Phone: (303) 615-2027 Address: Metropolitan State University of Denver Department of Political Science, Campus Box 43 PO Box 173362 Denver CO 80217-3362
The international system is undergoing changes that are transforming centuries-old forms of polit... more The international system is undergoing changes that are transforming centuries-old forms of political, social, and moral development. Most importantly, the state's monopoly over the legitimate use of force has been undermined by a host of non-state actors, while the development of artificial intelligence and the prospect of autonomous weapons systems threaten to break humanity's monopoly over political violence. The books in this series will take up a range of problems posed by these transformations and address three broad aims: (1) to understand how these new wars and threats have emerged from new conditions that require us to rethink the ethical content and parameters of duty, obligation, responsibility, and legitimacy; (2) to analyze how these new developments generate new obligations and responsibilities that lie beyond the scope of traditional ethics; (3) and to formulate new ethical approaches that may help us to map the new conceptual terrain of the new wars.
Recent decades have seen an increasing reliance on private military contractors (PMCs) to provide... more Recent decades have seen an increasing reliance on private military contractors (PMCs) to provide logistical services, training, maintenance, and combat troops. In Outsourcing War, Amy E. Eckert examines the ethical implications involved in the widespread use of PMCs, and in particular questions whether they can fit within customary ways of understanding the ethical prosecution of warfare. Her concern is with the ius in bello (right conduct in war) strand of just war theory. Just war theorizing is generally built on the assumption that states, and states alone, wield a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Who holds responsibility for the actions of PMCs? What ethical standards might they be required to observe? How might deviations from such standards be punished? The privatization of warfare poses significant challenges because of its reliance on a statist view of the world. Eckert argues that the tradition of just war theory—which predates the international system of states—can evolve to apply to this changing world order. With an eye toward the practical problems of military command, Eckert delves into particular cases where PMCs have played an active role in armed conflict and derives from those cases the modifications necessary to apply just principles to new agents in the landscape of war.
Despite considerable moral and material differences among states, the concept of sovereign equali... more Despite considerable moral and material differences among states, the concept of sovereign equality permeates international relations theory and, in particular, normative international relations theory. Most traditions of international ethics incorporate the idea of equality. John Rawls's Law of Peoples is representative of this tendency. The states party to Rawls's contractual model of international justice are assumed to be equal. Despite the inequalities among states, the choice to model states as equals is justified to the extent that they all possess some degree of moral agency. As moral agents, states possess an inherent equality that justifies modeling them as equal. Nevertheless, states as equal moral agents would take into account certain aspects of international inequality. In particular, they could recognize the role that Great Powers can play in maintaining order and establishing the preconditions for international justice. This piece explores the extent of equality in normative international relations theory.
In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls modeled peoples as being independent and mutually disinterested... more In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls modeled peoples as being independent and mutually disinterested. This is an assumption that mirrors his treatment of individual persons in the domestic context. This article argues that this assumption does not translate to the international context. While individual persons do not require the existence of other persons, states cannot exist independently of other states. Because statehood is a social construct, states require the recognition (and the existence) of other states, and they are incapable of being considered independently of the system and the other states that populate the system. Drawing on aspects of the relational dimension of care ethics, this article considers the implications of rejecting the assumption of independence and mutual disinterest. Theorizing states as inherently connected to one another allows the relationships and connections among them to come into the process of developing principles of justice. The international system is often portrayed as a system that is adversarial in nature. This sentiment finds its strongest expression in realism, which depicts the international system as a zero-sum game in which one state can only gain at another's expense. The ability to realize gains in power and security only at the expense of other states places them,
In his provocative book War and Self-Defense, David Rodin criticizes attempts to justify national... more In his provocative book War and Self-Defense, David Rodin criticizes attempts to justify national defense based on an analogy between the individual and the state. In doing so, he treats state personality as an analogy to the personality of the individual. Yet the state possesses the key attributes of moral personality, including a conception of the good life and a sense of justice. The state's unobservable – but nevertheless real – moral personality means that it also possessed the right to defend the continued existence of that personality against an attack. Subject to the same constraints that are placed on individuals, such as necessity and proportionality, the state possesses the right to national defense based on its own personality.
The international system is undergoing changes that are transforming centuries-old forms of polit... more The international system is undergoing changes that are transforming centuries-old forms of political, social, and moral development. Most importantly, the state's monopoly over the legitimate use of force has been undermined by a host of non-state actors, while the development of artificial intelligence and the prospect of autonomous weapons systems threaten to break humanity's monopoly over political violence. The books in this series will take up a range of problems posed by these transformations and address three broad aims: (1) to understand how these new wars and threats have emerged from new conditions that require us to rethink the ethical content and parameters of duty, obligation, responsibility, and legitimacy; (2) to analyze how these new developments generate new obligations and responsibilities that lie beyond the scope of traditional ethics; (3) and to formulate new ethical approaches that may help us to map the new conceptual terrain of the new wars.
Recent decades have seen an increasing reliance on private military contractors (PMCs) to provide... more Recent decades have seen an increasing reliance on private military contractors (PMCs) to provide logistical services, training, maintenance, and combat troops. In Outsourcing War, Amy E. Eckert examines the ethical implications involved in the widespread use of PMCs, and in particular questions whether they can fit within customary ways of understanding the ethical prosecution of warfare. Her concern is with the ius in bello (right conduct in war) strand of just war theory. Just war theorizing is generally built on the assumption that states, and states alone, wield a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Who holds responsibility for the actions of PMCs? What ethical standards might they be required to observe? How might deviations from such standards be punished? The privatization of warfare poses significant challenges because of its reliance on a statist view of the world. Eckert argues that the tradition of just war theory—which predates the international system of states—can evolve to apply to this changing world order. With an eye toward the practical problems of military command, Eckert delves into particular cases where PMCs have played an active role in armed conflict and derives from those cases the modifications necessary to apply just principles to new agents in the landscape of war.
Despite considerable moral and material differences among states, the concept of sovereign equali... more Despite considerable moral and material differences among states, the concept of sovereign equality permeates international relations theory and, in particular, normative international relations theory. Most traditions of international ethics incorporate the idea of equality. John Rawls's Law of Peoples is representative of this tendency. The states party to Rawls's contractual model of international justice are assumed to be equal. Despite the inequalities among states, the choice to model states as equals is justified to the extent that they all possess some degree of moral agency. As moral agents, states possess an inherent equality that justifies modeling them as equal. Nevertheless, states as equal moral agents would take into account certain aspects of international inequality. In particular, they could recognize the role that Great Powers can play in maintaining order and establishing the preconditions for international justice. This piece explores the extent of equality in normative international relations theory.
In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls modeled peoples as being independent and mutually disinterested... more In The Law of Peoples, John Rawls modeled peoples as being independent and mutually disinterested. This is an assumption that mirrors his treatment of individual persons in the domestic context. This article argues that this assumption does not translate to the international context. While individual persons do not require the existence of other persons, states cannot exist independently of other states. Because statehood is a social construct, states require the recognition (and the existence) of other states, and they are incapable of being considered independently of the system and the other states that populate the system. Drawing on aspects of the relational dimension of care ethics, this article considers the implications of rejecting the assumption of independence and mutual disinterest. Theorizing states as inherently connected to one another allows the relationships and connections among them to come into the process of developing principles of justice. The international system is often portrayed as a system that is adversarial in nature. This sentiment finds its strongest expression in realism, which depicts the international system as a zero-sum game in which one state can only gain at another's expense. The ability to realize gains in power and security only at the expense of other states places them,
In his provocative book War and Self-Defense, David Rodin criticizes attempts to justify national... more In his provocative book War and Self-Defense, David Rodin criticizes attempts to justify national defense based on an analogy between the individual and the state. In doing so, he treats state personality as an analogy to the personality of the individual. Yet the state possesses the key attributes of moral personality, including a conception of the good life and a sense of justice. The state's unobservable – but nevertheless real – moral personality means that it also possessed the right to defend the continued existence of that personality against an attack. Subject to the same constraints that are placed on individuals, such as necessity and proportionality, the state possesses the right to national defense based on its own personality.
Uploads
Books by Amy E Eckert
Just war theorizing is generally built on the assumption that states, and states alone, wield a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Who holds responsibility for the actions of PMCs? What ethical standards might they be required to observe? How might deviations from such standards be punished? The privatization of warfare poses significant challenges because of its reliance on a statist view of the world. Eckert argues that the tradition of just war theory—which predates the international system of states—can evolve to apply to this changing world order. With an eye toward the practical problems of military command, Eckert delves into particular cases where PMCs have played an active role in armed conflict and derives from those cases the modifications necessary to apply just principles to new agents in the landscape of war.
Papers by Amy E Eckert
Just war theorizing is generally built on the assumption that states, and states alone, wield a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Who holds responsibility for the actions of PMCs? What ethical standards might they be required to observe? How might deviations from such standards be punished? The privatization of warfare poses significant challenges because of its reliance on a statist view of the world. Eckert argues that the tradition of just war theory—which predates the international system of states—can evolve to apply to this changing world order. With an eye toward the practical problems of military command, Eckert delves into particular cases where PMCs have played an active role in armed conflict and derives from those cases the modifications necessary to apply just principles to new agents in the landscape of war.