Justifications for the Use of Violence in Conflict (DP IB Global Politics: HL): Revision Note
Cultural justifications
Cultural justifications are the use of shared beliefs, traditions, religion or ideology by a group to explain and legitimise the use of violence against others as necessary, righteous or morally acceptable
Generalising about cultural is always dangerous, as there are multiple perspectives on violence in any culture
Events from the past and long-held accepted norms may influence how a culture views violent conflict
Past wars with neighbouring states can lead to deep resentment and a desire for justice even if it includes violence
Traditions of seeing certain marginalised groups as inferior can lead to widespread acceptance of violence being used against them
Land disputes are often based on historical links to the area so violence can be used to correct this injustice
Neo-colonialists and cultural relativists argue that a desire to spread Western cultural values has led to great violence in the past and continues to do so today
Case Study
Israel-Palestine
Both sides of the Israel-Palestine conflict draw on deep cultural, religious and historical narratives to justify violence, making it a powerful illustration of cultural justifications in practice
Israeli/Zionist justifications
Many Israelis justify military action through religious and historical claims to the land rooted in Jewish scripture
This is reinforced by the trauma of the Holocaust, which strengthened the argument that Jewish people required a secure homeland
Military force - including operations in Gaza - is framed as self-defence and survival
Palestinian justifications
Palestinians point to the 1948 Nakba, when approximately 700,000 Palestinians were displaced during the founding of Israel, as a foundational grievance
Ongoing occupation and the blockade of Gaza are framed as continuing injustice, with violence seen by some as legitimate resistance
Control of Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque carries deep religious significance, further fuelling the conflict.
The neo-colonial dimension
The 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which Britain promised a Jewish homeland in Palestine without consulting its Arab population, is widely cited as a colonial-era decision whose consequences continue to drive violence today
Western political and military support for Israel is seen by many as a continuation of this pattern
Complexity
Neither society is monolithic
Many Israelis oppose settlement expansion, and many Palestinians reject Hamas's tactics
Cultural justifications are often invoked selectively by leaders and media to mobilise support for violence
Legal justifications
At the international level IGOs mostly provide legal justifications for violent conflict although they are not all in agreement
Within a state the only legal justification for the use of force is determined by the government of that state
Although we think of laws as always being enforceable, this is not always the case outside of the state
IGOs and legal justification for violent conflict
Legal framework | Key provision | Application |
|---|---|---|
Geneva Conventions (1949) |
|
|
UN Charter - Article 51 |
|
|
UN Security Council |
|
|
International Criminal Court (ICC) |
|
|
NATO Charter - Article 5 |
|
|
Within the state
The legal justifications for the state engaging in violent conflict are determined by the political leadership and judicial system of the state
Citizens’ views, cultural values and religious values can influence these justifications
Religious justifications
Determining religious opinions is always dangerous because people within one religion can have differing opinions
Religious views are often manipulated to justify violent conflict
Some theorists argue that religious individuals or groups feel they have a special knowledge and are superior to non-believers, and this can be used to justify conflict
Every major religion values peace and accepts violence under only extreme circumstances
Most of the world’s major religions have ideas as to when going to war is ethical and how wars should be conducted to minimise death and destruction
However, religious values are always open to interpretation
Wars that many think of as religious wars are usually about resources, interests and/or socio-economic divisions (e.g. Israel and Palestine)
Unlock more, it's free!
Join the 100,000+ Students that ❤️ Save My Exams
the (exam) results speak for themselves:
Was this revision note helpful?
