Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2008
Abstract
This Essay explains how the political theorists Hobbes, Kant, and Locke interpret the decision to go to war (us ad bellum) and the manner in which the war is conducted (just in bello). It also considers the implications of the three theories for compliance with international law more generally. It concludes that although all three can lay claim to certain key features of modern international law, it is Locke who provides the most complete support for both the laws of war, in particular, and with international law, in general.
Disciplines
International Law | Law | Law and Philosophy | Military, War, and Peace
Recommended Citation
Michael W. Doyle & Geoffrey S. Carlson,
Silence of the Laws? Conceptions of International Relations and International Law in Hobbes, Kant, and Locke,
46
Colum. J. Transnat'l. L.
648
(2008).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2153