People  |   Advanced Search  |   US English US English US English
中文 中文
Español Español
Français Français
Русский Русский

Noncombatant Immunity in Michael Walzer's Just and Unjust Wars [Abstract]

Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 11 (1997)

Issues of immunity from attack and the assignment of responsibility for civilian deaths are central to the modern war convention. Koontz addresses several difficulties with Walzer's treatment of noncombatant immunity in Just and Unjust Wars. Walzer's theory of noncombatant immunity states that immunity from attack is a fundamental human right that can only be lost once a person becomes a direct threat or consents to give up his or her right to immunity. Koontz cites inconsistencies in Walzer's method of determining the immunity of soldiers and civilians. He argues from a deontological perspective that there can be no grounds for consent to the loss of immunity other than a direct threat posed by a civilian. This strengthens the protection of noncombatants, a principle that had been weakened by Walzer.


To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.

Read More: Just War Tradition

Related Resources:

Related Resources
blog comments powered by Disqus
In this Issue of the Journal
Join our Mailing Lists
Social Network

Social Network

The Journal

The Journal