Vol. XXXVIII / 1 - Studia Moralia

ONLY THE SOVEREIGN MAY DECLARE WAR AND NATO AS WELL 215
rights theory and practice. It therefore must concede, as we have
argued, that not only the United Nations Security Council but
also organisations like NATO may, despite their lack of
traditional attributes of sovereignty, declare war in the face of
gross human rights violations by appeal to the principle of the
just cause as elaborated in the theory of the just war. In this way
the principle of the just cause could be and has been expanded
to cover gross human rights violations. Accordingly,
contemporary human rights theory and practice does not
undermine but adds a new dimension to the theory of the just
war.
Katholieke Universiteit Brabant
Department of Philosophy (Legal Philosophy)
Postbus 90153
5000 LE Tilburg
THE NETHERLANDS
M. B. RAMOSE
—————
Summary / Resumen
The humanitarian crisis that led to war between NATO and
Belgrade calls into question especially the principle of the just war
doctrine that only the sovereign may declare war. Not only who is the
sovereign but also the character of sovereignty appears to have been
modified by NATO’s appeal to human rights violation as proper and
sufficient justification for the declaration of war. Precisely because the
just war theory was not constructed in the language of human rights as
we understand it today, it is pertinent to enquire if contemporary
human rights theory and practice either undermines or adds a new
dimension to the just war. The seemingly persistent necessity to justify
resort to war means that human rights theory and practice reaffirms in
particular the principle of the just cause and thereby vindicates the just
war theory.
La crisis humanitaria que ha llevado a la guerra entre la OTAN y
Belgrado cuestiona el principio de la guerra justa, doctrina según la