Description
Just War Theory has been predominantly developed within Western philosophical traditions, often neglecting indigenous and non-Western perspectives on conflict and justice. This exclusion can reinforce colonial narratives by dismissing the legitimacy of resistance movements against imperial powers as unjust due to the neglect of indigenous and non-Western perspectives in Just War Theory. Just War Theory had roots with Roman Empire dominance over the communities outside the pax Romana, holy Christianity of Augustine and Aquinas against non-Christian communities, and justification of colonial violence for the conquest of the "New World," as evidenced in the works of influential figures such as Francisco de Vitoria and Hugo Grotius, who significantly contributed to its early principles. Their works often justified the subjugation of indigenous peoples, portraying it as necessary under the guise of moral and civilizational imperatives. This article explored the concept of just war within natural law, transitioning it from the theological realm to a secularization and universalization context. This shift constructs the legitimate authority of Eurocentric states within the framework of justifying war. From a decolonial perspective, the article critically analyzes the theological, philosophical, and socio-political structure of Just War Theory. Further, this article examines the difference between 'rightness' and 'legality' to explore how concepts like international law and universal law affect the freedom of indigenous peoples by reinforcing the Eurocentric legitimacy of wars through natural law.
