Jus Post Bellum and the Nature of Peace
GT 3.7 Post bellum: derecho, política y moral despues de la guerra
- Lonneke Peperkamp (Radboud University Nijmegen)
- Sesión 1
Día: miércoles,20 de septiembre de 2017
Hora: 18:00 a 20:00
Lugar: Sala de Juntas
Jus post bellum requires a certain degree of moderation, in terms of its normative ambition, content and operation. Approaches towards the concept of a “just peace” differ. Mark Evans has argued that a “just peace” is an “elusive ideal”. In her study on “Cosmopolitan Peace”, Cecile Fabre noted that “justice” is predominantly “procedural justice”. Barela and Keller have argued that peace requires recognition and a certain degree of concession and compromise from parties involved (principle of renouncement). As shown by the Colombian peace process, a “just” peace is not only related to form and process, i.e. negotiation of what is “just” in a specific context. It involves “substantive” justice, namely a “just” order with common rules, “just” institutions and arrangements, which secure peace, procedures to maintain peace, and a certain sense of societal acceptance.
Jus post bellum requires pragmatism and limitation.I undertake a study of different concepts of peace and argue that a just peace in the context of jus post bellum should be understood as a “decent peace which is stable for a substantial period of time”.
 Mark Evans, Just Peace: An Elusive Ideal, in Eric Patterson (ed.) Ethics beyond War's End (Georgetown University Press, 2012), 220.
 Cecile Fabre, Cosmopolitan Peace (OUP, 2016).
 Steven J. Barela and Alexis Keller, Justice, Peace and Jus Post Bellum, Amsterdam Law Forum (2015), 98.
Palabras clave: Peace, jus post bellum, just war, positive peace, negative peace