It looks obvious

The question of just war was, and still is, a source for many philosophical discussions. It was not only a theoretical question but a question that leaders considered practically, even if only for the purpose of legitimacy. It was also the justification establishing the league of nations and its younger, and equally failure, the UN.

My observations over the years brought me to believe that there are many more benefits for limited intervention or limited activism. My natural suspicious approach toward central planning, and the ability of central power to manage one country successfully, are in order of magnitude higher when a country tries to centrally manage the rest of the world.

The question I’m straggling with, without a good answer, is the question of moral obligation. Are there cases when a country must intervene in foreign war? The immediate answer is, obviously, a country should be obligated to stop cases of genocide. But this, as it usually is, isn’t as simple as we might have wish.

I believe that government only role, and justification, is to protect the human rights of those under its sovereignty. Is sending one to fight a none defensive war serve this purpose? Is this a justified expanding of the powers the government assume? I am not sure. Morally I would rather individual making a decision for themselves if, and how, they want to contribute to a struggle against evil around the world - but there is a valid question of practicality. Can an NGO stop a genocide without the backing of a state?

But even if we put the question of the state role aside there are many other, more practical questions. What level of genocide justified intervention? Why Darfur but not Congo? Is it a question of size or that wars between different groups? Should we stop a tribal war? What should we do in cases when the state kills its own people like in Cambodia? Or only certain segments of its population - like what have been done to women in Afghanistan?

If it was justified to stop Nazi Germany genocide why didn’t the world go to war to stop the killing in USSR under Stalin? Was it morally different?

Growing up I used to look at the pictures of my grandparents relatives that the german murdered in the holocaust. I used to imagine how would it be to belong to a big family, as it should have been if they would not have been murdered. It was obvious to me that it was immoral and evil to ignore the genocide. But I have no good answers what should be the right approach. I know the anger and pain of a nation that was the victim of such genocide, and the unanswered question: “How could you let this happen”? But I don’t know what should be the answer.