations (transitional justice)|reparations]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bass |first=Gary J. |date=2004 |title=Jus Post Bellum |url=https://spia.princeton.edu/system/files/research/documents/juspost.pdf |journal=Philosophy & Public Affairs |language=en |volume=32 |issue=4 |pages=384–412 |doi=10.1111/j.1088-4963.2004.00019.x |issn=1088-4963}}</ref>
==See also== * ''[[Jus ad bellum]]'' * [[Jus in Bello|''Jus in bello'']] * [[Peace treaty]]
==References== * Allman, Mark J. and Winright, Tobias L. "''Jus Post Bellum'': Extending the Just War Theory" in ''Faith in Public Life'', College Theology Society Annual Volume 53, 2007 (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008), 241–264. * Allman, Mark J. and Winright, Tobias L. ''After the Smoke Clears: The Just War Tradition and Post War Justice'' (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2010). * DiMeglio, Richard P. "The Evolution of the Just War Tradition: Defining ''Jus Post Bellum''" ''Military Law Review'' (2006), Vol. 186, pp. 116–163. * Kwon, David C. ''Justice after War: Jus Post Bellum in the 21st Century'' (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 2023). * Orend, Brian. [https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/war/ War] in ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'', 2000/2005. *{{cite journal |last=Österdahl |first=Inger |year=2012 |title=Just War, Just Peace and the ''Jus post Bellum'' |journal=Nordic Journal of International Law |volume=81 |issue=3 |pages=271–294 |doi= 10.1163/15718107-08103003|issn=0902-7351 }} *
;Specific {{reflist|30em}} {{Ethics}} {{International Criminal Law|state=collapsed}} {{Portal bar|Law|Politics}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Jus Post Bellum}} [[Category:Just war theory]] [[Category:Aftermath of war]] [[Category:Concepts in ethics]] [[Category:Latin legal terminology]]