Join the new world

Having witnessed years of turmoil and war across the european continent, scholars had been producing theories and frameworks for a peaceful international system. Alberico Gentili(1552-160😎, is the man that gave international law the first unpolished version of International Law of War in his publication De Jure Belli. Nonetheless the most praised scholar is Hugo Grotious, a Dutch scholar that inspired by Gentili wrote De Jure Belli ac Pacis. Grotius was also the creator of the concept of the freedom of the high seas. The idea that no nation can claim control of the oceans and everyone should be able to freely navigate them. The importance of Gentili and Grotious are crucial to our goal. Gentili and Grotious, gave the world the set of rules that would regulate the ways in which soldiers and countries should wage war at each other.

War has been one of the standards throughout human history. Regulating war is something that has been attempted in many ways. Some argue that regulating war is impossible, “In defending the acts of Milo in an internal armed conflict in Rome, Cicero pleaded,... silent enim leges inter arma." Laws are silent among [those who use] weapons.” Even though the debate, on whether war can be regulated is still open, international law, as we have seen, defines rules of war that should be followed. There are two independent set of rules that regulate war, Jus in Bello, are the set of rules that regulate how a war is to be carried. It is more commonly called International Humanitarian Law(IHL). The second branch of IHL is Jus ad bellum, that helps define the justness of war. The importance of the division of the two branches of law of armed conflict is better explained by the words of Prof. Carsten Stahn of the Geneva Academy of International Law; “Jus ad bellum and jus in bello were declared to be distinct normative universes, in order to postulate the principle that all conflicts shall be fought humanely, irrespective of the cause of armed violence.” This distinction can be traced back to one of the reasons for the creation of international law, which was the cruelty and brutality of the european wars of religion(1524-164😎.

Binding together international law and theory of war is harder said than done, what is war for international lawyers? Justice Hayes of the U.S court of appeals in 1974 in the case Pan American world air vs Aetna describes war as;

"War has been defined almost always as the employment of force between governments or entities essentially like governments, at least de facto...."The cases establish that war is a course of hostility engaged in by entities that have at least significant attributes of sovereignty. Under international law war is waged by states or state-like entities.... (W)ar (is) a contention between two or more States through their armed forces. War is that state in which a nation prosecutes its right by force."English and American cases dealing with the insurance meaning of war have defined it in accordance with the ancient international law definition: war refers to and includes only hostilities carried on by entities that constitute governments at least de facto in character."



One of the most famous scholars that has devoted time and words to the field of war is Carl Von Clausewitz. In his extensive analysis of war in his book On War, Von Clausewitz defined war as:

“War is nothing but a duel on an extensive scale. If we would conceive as a unit the countless number of duels which make up a War, we shall do so best by supposing to ourselves two wrestlers. Each strives by physical force to compel the other to submit to his will: each endeavors to throw his adversary, and thus render him incapable of further resistance.”


This definition of war is very accurate for the act of fighting, but on the other hand leaves us no space of analysis for the causes of war. Von Clausewitz does not take into account the broader aspect of war which is not only limited to the “violent act of submission of an enemy” . In his definition Von Clausewitz limits does not see any further goal apart from conquering an enemy in order to achieve a political goal. Nonetheless Von Clausewitz has been a great scholar in the field of war and does allude to war being more than just fighting when he states: “We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means.”

Since Clausewitzian times, war has changed and so has the international system and the actors that are within it. Since the time of its publication in 1832, On War has been followed by other publications by different authors. One very important example is Quincy Wright’s A Study of War which for our purpose presents the most accurate definition of war, Wright defines; “War is a violent contact between distinct but similar entities. In this sense a collision of stars, a fight between a lion and a tiger, a battle between two primitive tribes, hostilities between two modern nations would all be war.” Wright in his definition does not limit war to the duel of humans on a battlefield, by defining war as a violent contact of different but similar entities leaves the definition applicable to other situations where violence is not necessarily physical.


Prossimo appuntamento con la conclusione.