Description
Scholars interested in just war theory have paid insufficient attention to how those men and women who are tasked to carry out its demands, i.e., soldiers, think and talk about it. While one might stop short of arguing that only those who have had their ass shot off in a trench are qualified to talk about the merits (or lack thereof) of just war theory, it is hard to see the field’s disinterest in the soldierly perspective as anything other than perverse. This essay took some tentative steps toward addressing this gap. Focusing on eight of the better-known war memoirs written by British and American soldiers who had experienced combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, it examines how just war theory is treated in these texts. It identifies two patterns. On the one hand, most war memoirs contain some formal discussion of just war theory and/or the rules of engagement that it underpins. These discussions are usually quite positive. Soldier-authors radiate pride when recalling how their own actions and the actions of their comrades conformed with just war theory, and express regret at those occasions they did not. On the other hand, a a much more cynical attitude toward just war theory can be discerned in other passages of these texts, passages wherein just war theory is not being formally discussed — passages that involve laughter. What one finds disclosed in these passages is a repressed, seething anger toward just war theory. The very notion of just war is presented in these moments as part of a cruel cosmic joke that is carried on at the expense of the soldiers charged with waging it. This paper asks what this tells us about just war.
