| |
| |
| Acknowledgments | |
| |
| |
| |
| Pacifism and Just Wars | |
| |
| |
| |
| Introduction: Between the Horrors and Necessity of War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Condemning War but Fighting for Peace | |
| |
| |
| |
| War and Contemporary International Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| Many Unjustified Wars but Few Criminal Leaders | |
| |
| |
| |
| Minimalism, Consensus, and Solidarity | |
| |
| |
| |
| Summary of the Arguments of the Book | |
| |
| |
| |
| Grotius and Contingent Pacifism | |
| |
| |
| |
| Grotius on Just Wars | |
| |
| |
| |
| Grotius on Justifiable Killing in War | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Idea of Contingent Pacifism | |
| |
| |
| |
| An Objection to Contingent Pacifism | |
| |
| |
| |
| Contingent Pacifism and International Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| International Solidarity and the Duty to Aid | |
| |
| |
| |
| A Historical Note | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Idea of an International Community | |
| |
| |
| |
| Solidarity of the International Community | |
| |
| |
| |
| Objections | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Duties of Solidarity | |
| |
| |
| |
| Rethinking the Normative ad Bellum Principles | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Principle of Priority or First Strike | |
| |
| |
| |
| Gentili and the Justification of Offensive War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Grotius on Fear of Attack | |
| |
| |
| |
| First Strikes: The Priority Principle | |
| |
| |
| |
| Last Resort as the Ultimate Restraint | |
| |
| |
| |
| Contemporary Warfare and the Priority Principle | |
| |
| |
| |
| International Law and the Priority Principle | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Principle of Just Cause | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conversion of Heathens and Promotion of Democracy | |
| |
| |
| |
| Paradigmatic Just Causes: Individual and Collective Self-Defense | |
| |
| |
| |
| Reconceptualizing the Principle of Just Cause | |
| |
| |
| |
| Just Cause and the Element of State Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Bifurcated Normative Principles of Jus ad Bellum | |
| |
| |
| |
| Rethinking the Separation of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Principle of Proportionality | |
| |
| |
| |
| Proportionality in Traditional Just War Theory | |
| |
| |
| |
| Necessity and Proportionality in International Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| Self-Defense and Proportionate Response | |
| |
| |
| |
| Proportionality and Minor Jus ad Bellum Principles | |
| |
| |
| |
| Connecting Proportionality, Priority, and Just Cause | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Precedent of Nuremberg | |
| |
| |
| |
| Custom and the Nuremberg "Precedent" | |
| |
| |
| |
| Just War Theory and Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Nuremberg "Precedent" | |
| |
| |
| |
| Rules in International Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| Jus Cogens Norms and the Crime of Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Conservative Approach to Custom | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Rules of the International Community | |
| |
| |
| |
| Prosecuting Military and Political Leaders | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Admiral Doenitz Case | |
| |
| |
| |
| Doenitz's Defense | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Ministries Case | |
| |
| |
| |
| Political Ministers and Waging War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Roles and Actus Reus | |
| |
| |
| |
| A Successful Prosecution: Admiral Raeder | |
| |
| |
| |
| Prosecuting Civilians for Complicity: The Krupp and I. G. Farben Cases | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Case against Krupp | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Case against I. G. Farben | |
| |
| |
| |
| Judge Hebert's Concurring Opinion | |
| |
| |
| |
| Mens Rea and Conspiracy | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conceptualizing the Crime of Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Defining State Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| What Is Aggression? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Historical Roots of the Idea of State Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Waging Aggressive War | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Wrong of Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Who Decides? Another Lesson from Nuremberg | |
| |
| |
| |
| Act and Circumstance in the Crime of Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Problem of Acts | |
| |
| |
| |
| State Aggression as a Circumstance | |
| |
| |
| |
| Participating and Being Liable | |
| |
| |
| |
| Participating in the Circumstances of War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Revisiting the Superior Orders Defense | |
| |
| |
| |
| Individual Mens Rea and Collective Liability | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conspiracy at Nuremberg | |
| |
| |
| |
| Intent to Wage War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Two Intentions | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War | |
| |
| |
| |
| Collective Liability Schemes | |
| |
| |
| |
| Hard Cases and Concluding Thoughts | |
| |
| |
| |
| Humanitarian Intervention | |
| |
| |
| |
| Humanitarian Intervention in International Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| Immunity, Complicity, and Collective Liability | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Applicability of the Doctrine of Double Effect | |
| |
| |
| |
| Collective Responsibility of States | |
| |
| |
| |
| Defending Humanitarian Wars | |
| |
| |
| |
| Should Anyone Be Prosecuted for Humanitarian Wars? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Terrorist Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Piracy and Terrorism | |
| |
| |
| |
| Legitimate Authority and Non-State Actors | |
| |
| |
| |
| Similarities between State and Non-State Actors | |
| |
| |
| |
| Prosecuting Terrorist Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Terrorists and Due Process Rights | |
| |
| |
| |
| Human Rights after September 11, 2001 | |
| |
| |
| |
| Defending International Criminal Trials for Aggression | |
| |
| |
| |
| Koskenniemi's Critique of International Criminal Law | |
| |
| |
| |
| The Diversity of Norms Defense | |
| |
| |
| |
| Drumbl's Arguments about Retribution and Deterrence | |
| |
| |
| |
| Political Leaders Defending Themselves | |
| |
| |
| |
| International Criminal Trials and Aggression | |
| |
| |
| Bibliography | |
| |
| |
| Index | |