In a searching reflection on the justice of preemptive military strikes designed to prevent Iran from gaining the use of nuclear weapons, Robert Koons embarks on a line of reasoning not altogether persuasive.
He works his way through the criteria for a just war, and when he comes to “last resort” he observes that the moral substance of just war theory requires a formal declaration of war—a clear statement of military intent—so that the other side, in this case Iran, can back down.
This line of reasoning rules out sudden preemptive attacks. Here is how Koons puts it.
Just war theory resolutely opposes any surprise attack, such as that of the Japanese on Pearl Harbor, precisely because such an unanticipated action can never be a last resort. Sneak attacks do not provide the prospective enemy with an ultimatum that it can meet and thereby avert the catastrophe of war. A just war against Iran, therefore, would have to be a declared war. Given the United States Constitution, it is the sole prerogative of the Congress to issue any ultimatum with a declared state of war among its threatened consequences. The president lacks the constitutional authority to issue such an ultimatum or declaration. There may be cases in which action must be taken swiftly, leaving no time for the Congress to convene and make its decision, but that is certainly not the case here, with at least several months before a decision to launch a war must be made. Consequently, no action (either by American or allied forces) authorized solely by the president can be just.
I’m not convinced.
It’s not as thought Iran isn’t aware of Israeli and American concerns. Diplomacy is a way to send messages and deliver ultimatums that are just as clear as the declaration of war.
All-in-all, I think Koons misconceives the political importance of Congressional declaration of war with a moral importance. Our constitutional constraints on the declaration of war are legal mechanisms designed to ensure accountability and prevent our President from conducting private wars that do not serve the national interest. Formal declaration of war brings our foreign policy above board. Yes, that would clarify things for the Iranians, but as I observed we can make things clear in other ways. The real importance is domestic. Citizens need to know when our leaders have committed military force, because at the end of the day it’s our blood and treasure that’s on the line.
That’s not to say that a preemptive strike against Iran would satisfy other just war criteria, but it does suggest that Koons reasoning is a bit too legalistic and not altogether convincing.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
