Dalla guerra giusta al pacifismo giuridico. E ritorno?

The theological and ethical theory of just war was developed in late antiquity, in order to justify the Christian’s fighting in the army, despite the nonviolent precepts established in Matthew 5.39 and 26.52. In the context of the Conquest of America, Francisco de Vitoria reformulated the theory building it on universal natural rights, and Bartolomé de Las Casas reversed its political meaning. In the epoch of sovereign states, the war was legally limited in Europe inasmuch the unrestrained use of violence beyond its borders performed a relief function. From Immanuel Kant to Hans Kelsen, to Jürgen Habermas, to Luigi Ferrajoli the legal pacifism has entrusted to the law the charge to abolish the war. This project has been challenged by theoretical and practical paradoxes and failures, from the League of Nations to the UN, to the ICC, and undermined by the technological development of warfare. From the end of Cold War, the moral theory of just war has been paradoxically revived in the context of globalization an hegemonic unilateralism. The law has been utilized both to legitimize the war and to restrain the war, if not to avoid it. The law is not sufficient to extirpate the social, economical, cultural, anthropological roots of war, but it is a necessary resource.